/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10369213]

how is the odyssey translation by emily wilson? is it good or is it shit?

[Anonymous No.10369228]

>>10369213
its good

[Anonymous No.10369232]

>female
>good
What do you honestly think?

[Anonymous No.10369307]

>>10369232
woah dude thats kind of sexist, no?

[Anonymous No.10369328]

>>10369232
>who is J.K. Rowling

[Anonymous No.10369338]

>>10369328
even if this is bait i am fucking mad

[Anonymous No.10369347]

>>10369232
Go back to pol with this shit b8

[Anonymous No.10369353]

>>10369232

[Anonymous No.10370047]

>>10369213
the excerpts show it's dumbed down but not even accurately dumbed down

[Anonymous No.10370981]

>>10370047
Wowwwww what a surprise, women are retarddd

[Anonymous No.10370985]

>Tell me about the complicated man

[Anonymous No.10370988]

>>10369328
J.K. Rowling will see the error of her ways soon and be /ourgirl/ because of the Johnnie Depp backlash she is receiving at the moment.

[Anonymous No.10370993]

>>10369213
This sounds more like a cashgrab than anything to be honest, a book advertised as the "feminist take on a classic". Who keeps shilling these dumb fucking threads?

[Anonymous No.10371107]

>>10369328
What? I mean Harry Potter is arguably one of the best book series of all time (especially numbers 2 and 4), but let's be real here lol, that doesn't prove this translation is good

[Anonymous No.10371138]

>>10370985
hahahahahha.

A WOMEN UNDERSTANDING HOMER EVER

Ohhh you....

[Anonymous No.10371153]

>>10369232
Edith Hamilton did pretty good with Mythology

[Anonymous No.10371165]

The modern womanly culture cannot deal with the ancients in a straight matter. They will either totally ostracize ancient literature in the future (which I certainly hope for as it will stay a bastion of masculinity for generations to come). Or they will do stuff like pic related where they will reinterpret everything about ancient Greece and the great poems to the point that they will pull feminist and or political correct interpretations out of their ass and shape the texts newly through interpretation and schooling. Also, friendly reminder that you're ignoring a few thousand years of first hand male experience if you're ignoring all the misogynistic moments of literature. Stereotypes, albeit they are not entirely true most of the time, don't arise out of nothing. Something has to, no pun intended, trigger them. From the view of Hesiod to women as a great evil, to the excerpt from Nietzsche I posted. There is a reason why every thinking man ever realized that women are worthless when they wander out of their nature given responsibilities of child bearing and offspring.

[Anonymous No.10371169]

>>10371165
>pic related

[Anonymous No.10371170]

>>10369213
It's awful. Politically motivated revisionist bullshit. She doesn't attempt to translate the Odyssey. She rewrites it to fit her "moral" sensibilities and political inclinations.

[Anonymous No.10371171]

>>10369232
This, but unironically.

[Anonymous No.10371181]

>>10370988
What do you mean?

[Anonymous No.10371186]

>>10371170
she literally just modernizes the language. if that counts as "rewriting," it only counts as such insofar as literally every translation ever carries with it the mark of the translator him- or herself, which is intrinsically going to inflect upon the text, just as the contemporary standards of the language it's being translated into will influence it.

[Anonymous No.10371191]

I think each translation is sort of a window into the time it was translated, as well as being, you know, a translation. And you have four hundred years' of translations to choose from, if you, say, you want something with overblown cod-classical language or a romantic poetic vibe...

For the record, this isn't a feminist take on The Odyssey (she's a prickly old professor of classics) and it's a barely interesting footnote that she's a broad--if you're pitching a piece on a new translation of Homer, you sort of need a hook, I guess.

I'm vaguely interested. I don't dig the overblown KJV vibes of most classical translations, so I like that the idea that she's produced a work that dispenses with the hoary language of former translators, befitting its emergence from the oral tradition, and has also produced the first line-for-line translation of the original.

[Anonymous No.10371195]

>>10371186
>she literally just modernizes the language.
This was proven wrong several times. Her version of the poem is highly redacted in content also.

[Anonymous No.10371200]

>>10371195
show me one line of politically-motivated (as opposed to stylistically-motivated) redaction. hard mode: you can't be plucking something out of context from an archived /lit/ thread or Breitbart article

[Anonymous No.10371202]

>>10371191
Stop lying faggot. Plenty of excerpts were posted in the previous threads on this subject. She redacts the story. It's not a mere update using contemporary English.

[Anonymous No.10371206]

>>10371200
How much are you getting paid to shill this garbage here?

[Anonymous No.10371213]

ITT:
>it's about ethics in greek translations

[Anonymous No.10371214]

>>10371200
Not him, it isn't about politics either, why would you tell that Odyssey is a "complicated" man. If you're arguing in todays context it makes him sound like someone with issues, or a man that is overly mysterious and complicated; or a man that is hard to understand. Why?

>Tell me, O Muse, of the man of many devices, who wandered full many ways after he had sacked the sacred citadel of Troy.

>Sage mir, Muse, die Taten des vielgewanderten Mannes, Welcher so weit geirrt nach der heiligen Troja Zerstörung,

>O junaku mi kazuj, o Muzo, o prometnom onom; Koji se mnogo naluto razorivši presvetu Troju

Three languages. A men of many devices, a man that is very traveled, a men that passed many places. I will not pretend I can read the original but I'd rather trust the stylistic approach of the dozen translations I've seen than someone pulling something out of their ass just to do something that hasn't been done before.

[Anonymous No.10371220]

>>10371202
not even him, but there are literally hundreds of homeric translations that vary in styling and interpretation.
Any seasoned reader of Homer knows this.
Stop getting rekt because of >muh women

[Anonymous No.10371224]

>>10371214
The Greek original has 'polytropos' which is hard to translate, here's a whole article on Wilson's choice: http://languagehat.com/polytropos/

Didn't know that Hobbes just skipped it.

[Anonymous No.10371235]

>>10371224
>http://languagehat.com/polytropos/
I still disagree with her choice, this just made me realize why the prometnom/vielgewandert and such were chosen instead mostly. Many-turned truly sounds like someone who has seen much and traveled far. But you are not automatically a complicated man if you have done anything of that.

