sovay: (I Claudius)
sovay ([personal profile] sovay) wrote2009-12-04 01:57 pm

θεός νύ τις ἦ βροτός ἐσσι;

I like Robin Williamson's "Fool's Song (Columbine)," but I really wish he had included the verses Hope Mirrlees wrote for Lud-in-the-Mist (1926).

"There are windfalls of dreams, there's a wolf in the stars,
And Life is a nymph who will never be thine,
With lily, germander, and sops in wine.
With sweet-brier,
And bon-fire,
And strawberry-wire,
And columbine."


My poem "Leukothea's Odyssey 6" has been accepted by Goblin Fruit.

[identity profile] ron-drummond.livejournal.com 2010-02-03 04:26 am (UTC)(link)
I can certainly recommend you some classical poets, although I have a difficult time recommending translations. (If you read two or three at once, you can get a better sense of the work as a whole rather than each translator's particular filter, but that presupposes that you can get, say, three comparable translations of Lucan that don't suck. Your chances improve with things like the Odyssey.)

I would welcome that. I have Fagles' translations of Homer and The Aeneid and the 1993 edition of The Norton Book of Classical Literature, edited by Bernard Knox. Am I right to consider Fagles a good first translation of those works? Are there other translations you consider essential? Who are your favorite classical poets and translations?

Your comment about reading two or three good translations of a given poet struck a nerve. In the mid-90s, when I was first immersing myself in Beethoven's late string quartets (works I count amongst the most sublime utterances in the history of the human race), I was able to afford multiple recordings of each of them, and so had the odd and illuminating experience of becoming more intimately familiar with the compositions than I was with any single recording of them. The best performances inter-illuminate one another, revealing qualities in the music that are not contained in any performance, qualities that stand revealed only in one's imagination, a strange sort of parallactic juxtaposition. Obviously not the same phenomenon, and yet similar in some ways, or so I would imagine.

I also have (moving on to the middle ages) Robert M. Durling's translations of Inferno and Purgatorio, from Oxford. Not, I suspect, the most well known recent translations, but I was intrigued by the editions in the store and decided to take a risk on them. I don't believe his translation of Paradiso has been published yet.

Beyond that I have a few used Norton anthologies of English poetry, mostly unread, like the classical works mentioned above.

It's daunting, and it seems I must read Homer before Virgil, and Homer and the Bible and no doubt any number of other things before Dante, etc. I do appear to have committed myself to devoting a fair amount of my "free" reading time for 2010 to a close reading of most of the Bible, a document I have decidedly mixed feelings about, central-document-of-western-civilization syndrome and all that. If I can fold some Shakespeare in there it would be a good thing. Actually I'd rather fold Homer into it, but don't want to bring the whole effort crashing down, which is so easy to do.

I have a huge volume of Eugenio Montale, who I stumbled upon; I really like some of it. All that Mediterranean light. Mean to read more. Remember liking some of Neruda's 100 love sonnets. Mystical sensuality; Kinnell gets it just right sometimes, something he shares with Montale and Neruda. But so much poetry is opaque to me.

Who are your favorite female poets? I feel underread in women writers generally. I do have a "complete" Dickinson, but have barely begun.

[identity profile] ron-drummond.livejournal.com 2010-02-05 05:04 am (UTC)(link)
All of this is wonderful and energizing to read; thank you. I like the quality of your thought, very much, and if you decided at some point to devote more of your writing time to critical works in the field (perhaps you already have or do!) I have no doubt the field would benefit thereby. (It's a conundrum I face: is it better that I forgo critical writing to spend more time working in more explicitly creative genres, or -- ? I wonder to what extent you wrestle with that.) It will take a while to absorb (you cover a great deal of ground quite succinctly), but I have printed out your replies and archived them for both immediate and later reference; and later I will reply at greater length.

As for the Bible, I have the Oxford Jewish Study Bible, which uses the JPS Tanakh (a fine translation for sure), and Robert Alter's translations of Torah, Samuel, and Psalms. Alter is awesome! The translations are beautiful (and it seems highly idiomatic; his reputation as a scholar of Hebrew is sterling) and his essays and annotations are superb. I envy your ability to read the gospels in the original Greek. I have Willis Barnstone's translation of the gospels, which I like very much, though I prefer to read them with traditional forms of pronouns restored. I also have Richmond Lattimore's New Testament, and about 25 other English translations, 16 of them in just two Oxford volumes of parallel NT's. I have an ambition to write a new "translation" of Mark, my favorite of the canonical gospels. (I urgently recommend John Carroll's profoundly heretical -- and I mean that as the most soulful compliment -- midrash on Mark, The Existential Jesus.)