Homer's Odyssey Three Ways: Recent Translations by Verity, Wilson, and Green, by Richard Whitaker

(See also Homer’s Odyssey)

After having read Emily Wilson’s review of Nolan’s The Odyssey I wanted to learn some more about her translation, and so I read this article, Homer’s Odyssey Three Ways: Recent Translations by Verity, Wilson, and Green, by Richard Whitaker.

I have not yet read Wilson’s translation, maybe I’ll give it a try but am not encouraged by the review.

Whitaker’s take is mostly negative:

  • the “translation” is not suitable for academic use, though may be of interest to people who already know the work (242)
  • “The two great novelties of Wilson’s Odyssey are the way she represents a group of characters that we might term ‘underdogs’–notably the Cyclops, and the suitors and their allies–in a sympathetic light, while representing Odysseus as, on balance, reprehensible. The big problem, however, with Wilson’s heterodox approach to the characters of the Odyssey is that she can sustain it only by distorting and misrepresenting what the Greek text says” (243).
  • The meat of the article’s treatment of Wilson’s work is basically defending this charge. I think Whitaker is largely successful, he cites numerous cases where Wilson simply leaves out words from translation that do not fit her worldview.
  • That said, I sympathize with some of her project. I do agree that the depiction of Polyphemus that Whitaker discusses on p 245 is more nuanced than he seems to think it is, that we must feel some sympathy for the cyclops; though Wilson reaches too far in removing the connotations of monstrousness and savagery that are present in the original text.
  • Likewise I think Wilson’s point that Odysseus is often portrayed in a negative light to be well put, and an essential part of his character, but she perhaps takes it too far by e.g. simply leaving out the phrase “though he longed to save them” when discussing his failure to keep his men alive (244) since this him look more callous and self-serving.
  • Whitaker has a list of modernized terminology on pages 247-8 including “cutest”, “Teenagers”, “glugs it down” that is the sort of thing that makes me instantly want to put down a book like this. The point of this kind of literature is to be transported. We shouldn’t be looking for a cozy, familiar, safe space.
  • Pages 250 onward list a dizzying array of simple mistranslations, like “fifty” instead of “five hundred”, or “cloudy” instead of “snowy”.

While Whitaker spends most of his time on Wilson’s work, he does discuss the others a bit.

  • He has a generally positive take on Green’s translation, though the Yoda-speak he mentions is a fairly strong turn-off for me (252).
  • Verity’s is straightforward but a bit dull (253).