[Anonymous No.10371248]

>>10370985
Is he not complicated?

[Anonymous No.10371254]

>>10371202
I mean, every work is necessarily a modification of the original. All of the translations of Homer tend to be radically different. I would argue that: Emily Wilson is not a raging feminist and this is more of an attempt to popularize the work for the general reader, rather than pushing some feminist message. The people pushing a feminist message are all the retards that are writing about the book being translated by a woman and some fucking shit about taking back the canon.

I could be convinced to the contrary but I really don't see it. At best, I think I could take an argument that her retard-level language is an attack on, like, literary modernism and a misguided attempt to democratize the classics. But I don't see a hardcore feminist agenda in the book itself.

[Anonymous No.10371256]

Imagine the amount of autism required for someone to get butt-blasted over this.

Translating Homer is an incredibly rewarding experience which I would recommend to anyone visiting this board. Finishing either epic poem is, in itself, a great accomplishment.

[Anonymous No.10371259]

@10371254
Now you're just equivocating. Go away.

[Anonymous No.10371290]

>>10371170
can you give actual examples of how you think she foes this instead of just blathering

[Anonymous No.10371302]

>>10371235
idg the interpretation of "complicated man" in here as meaning anything particularly negative, of course he's complicated

[Anonymous No.10371318]

>>10370985
>literally started with an obviously feminist buzzword

[Anonymous No.10371320]

It is best to avoid translation gimmicks

[Anonymous No.10371327]

>>10371256
>read a poem is a great accomplishment

lol what they're not even that long

[Anonymous No.10371330]

>>10370985
>the holy town of Troy

HOLY?
TOWN?

Fuck me

[Anonymous No.10371366]

>>10369213
>Those harrassment teeth

She looks like every middle age women who's afraid of aging running on the va va voom of two glasses of red wine who harrass young men in clubs and bars.

[Anonymous No.10371381]

>>10370985
You can tell she rubbed her old disgusting cunt while thinking about Odysseus several times.

[Anonymous No.10371386]

>>10371381
>>10371366
Your writing smells like stale mountain dew and a sweaty neckbeard

[Anonymous No.10371387]

Why are Anglos such autists about "proper" translations? Most translations are fine. Read the original if you want don't want to miss anything.

[Anonymous No.10371396]

>>10371387
>Why are Anglos such autists about "proper" translations?

We don't have a sub 90 IQ

[Anonymous No.10371407]

>>10371366
oh wow she wore a dress and brushed her hair before her picture was taken, what a slut

[Anonymous No.10371411]

>>10371386
You write like a fag and your shit's all retarded.

[Anonymous No.10371415]

>>10371387
It's not 'anglos' it's /lit/

This board is obsessed with purity

[Anonymous No.10371423]

>>10371415
You say that like it's a bad thing.

[Anonymous No.10371562]

>>10371327
He clearly meant "finishing the translation" not "finishing reading the poem"

[Anonymous No.10371589]

>>10371423
it is lol

[Anonymous No.10371592]

>>10369328
*breaths in*
*head explodes*

[Anonymous No.10371614]

>>10371153
Doesn't count since it is good.

[Anonymous No.10371665]

>>10371214
I agree with the choice of complicated. She states that she tried to avoid the repetition of the epithets because in our written culture repetitions stiffens, and instead looks to convey a meaning.

Part of this is also that she wrote in verse, which is admirable.

Complicated was a beautiful choice and I think like in the word crafty it points to a duality between capability and the misuse of those capabilities.

The poem loses the ritualistic aspect that many expect and love in epic poetry, but it gains it in resonance.

[Anonymous No.10371680]

>>10371665
So basically you're for the gradual destruction of the original poem by modernizing it in every generation and adding stuff because it sounds better to us today? Beautiful.

[Anonymous No.10371684]

>>10371665
And also, as a translator myself, I will use an "repetition" or overused "epithet" if it seems like the ideal solution. A great problem with translations today is that people try to be original by any means and they use objectively worse solutions to problems just so that they have their own solution. I see no shame in taking a part someone else came up with if it indeed seems ideal when comparing it to the source.

[Anonymous No.10371691]

>>10371680
don't people mostly read older translations anyway? it isn't like after a new one comes out the old ones are all set on fire

[Anonymous No.10371705]

>>10371691
You're overlooking that there will always be someone who will meet the original work through this twisted new translation. Especially in schooling if teachers recommend a newer translation over the older ones. And I'm especially sure that this will happen at least in some cases because >muh wymen

[Anonymous No.10371729]

>>10371691
I don't think most people even think about translations really, they just pick up whatever copy the bookstore/library has. Or, of course, the edition they've been assigned.

[Anonymous No.10371740]

>>10371680
No translation is a substitution for the original unfortunately and the older translations are not necessary the most accurate.

Most earlier translations didn't have a correct philological apparatus and didn't really understand greek that well (only at the beginning of the xix century the revolution of scientific philology happened). Later middle of this century translation forgo metrics for blank verse, have to change the overall number of lines, and when they don't do that they are stiff because they are scholarly editions made to help researchers by consistency.

But here is the thing: if your complain is disregard for the original for catering our tastes, that is the accusation you can make to all translations before academia existed. Take Pope's highly refined language, that is not what the odyssey with it's bits and pieces stuck together from different registers and traditions, is like. Pope just projected his idea of the noble greeks on it.

[Anonymous No.10371744]

>>10369213
Female translations are garbage they are incapable of being objective.

[Anonymous No.10371772]

>>10371740
Unfortunately it is almost impossible to make a translation that is absolutely correct and that is working as a viable substitution for the beauty of the original verse. Pope is a rather extreme example of things, yet the translations of the XX century are very accurate and some of them are very beautiful as well. I know a lot more about the translations in my original language than in English, but both viable translations were done by philologist, academics, that are the top of Greek philology in the country. When you compare the translations you see a lot of similarities yet differences in style. But both translations respect the fact that you are working with an ancient text and it should be translated and treated as such. Take the Bible for example, there are a lot easy to read editions that don't take the canonical approach that I've just described, but they don't present themselves as something great, or new, or accurate. This translation is presented as a landmark, while it is rather silly.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/dec/08/the-odyssey-translated-emily-wilson-review

Comparing the parts I've seen with the 5-6 translations in 4 languages I speak I cannot but stress the fact that she is trying to create something new by destroying the traditional approach to the Odyssey. I'd rather believe these few translations I know, and the people behind them, than one single translator who is presented as bringing something rather new that the great scholarship of the XX and XIX century somehow were not able to figure out.

