Which translation of Ovid's Metamorphosis is best suited to a first time reader?
I like Ted Hughes' translation. It's not a complete translation though.
I just finished it, and had a pretty good time with the A.D. Melville translation -- the only annoying bit was endnotes rather than footnotes (but they tended to have pretty good stuff in them, e.g. explanations of brilliant wordplay that cannot be translated)
other than that, I'm pretty sure the Mandelbaum is highly acclaimed, and he did a good job with Dante too. He'd have been my go-to if I didn't like the Melville excerpt I read so much
I'd recommend the Melville too. He manages to keep it somewhat poetic but still readable
>>7843154
>>7843170
Who do you think will be easier to understand? Melville or Mandelbaum? My main concern is easily understanding the story content on first reading. Also, is anyone familiar with Humphries (pictured in OP)? I heard good things about his translation as well.
Melville translation is like $4 on the kindle store. It's Oxford so I'm pretty sure the footnotes are hyperlinked and that won't be a problem.
>>7842947
Learn Latin and read the original
>>7843283
Melville is not difficult to follow at all. I had read Iliad, Odyssey, and Aeneid beforehand, but I don't think it made much difference anyway. Don't know much about Humphries, sorry. Really you'll probably be fine with any of those three, don't sweat it too much.
>>7843644
I took 4 years of Latin in high school. Had to translate some Ovid actually. It's okay though I know you are memeing- thanks for the suggestion, chief.
>>7843679
I read Mythology & Iliad and I'm currently reading Odyssey. I plan to read Aeneid before Metamorphoses as well.
I'll probably go with the Melville translation, Thanks for the help.
Arthur Golding's
>>7844265
This is good in the way Pope's Iliad is good -it's interesting, but that shit ain't accurate.
