4 ms·

I am implying that up until very recently translating Classics was thought to be a very serious job where the author certainly tried to give a new angle to the

I am implying that up until very recently translating Classics was thought to be a very serious job where the author certainly tried to give a new angle to the work(else why translate), but did not try to radically alter the meaning. You change the angle of the spotlight, or maybe the brigtness, you don't change the object at which the spotlight is pointing. Making a "feminist" translation of the Odyssey under the pretension that the original is a "patriarchal fantasy" is not a serious work and shouldn't be taken as such.

roflyear 3y ago
Who are you to judge what is serious or not? The Odyssey has been translated dozens of times. Have you read most of them, to be able to substantiate these statements?
giraffe_lady 3y ago
This translator takes the task very seriously, and is taken seriously by other professionals in her domain of expertise. I don't know how to find a stronger signal of seriousness than that. Her introduction to the odyssey is actually a very interesting essay about the constraints and dynamics of translating ancient texts, it's definitely worth reading for its own sake. A really interesting example of this and probably the one you're on a rant about is the "feminist" decision to use the word slave to describe the murdered house girls. Previous english translations used the word servant or maid. The original greek word is none of these, but they were slaves and an ancient greek would know that in this context. Every translator is making a decision about what information is communicated when they select a word there. And a selection is required, there's no perfectly neutral choice.
jjulius 3y ago
>Making a "feminist" translation of the Odyssey under the pretension that the original is a "patriarchal fantasy" is not a serious work and shouldn't be taken as such. Why not? Edit: Also unclear where you're quoting "feminist" and "patriarchal fantasy" from, as the article and this entire thread mention neither.
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  As an adaptation, it seems very interesting. As a translation, it seems absurd.
  - roflyear 3y ago
    Would you mind pointing out how this is a "feminist" translation?
    - mcpackieh 3y ago
      I never claimed it was, nor have I read it. I am responding to the premise presented in the comments above.
  - jjulius 3y ago
    Can you explain what you find absurd about the translation that appears in this article? Edit: Am I correct in inferring that you're calling this translation absurd despite admitting you haven't read it?[1] [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36636178 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36636178
    - mcpackieh 3y ago
      That's a false premise, I have no opinion on the translation in the article. I am responding to the premise of a feminist translation, not to this specific translation (which may in fact not be feminist at all.)
      - jjulius 3y ago
        ... okay then.
        mcpackieh 3y ago
        > Am I correct in inferring that you're calling this translation absurd As I explained, no. mamonster presented the premise of a feminist translation. You asked what the problem with that would be, and I responded the premise of a feminist adaptation seems fine but a feminist translation does not. I have not argued that this translation is a feminist translation; I am responding to the same premise which you responded to when you asked "Why not?" If you can ask "Why not?" to a premise disconnected from the article, then I can address the same premise.

roflyear 3y ago

Who are you to judge what is serious or not? The Odyssey has been translated dozens of times. Have you read most of them, to be able to substantiate these statements?

giraffe_lady 3y ago

This translator takes the task very seriously, and is taken seriously by other professionals in her domain of expertise. I don't know how to find a stronger signal of seriousness than that. Her introduction to the odyssey is actually a very interesting essay about the constraints and dynamics of translating ancient texts, it's definitely worth reading for its own sake. A really interesting example of this and probably the one you're on a rant about is the "feminist" decision to use the word slave to describe the murdered house girls. Previous english translations used the word servant or maid. The original greek word is none of these, but they were slaves and an ancient greek would know that in this context. Every translator is making a decision about what information is communicated when they select a word there. And a selection is required, there's no perfectly neutral choice.

jjulius 3y ago

>Making a "feminist" translation of the Odyssey under the pretension that the original is a "patriarchal fantasy" is not a serious work and shouldn't be taken as such. Why not? Edit: Also unclear where you're quoting "feminist" and "patriarchal fantasy" from, as the article and this entire thread mention neither.

mcpackieh 3y ago
As an adaptation, it seems very interesting. As a translation, it seems absurd.
- roflyear 3y ago
  Would you mind pointing out how this is a "feminist" translation?
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    I never claimed it was, nor have I read it. I am responding to the premise presented in the comments above.
- jjulius 3y ago
  Can you explain what you find absurd about the translation that appears in this article? Edit: Am I correct in inferring that you're calling this translation absurd despite admitting you haven't read it?[1] [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36636178 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36636178
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    That's a false premise, I have no opinion on the translation in the article. I am responding to the premise of a feminist translation, not to this specific translation (which may in fact not be feminist at all.)
    - jjulius 3y ago
      ... okay then.
      - mcpackieh 3y ago
        > Am I correct in inferring that you're calling this translation absurd As I explained, no. mamonster presented the premise of a feminist translation. You asked what the problem with that would be, and I responded the premise of a feminist adaptation seems fine but a feminist translation does not. I have not argued that this translation is a feminist translation; I am responding to the same premise which you responded to when you asked "Why not?" If you can ask "Why not?" to a premise disconnected from the article, then I can address the same premise.