Also, women can't understand Homer but well, you take that as a personal opinion.

[Anonymous No.10371792]

>>10371772
wow a translation is being marketed so that it sells and sounds exciting, time to cry about it
and it sounds like everyone in this thread who are so worked up over it haven't read anything but some excerpts, bitch about after you've actually read it

[Anonymous No.10371813]

>>10371792
>H-heh its capitalism my man who cares as long as it makes money

Also, if crucial parts are translated like that... Well, of course it allows judgements. The introduction and the opening hymn to the Muses are one of the most influential parts of Western literature. I'd be careful when translating that, at least as careful as with the Bible.

[Anonymous No.10371814]

>>10371680
What are you saying? That every translation of poetry should be archaic just because? It's a translation from the original Greek, it's not changing older translations.

[Anonymous No.10371819]

it's shit

[Anonymous No.10371822]

>>10371813
I'm saying you're getting mad at the marketing and reviews which are irrelevant to the actual translation.

[Anonymous No.10371838]

>>10371814
I think that archaisms add to the charm of the translation and give off that vibe that you're dealing with an ancient text. So talking about personal aesthetics, yes. Scholarly and critical editions are something else. Modernizing translations is a destructive trend where you turn things as the Quran or Old Testament into flower power hippy texts. I saw Quran translations where whole parts about slavery and conquering women are omitted by using new and fancy language.

I would even go so far to say that the modernization of the language used in the translations are not the main problem. Modern language can be used. What I witnessed is blatant banalizing of ancient texts like Odysseus the "complicated man" which sounds like a blogger talking about his anxiety.

[Anonymous No.10371860]

>>10371838
That it is turning it into a flower hippy text is your personal idea. I find it a moving and enjoyable translation.

Again you yourself are saying that your concern here is not the original, but to defend the nostalgia for the original that you have. The classics as you have imagined them would Nietzsche say.

[Anonymous No.10371875]

>>10371860
There are things that are not only nostalgia, as the Quran example I gave. Judging from the parts of the translation I saw it is banalized and some of the solutions, like "complicated" are just there to do something new. I'd have to see the rest.

Also, can you read the original? I admit that I can't so talking about accuracy is only possible while reflecting other translations and comparing them with this.

[Anonymous No.10371881]

>>10371772
You really think this is a hippy translation that doesn't capture the poetics of Homer:

Tell me about a complicated man.
Muse, tell me how he wandered and was lost
when he had wrecked the holy town of Troy,
and where he went, and who he met, the pain
he suffered in the storms at sea, and how
he worked to save his life and bring his men
back home. He failed to keep them safe; poor fools,
they ate the Sun God’s cattle, and the god
kept them from home. Now goddess, child of Zeus,
tell the old story for our modern times.
Find the beginning

Because I have read home in multiple translations and this is the closest it even gets to the pleasure of Vincenzo Monti's translation

[Anonymous No.10371888]

>>10371881
Just compare that with Fagles:

Sing to me of the man, Muse, the man of twists and turns …
driven time and again off course, once he had plundered
the hallowed heights of Troy.
Many cities of men he saw and learned their minds,
many pains he suffered, heartsick on the open sea,
fighting to save his life and bring his comrades home.
But he could not save them from disaster, hard as he strove—
the recklessness of their own ways destroyed them all,
the blind fools, they devoured the cattle of the Sun
and the Sungod blotted out the day of their return.
Launch out on his story, Muse, daughter of Zeus,
start from where you will—sing for our time too.

[Anonymous No.10371899]

>>10370985
>the complicated man
This is not an inaccurate translation. And that's true of the entirety of her new translation. It IS an accurate translation. The issue is that by translating Polytropos as "the complicated man" the translator loses a lot of the original meaning (but this is true of every translation). "The man of many paths," or "the man of many ways" would have been my preference, but I like the multivalence of the original word and it's entirely lost in Wilson's translation.

On the whole, I might recommend her translation for young adult readers since it IS more approachable, but I wouldn't recommend it for anyone seriously interested in the works of Homer. That said, other translations do exist and there's no reason not to offer something like this. I may not agree with all of Wilson's choices, but I think she did a great job, considering what her goals were for the translation.

[Anonymous No.10371906]

>>10371888
>Fagles
The man for wisdom's various arts renown'd,
Long exercised in woes, O Muse, resound;
Who, when his arms had wrought the destined fall
Of sacred Troy, and razed her heaven-built wall,
Wandering from clime to clime, observant stray'd,
Their manners noted, and their states survey'd,
On stormy seas unnumber'd toils he bore,
Safe with his friends to gain his natal shore:
Vain toils! their impious folly dared to prey
On herds devoted to the god of day;
The god vindictive doom'd them never more
(Ah, men unbless'd) to touch that natal shore.
Oh, snatch some portion of these acts from fate,
Celestial Muse, and to our world relate.

If you're not into neo classical couplets Fitzgerald is the choice

[Anonymous No.10371911]

>>10371881
You prefer that over this?

Sing to me of the man, Muse, the man of twists and turns ...
driven time and again off course, once he had plundered
the hallowed heights of Troy.
Many cities of men he saw and learned their minds,
many pains he suffered, heartsick on the open sea,
fighting to save his life and bring his comrades home.
But he could not save them from disaster, hard as he strove —
the recklessness of their own ways destroyed them all,
the blind fools, they devoured the cattle of the Sun
and the Sungod blotted out the day of their return.
Launch out on his story. Muse, daughter of Zeus,
start from where you will — sing for our time too.

Seriously, english is not my first language but "wrecked"; "complicated" nigga please... And if indeed the exact same word is used in the Homer Hymns, and look, when you use wily, much turned, much traveled it makes sense, yet a complicated robber. Her translation is basically taking complicated as an epithet for Odysseus because she thinks it fits him well and not because Homer says so.

