Calling Penelope, Wifey!

Language lovers and The Odyssey

How does one sum up succinctly their feelings after reading Homer’s Odyssey? The task is daunting to say the least. I have had the pleasure now of reading not one, but two translations, Fagles and Solot’s, through SCP. Fagles was a bound edition, while I read Solot’s on Kindle. Both contain supplementary materials such as maps and a pronunciation dictionary (with details about each character). However, the Fagles edition includes The Genealogy of Theoclymenus, which the Solot does not, while Solot’s includes a helpful note at the end called Reading the Rhythm. (Though I would have preferred it at the beginning of the text, rather than after, as many readers (such as myself) most likely would have found that useful before diving in. One of the advantages of reading The Odyssey on Kindle is that, if you are curious about how certain places and names are pronounced and would like more than simply attempting to do so yourself, the audio feature is a helpful tool.

That being said, there is something to be said for having the ability to hold a text in your hand, which, to me, no e-reader can replace. At the same time, using Kindle allowed me to highlight passages and make notes. While one could do so in the hardcopy with an abundance of sticky notes, I find this cumbersome and worry that it might damage the print after removal, lifting ink off the page. All these things, though, are minor features, and vary given taste and what you, as a reader, appreciate or wish to negate. (thinking that it would detract from the enjoyment therein). I postulate that no matter which translation or device you use, the purpose should be to make the most of it, and with that, dive in.

I began this process with Fagles version and admittedly with some trepidation, since it is Homer, and one of the few classics I did not read in high school, though we did venture into The Canterbury Tales and Beowulf. Fagles edition, to me, is less lyrical than Solot’s, and maybe that is why I found it quicker to read. It moves at an astounding pace, even for something that clocks in at 485 pages, written so long ago. Yet, it has a flat feel (by this I mean, the meter does not stand out even with a certain amount of subtlety,) I did not find myself noting key passages to highlight the tempo, because even as one whose ear is pretty keen when it comes to music and poetry, for the most part, it was indistinguishable from the narrative, rather then contributing to it. This does not mean I did not enjoy it, I did, but not in the same way as other epics I have read. It is my perspective, especially given that one of the reviewers on the sleeve is Ted Hughes, more of a modernist than one known for prosody, that the Fagles edition is written specifically for the modern ear. (one not attuned to, nor as appreciative of work which sounds right off the bat, poetic in the truest sense of the word). This translation would be a good, non-threatening introduction for high school students, given its readability.

The Solot translation, through SCP, on the other hand, does contain stanzas that feel and sound metrical to the ear, and as their note Reading the Rhythm suggests, one can read it naturally, and still hear the stresses as one moves along, without pausing to ensure you do. As evidenced here in Book 19, page 315, where Odysseus relays the story of Pheidon, king of Thesprotia

Doulichion

Still, I did see the riches Odysseus left for safekeeping,

Enough for his son and grandson- ten generations-

By contrast, Fagles says

A Thesprotian cutter

chanced to be heading for Doulichion rich in wheat.

But he showed me all the treasure Odysseus had amassed, enough to last a man and ten generations of his heirs-

and in the following passage, Book 20, page 337, Theoclymenus berates the suitors, calling their attention to the carnage before them. Solot’s translation says

Swarming and scurrying down through the murk to the Gloom Where the sun is no more— a place of pure darkness, and doom.

Fagles translation reads

Night shrouds your heads, your faces down to your knees- cries of mourning are bursting into fire-cheeks-rivering tears-

While reading Solot’s translation, it was evident that sometimes in their effort to make it easily digestible, it would lapse into modern terms such as ‘wifey’, ‘ain’t.’ and even ‘I’m just not that impressed’, which have the unfortunate effect of pulling the reader’s attention away from the text, even if it does not require the reader to seek outside sources for understanding. This is a shame, because for the most part, Solot’s is for poetry lovers and for those familiar with epics, as it heralds the earlier efforts of bards, who composed their work to be sung, rather than read. However, one can make the argument that poetry, and especially epic poetry, has survived only through the oral tradition, which in the case of Homer is abundantly clear. If, as is thought, Homer was blind, he would have needed a scribe who wrote the text down, but if it was never written, and Homer himself was illiterate, then the only feasible way for the work to be passed along would have been through recitation. Taking this into account, it is also more than likely that as time passed, each generation added its own flavor to it, while the story remained, for the most part, the same. If we take this view, then the use of words such as ‘wifey’, ‘aint’, and so on can be forgiven as textual additions that enhance the narrative rather than detract.

Yet while reading Fagles translation, Knox’s annotations in the Introduction (pages 16-17) on the text curiously underscore my previous comments on Solot’s translation. He cites the disparate dialects found in translations, along with variances in meter and epithets repeated throughout the text. Some of these cause incongruities, yet, by taking into account the oral nature of the epic and the passage of time, we can circumvent what would seem to be errors by recognizing that language is a living thing, as is poetry as well. Knox’s note in the introduction delves deeper, asking us to consider not just fluctuations but the poetic voice, contrasting it with the common voice used in Homer’s day.

“The language of Homer is, of course, a problem in itself. One thing is certain: it is not a language anyone ever spoke. It is an artificial, poetic language-as the German scholar Witte puts it, “The language of the Homeric poems is a creation of epic verse.” It was also a difficult language. For the Greeks of the great age, that fifth century, we inevitably think of when we say, ‘the Greeks.’ “

It was brimful of archaisms, in vocabulary, syntax, and grammar- and of incongruities, words and forms drawn from different dialects and different stages of the growth of language. In fact, the language of Homer was one nobody, except epic bards, oracular priests, or literary parodists, would dream of using.

This does not mean Homer was a poet known only to scholars and schoolboys; on the contrary, the Homeric epics were familiar as household words in the mouths of ordinary Greeks.” The Odyssey, Bernard Knox, Introduction: The Language of Homer, pg 12

With this in mind, both versions have drawbacks. Fagles does not include illustrations, though it does have Knox’s Introduction, which not only contains the previously cited History of Language, but also a guide on pronounciation and the epic rhyme scheme. Solot’s features Aedan Kennedy’s illustrations, which pull you deeper into the times, that of ancient Greece, enhancing your experience while aiding comprehension (as is the case with the deaths of the duplicitous handmaidens, seeing how they were killed rather than just trying to picture it in your mind). -If one wants to get the feel of an epic, which has a rhythm and rhyme beautifully sewn into it, Solot’s version will fit the bill. If you want something that is less poetic, more dense in terms of what supplementary items are included, Fagles will do.

One thing to keep in mind is that a film version of the poem is set to arrive on July 17th of this year, which will hopefully boost the sales of SCP’s version. While that is good, I am wary of adapting any work, especially an epic poem, for film. The risks (from casting) Matt Damon, who is Odysseus, really does not seem appropriate given his very Nordic appearance, or the fact that it is directed and written by Chris Nolan, more known for superhero movies such as Man of Steel, The Dark Knight Rises, Justice League and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (or that anytime you endeavour such a project, you will automatically run up against critics of from both the scholarly world and the general public), and as a result lose in terms of narrative, and depth.

It is hoped that more people may put aside inherent biases toward poetry and purchase either Fagles or Sol’s or Solot’s translation to see what all the fuss is about. If that is the case, I am all for it. My feeling is that anything that lifts up poetry is a good thing. We need more beauty, more light, and definitely more poetry in the world, which can serve as a beacon to inspire, guide, and encourage all of those things within ourselves.