[Anonymous No.10371922]

>>10371899
alri emily

[Anonymous No.10371942]

>>10371911
That translation is incredibly clumsy and wordy. I'm not even sure why he didn't go for a prose translations.

Also wreck is a proper word that has a lineage from the 12th century, I think here you are reading it too much through your online gaming sensitivity, so instead of the norse origin you read rekkd

[Anonymous No.10371946]

>>10371911
A "complicated man" is code for a shitlord, amirite ladies?

[Anonymous No.10371959]

>>10371942
>Also wreck is a proper word that has a lineage from the 12th century

Likely earlier. Wreccan is an Anglo-Saxon word and we have records of its use in the first millennium.

[Anonymous No.10371985]

Why are there women on the cover?

What does this translation provide that previous translations do not?

Why is the translator acting like she is some author of a new book? Translators should not show their faces.

[Anonymous No.10371988]

>of diseases, complicated
Is she saying Odysseus is a disease?

[Anonymous No.10372001]

>>10371946
more like a problematic fave

[Anonymous No.10372008]

>>10371946
>>10371988
Why is "complicated man" something only a woman would say? I'm not disputing that it is, and I suppose that's why it's so funny when put in Homer's mouth. What I want to understand is why it seems self-evident.

[Anonymous No.10372042]

>>10372008
I saw one review (by a woman) saying it sounded like 'a friend bitching abut an annoying boyfriend' and that seems to be the tone that people with that complaint have are reading into it. Seems like a lot of projection to me, for one the author isn't some 20 something or whatever stereotype and second "complicated" isn't negative or even a necessarily critical description of a person.

[Anonymous No.10372043]

>>10371386
You smell of soy milk and pine cone soap

[Anonymous No.10372045]

>>10371589
>lol
Get your arse back to wherever it came from.

[Anonymous No.10372052]

>>10371592
>*action*
Fuck off.

[Anonymous No.10372062]

>>10371985
It's an enjoyable modern verse translation done by a classics scholar. People should be happy.

[Anonymous No.10372065]

>>10372042
>for one the author isn't some 20 something or whatever stereotype
I see your point, but that doesn't mean much if the targeted audience is supposed to be those 20 something stereotypes and the language she uses theirs.

[Anonymous No.10372071]

>>10371860
> I find it a moving and enjoyable translation.
Kill yourself. Fucking plebeian.

[Anonymous No.10372082]

>>10371946
Pretty much.

[Anonymous No.10372127]

>>10372062
>enjoyable
>modern verse translation
>>>/redit/

Ok I decided to use the google machine and I can see this book is complete trash

[Anonymous No.10372151]

>>10372071
I'm sure you are reading homer in the original greek right?

[Anonymous No.10372183]

>>10372127
Yeah no modern translations are ever enjoyable.
I'll call richard howard and let him know.

[Anonymous No.10372227]

>>10372008
Because women want to understand people, men want to act alongside them. Unlike the other translations in this thread, which are beautifully factual, complicated is the only one that tries to describe a single entity of the total PERSON rather than describing the entity based on what it has been through and done.
It's like the whole deeds not words thing. Complicated assumes that there is this thing that is that person and we should understand them as an enduring entity. This is simply not true. A person isn't complicated while they're taking a shit. What you're basically saying is that you don't understand them, or they are difficult to figure out. But WHAT is difficult to figure out about a PERSON? What they do? When? When they take a shit it's because they take a shit. When they save their friends they are compelled through love or honour. So it's more like saying "OMG I just can't believe he did that!"

[Anonymous No.10372234]

>>10372008
because men understand it well enough that it doesn't need to be said.

[Anonymous No.10372237]

More proof that 2D > 3D.

[Anonymous No.10372244]

okay so no one upset has read beyond the first page of the new translation, got it

[Anonymous No.10372246]

>>10372151
ναι

[Anonymous No.10372249]

>>10372227
Underrated post.

[Anonymous No.10372251]

>>10372237
2d is better than 3d but you have shit taste either way. The medium allows unfettered representation of idealized beauty and you're squandering it

[Anonymous No.10372260]

>>10372251
>implying quasi-realistic 2.5D art is better than pure 2D
Cancer.

[Anonymous No.10372266]

>>10372251
That pic is photobashed. If you don't know what that is, it means you're a bottom of the barrel philistine.

[Anonymous No.10372298]

>>10372251
This. 2D is almost platonic form to the imperfect reality of 3D.

[Anonymous No.10372304]

Ok, this is now an art thread. Post qts.

[Anonymous No.10372308]

>>10372266
potatoface

[Anonymous No.10372314]

>>10372304
Looks like she has a neckbeard

[Anonymous No.10372316]

>>10372304
>tfw no vampire loli gf

[Anonymous No.10372320]

[Anonymous No.10372327]

Women should be watched, not talked about.

[Anonymous No.10372334]

[Anonymous No.10372335]

[Anonymous No.10372340]

[Anonymous No.10372347]

[Anonymous No.10372352]

[Anonymous No.10372353]

reminder that all 3d women are absolute shit through and through

[Anonymous No.10372358]

[Anonymous No.10372364]

[Anonymous No.10372372]

Well, if you fags aren't going to share any, than I'll stop as well. Selfish bastards.

[Anonymous No.10372391]

>>10372372
I-I enjoyed the little art gallery you posted!

[Anonymous No.10372398]

>>10369232
This but unironically. There's already good real translations. Read those and disregard roasts.

[Anonymous No.10372408]

>>10372398
>The first female who translated Odyssey
That shit was an instant red flag for me already. Promoting a translation with the gender of the translator as if it had any worth.

[Anonymous No.10372476]

>>10372398
>>10372408
See >>10372327

[Anonymous No.10372535]

>>10369328
I want to believe this is bait but just the way the post is made makes me think it was made by a raging unironic newfag

>>10371107
fuck you too

[Anonymous No.10372577]

>>10372476
Not sure I want to disabuse you of your derpheld convictions, because I know for a fact that the only reason I have been showered in pussy my whole life is that I’m not a jackass like you guys...

[Anonymous No.10372610]

>>10372577
>I'm afraid I won't get any pussy if I ever voice an opinion that could be seen as chauvinistic or misogynistic by worthless, illiterate roasties

[Anonymous No.10372826]

>>10372577
>Subtle arguing with holes
Every single time, women really are only as useful as their hole.

[Anonymous No.10372840]

>>10372610
Yeah insulting people is not the best way to get them to suck your cock, who knew?

[Anonymous No.10372864]

>>10371415
which is why they read english translations of text in the first place hurr

[Anonymous No.10372878]

>>10371680
the other responses to you are more thorough and come from a place of greater engagement with the actual history of translation of this piece in particular, but i would just add that she has been very forthcoming with what the goals of her translation are. i get that canon-obsessed nerds on /lit/ might not get this, but not every translation is intended to be "definitive," and you lose a lot by not reading multiple at the very least if you're refusing to learn the ancient Greek and read it that way. i just don't understand how her pursuing a very particular goal, making that known, and executing it artfully is grounds for accusing her of destroying muh epic unless people are just still buttblasted about PJW shit

[Anonymous No.10372881]

>>10372577
Huh good behavior => sex
So all those beaten wives must have deserved it, interesting

[Anonymous No.10372885]

>>10372840
>Yeah insulting people is not the best way to get them to suck your cock, who knew?

[citation needed]

[Anonymous No.10372890]

>>10372840
False, it's a tried and true method.

[Anonymous No.10372896]

>>10371899
>complicated isn't a multivalent word
you realize that the phrases you prefer point in a single direction in an epic poem about travel, right? out of those phrases, i get that Odysseus is a man who has long been at sea and seen some shit. "complicated" gets me closer to an understanding of his psyche, his morality, his engagement with the world, his travels (by nature of its context and the rest of the passage), etc. i think it's an excellent choice and i look forward to reading her translation and getting a new perspective on a text that i'm too /socialsciences/ to have the tools to read in the original

[Anonymous No.10372905]

>>10372896
>Reaching this hard

It's ok Emily.

[Anonymous No.10372911]

Are those minoan gurls related to the story?

[Anonymous No.10372939]

>>10372890
Oh yeah? Then suck on my testes you whiny ass bitch.

[Anonymous No.10372990]

>>10372905
she wrote an article about why she choose that word, since people in it are so hung up on it since they're so lazy they can't read more than the first few lines, maybe look that up

[Anonymous No.10373025]

>>10372896
>i think it's an excellent choice and i look forward to reading her translation and getting a new perspective on a text...
Lol. Do you realize how obvious you sound?

[Anonymous No.10373027]

>>10372990
I've read the article, even before your post. She can say what she wants, its not a fitting translation imo. Also, I know of at least another place in the Homeric Hymns where the same words is used in a similar context and all the ways that specific word was translated before by older authors would fit in that place too. Would Emily's "Complex man" fit? No.

[Anonymous No.10373049]

>>10372911
no not at all, the whole selling point here is "muh woman translator"

>"The first woman to translate the odyssey in english"
>"has given Homer's epic a radically contemporary voice"
>Pictures of the roastie and book
into garbage can

[Anonymous No.10373065]

Never fall for the "New Translation!!!!!" crazes that pop up from time to time. Give it time and wait for the criticism to roll in. There's no excuse given how many excellent, time-tested translations that are available.

[Anonymous No.10373122]

>>10371330
Holy isn't bad, the word is something like sacred. Town is more accurately something with power or height, maybe a tower or citadel.

[Anonymous No.10374261]

>>10372896
>you realize that the phrases you prefer point in a single direction in an epic poem about travel, right?

"The man of many paths" is absolutely not restricted merely to spacial travel and is a near literal translation of Poly(many)tropos(paths). A man of many paths may: 1 be very COMPLICATED emotionally/spiritually; 2 have literally walked many paths (have been on a long journey); 3 WILL walk many paths (will undertake a long journey); will have many choices in his life. And ALL of these apply to Odysseus. These are also very common interpretations of the language for any native English speaker.

There's nothing inherently wrong with preferencing a single interpretation. I just prefer nuance.

[Anonymous No.10374278]

She feminizes it too much. It's a complete instance of 'im going to force my beliefs on this texts whether it wants to or not'.
It's a trans-formation not a trans-lation. The text is being shaped by her (every translation involves transformation, but not to such an extremity), not transferred (from AG to English)

[Anonymous No.10374439]

>>10371200
>Breitbart
Do you get all your strawmen/bogeymen from Reddit, faggot?

[Anonymous No.10374461]

>>10371235
>polytropos
>many turns
It means he's been around. In this context that means travels.

[Anonymous No.10375196]

>>10371327
τ. μιkρό-εγkέφαλο

[Anonymous No.10375220]

>>10369213
>πολύτροπος
>complicated

[Anonymous No.10375294]

>>10375220
>What then? Is Odysseus bad because he is called Πολυτροπος? Is it nor because he is wise (σοφος) that Homer has given him that name? τροπος sometimes designates character, sometimes the use of speech. For on the one hand a man is ευτροπος (of good ways) when his character is turned toward the good, and on the other, τροποι of speech are inventions of various kinds. And [Homer] uses τροπος also for the variations of voice and melodies, as in the case of the nightingale, 'who with many changing notes pours out her rich-sounding voice" (Od. 19.521).

>If wise men σοφοι are skilled at discussing (δεινει...διαλεγεσθαι), the also know how to express the same thought in many ways (τροπους), and since they know many turns of speech (τροπους λογων) to say the same thing, they could be called πολυτροποι. Wise men are also good <in their intercourse with people>. For this reason Homer says that Odysseus, being wise (σοφον), is πολυτροπος, because he knew how to consort with people using many turns of speech. Pythagoras, too, when asked to speak to boys, is said to have held speeches for boys, and to women, speeches apt to women, and to leaders speeches for leaders, and to adolescents, for adolescents. Discovering the style of wisdom (τροπον της σοφιας) that befits each category is a mark of wisdom, whereas it is a mark of ignorance to use the same kind of speech (μονοτροπω) with people who are differently disposed. This is also known by medicine if applied according to the rules, for therapy employs manifold ways (το πολυτροπον) becuase of the varied conditions of the patients.

This is just from Antisthenes. There is a whole wealth of literature trying to untangle Homer's use of this term. Stop embarrassing yourself.

[Anonymous No.10375300]

>>10375294
>shilling for women this hard
complicated is a word that doesn't give the meanings you have written my feminist buddie!

[Anonymous No.10375307]

Be honest /lit/: do you like fat girls? http://www.strawpoll.me/14581148

[Anonymous No.10375311]

>>10375294
Complicated =/= wise.

[Anonymous No.10375315]

>>10375307
Based America.

[Anonymous No.10375319]

>>10375311
>>10375294
Looks like you really embarrassed yourself there my man.

[Anonymous No.10375320]

>>10375311
In case you don't get why this is relevant, "wise" is partially synonymous with "experienced", hence the association is congruent with someone who has been around and has seen a lot of things.
"Complicated" carries no such connotations. It means that something is difficult to figure out or mysterious. This interpretation of πολύτροπος is incongruent with any of the ones offered in the past.
It's an innovation/redaction.

[Anonymous No.10375326]

>>10375320
That, and also that complicated would be translated as περίπλοkος.

[Anonymous No.10375345]

"Complicated" is a basic bitch epithet for chads, because women can't understand men. There is no need to further dwell on this. The translation is incorrect, because the Odyssey is classic "women will never understand"-core.

[Anonymous No.10375351]

>>10375300
>Shilling against women this hard
I just quoted Antisthenes.
You triggered yourself into oblivion because a woman knows more about Homer than you do lmao

>>10375311
lol

[Anonymous No.10375357]

>>10375351
>You triggered yourself into oblivion because a woman knows more about Homer than you do lmao
Seeing how she made an entire translation I say yes, she does know more than me about Homer (at least I hope she does). But her word choice is problematic.
And your quote was wrong and you "embarrassed" yourself. Defeated.

[Anonymous No.10375381]

>>10375351
I like how you ignored this post >>10375320
Also,
>lol
Go back to plebbit.

[Anonymous No.10375408]

>>10374278
the "feminization" is overstated, but it was obviously the project to do the former to the test not that latter, how is that a critque
just say it's not your thing and move on

>>10375345
you retards...have read books before? have come across the word complicated used in the way it's been used for centuries, not in the way you're all choosing to read it, in some valley girl voice? the translator is your mom's age, chill out

[Anonymous No.10375413]

>>10375357
>problematic.
t-t-tt-t-triggered

read past the first page lazy bitches if you want your crusade against women translators/this translation to sound like anything but a temper tantrum, there's pdfs out there

[Anonymous No.10375415]

>>10375408
Address this >>10375320 cretin.

[Anonymous No.10375416]

>>10375413
No since my irk was with πολύτροπος.
You seem to have a need for attention. You are not going to get that by defending women from teensy tiny criticisms of their work. I mean, I did comment on a single word only, after all.

[Anonymous No.10375422]

>>10371318
'tell'?

[Anonymous No.10375423]

>>10375415
complicated doesn't just mean mysterious
>>10375416
I've just started posting in this thread
idc if you or others don't like it, but there's no actual discussion except for on the one word for 100 posts

[Anonymous No.10375425]

>>10375408
Found the
>I am not like the other girls
roastie.
>implying only "valley girls" don't understand men
The translation sucks. Deal with it.

[Anonymous No.10375429]

>>10375423
>complicated doesn't just mean mysterious
Indeed, its primary meaning is "difficult to understand". Which was noted in that post.
You're trying to avoid the point.

[Anonymous No.10375432]

>>10375423
>idc if you or others don't like it
Oh you seem to care a lot though.
>>10375423
>there's no actual discussion
Thankfully we were enlightened by your superior post.
Irony aside when you have such a glaring, controversial translation in the front page you are discouraged from reading the rest. Perhaps she should have chosen a different word but nope, let's have some controversy.

[Anonymous No.10375435]

>>10375423
but carry on! if anyone has seen negative reviews could you post them, I've only seen one that was more mixed
>>10375425
I don't know any "valley girls", I'm saying choosing to read "complicated" like it's coming out of the mouth of a stereotype of a boy obsessed moron is the biggest reach I've seen and I don't understand why people are insisting that's the tone when it seems like it's just their retarded projection and it wouldn't be read that way if a man had chosen that as the translation (and I've seen this read from women as well as in here).

[Anonymous No.10375449]

>>10375435
All women are interested in men, Stacy. (Obsession is not required, and no one assumed it on her part.)
> don't understand why people are insisting that's the tone
Because the word is a blatant mistranslation of the poem. First, πολύτροπος does not mean "complicated" (or a synonym thereof), and its use does not pertain solely to Odysseus' character as an individual, but also his experiences, whereas "complicated man" is a mere qualification of character.

The translation is flat out wrong, right off the bat. Given that, people are speculating why this mistake in particular, and not another. The fact that the translator is a woman lends itself quite well to such speculation.

[Anonymous No.10375454]

>>10375435
> it wouldn't be read that way if a man had chosen that as the translation
A man wouldn't have chosen that as the translation. It's as simple as that.

[Anonymous No.10375457]

>>10375449
You can also add this arguement; why was the main selling point that a woman had wirtten it, and all the shills try to guide our eyes away from the fact now?
We can be proud of a woman translating Homer but if she does a controvesial job (fact which is obvious in the FIRST FUCKING PAGE) WELL YOU CAN'T CRITISIZE THT WOMANS NOW YOU FUCKING BOY STEREOTYPE MISOGYNIST PATRIARCHATOR

[Anonymous No.10375468]

πολύτροπος =experienced, cunning, resourceful, flexible, pragmatic, wise etc.

[Anonymous No.10375475]

>>10375457
I don't care about people not liking that or the choice of the word complicated, I'm specifically objecting to the reading of it as though it's meant in the tone of "It is the vocabulary of a woman in a bar talking to her pal about a boyfriend whom she should have dumped a long time ago."
(followed by, "The phrase is also (a coincidence?) the title of a biography of Bill Clinton." what? who remembers that shit or would assume it could be related?). Her point before that, that it "gives Odysseus interior complexity rather than exterior versatility" is fine, though I don't entirely agree, it's the bizarre characterization.
https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/public/odyssey-mendelsohn-wilson-review/

[Anonymous No.10375483]

>>10375475
I don't care about what you objecting to, I'm specifically wondering why it isn't allowed to critisize a woman but it is allowed to use the book being written by a woman as a marketing scheme.

[Anonymous No.10375487]

>here is a difference, however, between avoiding vocabulary that is tinged with racism, and rehabilitating the Cyclops as a “maimed non-Greek person” with whom the poem has “a certain amount of sympathy and even admiration”. Wilson calls Book Nine “A Pirate in a Shepherd’s Cave”, a title that paints Odysseus as the bad guy and the Cyclops as the victim. For her, the Cyclops and his people are not “lawless”, as the Greek has it, but “mavericks”. It is as if the killing and eating of Odysseus’ men were incidental details.

[Anonymous No.10375491]

>>10375487
Who cares if some men die man? The poor Cyclops was a minority and was only acting according to his nature.

[Anonymous No.10375496]

>>10375475
>it's meant in the tone of "It is the vocabulary of a woman in a bar talking to her pal about a boyfriend whom she should have dumped a long time ago."
You're putting words into our mouths. (Mine, at least, since I never called the translator a dumb bimbo.) All that people are saying is that the translation is incorrect, and the mistake is characteristic of a woman.

Glad you linked that review by the way, since it confirms the point, straight from the wolf's mouth:
>So does the gender of the translator make a difference that can be detected on the page? In the Guardian article Wilson suggests that it often does
And there you have it.

[Anonymous No.10375502]

Lel, way to shoot yourself in the foot.
>“The inability to take classical texts for granted”, she writes, “is a great gift that some female translators are able to use as a point of leverage, to shift the canon to a different and unexpected place.”
This is great.

[Anonymous No.10375508]

>>10375496
was referring to >>10375345 and a few more

[Anonymous No.10375510]

>>10375502
>“The inability to take classical texts for granted”
How come no feminist has raged at this comment yet?

[Anonymous No.10375512]

>>10375487
>SHE LITERALLY FUCKING DEFENDS THE MAN-EATING CYCLOPS IN HER TRANSLATION

L M A O
M
A
O

[Anonymous No.10375517]

>>10375512
>THE MAN-EATING CYCLOPS
The matriarchy enabling hero*

[Anonymous No.10375524]

>>10375487
I read that section a few days ago and don't really agree, cyclops comes off like a monster when he eats the men and then the other crew are crying, it's not passed over as quickly as that sentence implies. You do feel some pity for the cyclops, and his maiming is very gory.

[Anonymous No.10375527]

>>10375512
Women like brutes. This is not surprising.

[Anonymous No.10375532]

>>10375512
>>10375517
the tone is more comic then horror then back than anything like "defending"

[Anonymous No.10375533]

>>10375508
That post is obvious hyperbole though. Besides, you can be both highly educated and a basic bitch at the same time.

[Anonymous No.10375539]

>>10375532
>lmao look at dose people being eaten
I guarantee you that she wouldn't reimagine the scene as funny if the victims were women.
Has anyone read on what she did on the suitors scene?

[Anonymous No.10375544]

>>10375539
no the cyclops is funny not the violence, it's horror when he eats the people and (less so) when his eyes are stabbed and blood is going everywhere, then comic when he's getting tricked and talking to his sheep

[Anonymous No.10375547]

>>10375544
but that was comic in the original as well

[Anonymous No.10375713]

>>10375487
HAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHA

This can't be real? Seriously? Lets translate the Old Testament and put Baal as the good guy, since all these people "whoring after Baal" and other Gods just very pioneering the freedom of choice and religious sentiments. This translation is a meme, even more so than I thought.

[Anonymous No.10375770]

>>10375487
>people talking about the opening lines for dozens of posts to prove the translation sucks
>meanwhile there's stuff life this in her version
wew...

[Anonymous No.10375787]

I'm reading it at the moment, and.. besides the obvious mistranslations the translation is just vastly inferior to, lets say, Fagles. Its painfully obvious in pic related, don't have to point out anything.

download.libgen.io/get/CE68ECA4E2C9E6A0D90C5A4CA3676AC1/Homer_%20Emily%20Wilson%20%28trans.%29-The%20Odyssey-W.%20W.%20Norton%20%26%20Co.%20%282017%29.mobi <--- Download .mobi

[Anonymous No.10375860]

>>10375787
Thanks for the link, but it's not like I'm going to read this shit after all that I've found out about it so far. Doesn't seem to be a big enough trainwreck in translation to justify it.
Thank you for taking one for the team.

[Anonymous No.10375875]

>>10370985
>Tell me about the complicated man
>Perhaps he's wondering why you would sing to a man before throwing him in a river

[Anonymous No.10375876]

Truly, such alchemy of words.

[Anonymous No.10375877]

>>10371740
>muh science
Holy shit just swallow it you stupid fucking *nglo

[Anonymous No.10375886]

>>10375408
No, the feminization is not overstated. She intentionally gives focus to female characters. She's colonizing a culture with her own.
In addition, the translator applies femininity to a poem written by a male.

[Anonymous No.10375949]

>>10375483
You can criticize women, but as you can see the criticism here is just prejudiced and infantile. Humanities were supposed to cultivate character, but by reading this thread all one sees is a bunch of acne riddled teenagers who can’t string an argument together and uncharitably mischaracterize other people’s work.

Your reading of the classics has done you no good. You should be ashamed with yourself.

[Anonymous No.10375953]

>>10375949
It's tit for tat Stacy. Deal with it.

[Anonymous No.10375965]

>>10375949
Fuck off white knight, obviously we wouldn't criticize this specific women if hear inferior translation wasn't marketed and hailed as the second coming of Christ himself.

[Anonymous No.10375997]

>>10375965
People are praising Fagles translation, the translation that everyone loved to complain about how stiff it is. A translation as stiff as a PS1 character. If you can’t admit that Wilson vastly improved the flow you are dishonest and not worth to talk with.

People are complaining about the modernization as imposing our culture on the Greeks, but the. They are praising Pope’s which is nothing but an attempt to make the odyssey for the 18th century ears. A text composed before proper philology even existed.

And lastly,you drag her for trying to make the text more complex. Here the criticism is correct and welcome, the ambiguity she sees in the text are not necessarily there and are worth discussing, but they are far from being obvious. But realize that you clothe yourself as the lover of books: but what you argue is for one less translation, and against the renewed popularity of a classic, and for a simpler reading of a text.

The only consequence is this: you don’t love the works, you just want to use them as the shield and sword for your ideological battles. So be gone, be ashamed of yourself, and of the petty egoism that drives your words.

[Anonymous No.10376015]

>>10371772
Great but, whenever a new translation comes out, we don’t all rush to go burn the old ones. It’s weird I know, but somehow I think the world can contain multiple translations.

[Anonymous No.10376024]

>>10372227
I think if anything, you are giving a great case FOR this translation rather than against it. By showing that there is a difference and enough room for different translations to exist.

[Anonymous No.10376041]

>>10371170
Provide examples.

[Anonymous No.10376045]

>>10375997
If you seriously think that any excerpts that have been posted are better than the Fagles translation then you are truly a hopeless case. There is no need for a "reinterpretation or modernization" of the texts for their continued popularity. There is especially no need for things like >>10375487. How could you ever defend that? What is the Fagles translation if not a take on Homer for our age? A vastly superior one too, that is respecting the so called canon? Firstly, she is banalizing and making the text more simple. I would have no problem with that if the translation was seen as an easy to read translation, as such things exist, especially for the Bible. In this case she is sacrificing complexity and poetical beauty to gain what? Tell me, what exactly are we gaining in this new translation that we haven't seen before. That we haven't seen done better?
What points do you have to say that she is making the "text more complex". Have you read the translation beyond anything posted in this topic? I certainly have, and the only thing I saw is simplification upon simplification and the banality of wordings like >>10375876. What is my ideological background in this? You could say that the only background I'm trying to enforce is the masculinity of Greek culture which is being degraded, destroyed and stepped upon year by year. If you cannot deal with the fact that texts like the Bible, The Iliad and Odyssey, the Theogony, Works and Days and so on and on are shaped primary from a masculine point of view then you can please ignore ancient culture and values in its full scope. And yes, I'm arguing against ONE more translation if it is a bad and inferior translation, I'm especially arguing against the fact that this translation has already seen more media attention, and therefore will be better known in the academia and by normal readers just because it was done by a women who is "reinterpreting" the male standpoint of the Odyssey and Homer. Like that is something that is needed or that is done with any sort of argument. So you can fuck off again.

[Anonymous No.10376051]

>>10376015
But no one is burning anything, I doubt scholars will use it, and not even Wilson considers it authoritative, but just the translation she wished there was and there wasn’t. She often says that what moved her is not a lack of femininity, but that all modern translations used blank verse. She wanted a translation that would sound to our ears musical in the same way homer sounds to her. So she used strict pentameter and the exact same number of lines to try to convey the experience of it.

[Anonymous No.10376055]

>>10369213

You can't expect a woman to translate that shit well. Read Lattimore's, he did it best.

[Anonymous No.10376078]

>>10369328
sublime post

[Anonymous No.10376213]

>>10375787
Lattimore
>Godlike Theoklymenos now spoke out among them:
>'Poor wretches, what evil has come on you? Your heads and faces
>and the knees underneath you are shrouded in night and darkness;
>a sound of wailing had broken out, your cheeks are covered
>with tears, and the walls bleed, and the fine supporting pillars.
>All of the forecourt is huddled with ghosts, the yard is full of them
>as they flock down to the underworld and the darkness. The sun
>has perished out of the sky, and a foul mist has come over.'

Wilson
>The prophet Theoclymenus addressed them.
>"What awful thing is happening to you?
>Your faces, heads, and bodies are wrapped up
>in night; your screams are blazing out like fire
>The ornate palace ceilings and the walls
>are spattered with your blood. The porch is full
>of ghosts, as in the courtyard--ghosts descending
>into the dark of Erebus. The sun
>has vanished from the sky, and gloomy mist
>is all around

Such bland prose, I'll post more in a little

[Anonymous No.10376267]

>>10376045
underrated post

[Anonymous No.10376297]

>>10375875
top lel fuck you and this stale meme for making me chuckle

[Anonymous No.10376343]

>>10376213
Lattimore
>"Aias, son of stately Telamon, could you then never
>even in death forget your anger against me. because of
>that cursed armor? The gods made it to pain the Achaians
>so great a bulwark were you, who were lost to them. We Achaians
>grieved for your death as incessantly as for Achilleus
>the son of Peleus at his death, and there is no other
>to blame, but Zeus; he, in his terrible hate for the army
>of Danaan spearmen, visited this destruction upon you.
>Come nearer, my lord, so you can hear what I say and listen
>to my story; suppress your anger and lordly spirit."

Wilson
>'Please, Ajax, son of mighty Telamon,
>can you not set aside your rage at me
>about those cursed arms? Not even now,
>in death? The gods made them to ruin us.
>You were our tower; what a loss you were!
>We Greeks were struck by grief when you were gone;
>we mourned as long for you as Achilles.
>Blame nobody but Zeus. He ruined us,
>in hatred for the army of the Greeks;
>and that was why he brought this doom on you.
>But listen now, my lord. Subdue your anger'

Wilson uses the Latin anachronistic term 'Greeks' instead of 'Danaan' or 'Achaian' (even 'Hellenes' would have been a better anachronistic term). Even Odysseus' appeal to Aias is stripped of emotion.

Absolute hack job.

[Anonymous No.10376352]

its actually pretty good....but I enjoy comparing and contrasting different translations of texts.

why do you guys keep starting threads about what you hate? this thread, endless rupi kaur threads.

i dare you to post a thread about an author you love

[Anonymous No.10376356]

>>10376024
His whole post went over your head.

[Anonymous No.10376370]

>>10376352
The threads are started by viral marketers.

[Anonymous No.10376371]

>>10370985
uuuu

[Anonymous No.10376378]

>>10376343
The thing people forget, especially when its about translating such texts, is that the translator himself needs the skill set, the ability to write great prose or poetry to convey the words of the great author he is translating. She is just a bad writer.

[Anonymous No.10376388]

But how is her Seneca?
And who has a good translation of Seneca's plays?

[Anonymous No.10376389]

>>10371366
>who harrass young men in clubs and bars.
This is my fetish