Robert Fagles’s translation of Aphrodite’s affair & Hephaestus’s snare – The Odyssey, Book 8, lines 290-367:

 

Aphrodite and the Graces disarming Ares made by G. B. Gabbler

‘At the kings word the herald [Demodocus] sprang to his feet

and ran to fetch the vibrant lyre from the house.

And stewards rose, nine in all, picked from the realm

to set the stage for contests: masters-at-arms who

leveled the dancing-floor to make a fine broad ring.

The herald returned and placed the ringing lyre now

in Demodocus hands, and the bard moved toward the center,

flanked by boys in the flush of youth, skilled dancers

who stamped the ground with marvelous pulsing steps

as Odysseus gazed at their flying, flashing feet, his heart aglow with wonder.

 

A rippling prelude—

now the bard struck up an irresistible song:

The Love of Ares and Aphrodite Crowned with Flowers…

how the two had first made love in Hephaestus mansion,

all in secret. Ares had showered her with gifts

and showered Hephaestus marriage bed with shame

but a messenger ran to tell the god of fire—

Helios, lord of the sun, whod spied the couple

lost in each others arms and making love.

Hephaestus, hearing the heart-wounding story,

bustled toward his forge, brooding on his revenge—

planted the huge anvil on its block and beat out chains,

not to be slipped or broken, all to pin the lovers on the spot.

This snare the Firegod forged, ablaze with his rage at War,

then limped to the room where the bed of love stood firm

and round the posts he poured the chains in a sweeping net

with streams of others flowing down from the roofbeam,

gossamer-fine as spider webs no man could see,

not even a blissful god—

the Smith had forged a masterwork of guile.

Once hed spun that cunning trap around his bed

he feigned a trip to the well-built town of Lemnos,

dearest to him by far of all the towns on earth.

But the god of battle kept no blind mans watch.

As soon as he saw the Master Craftsman leave

he plied his golden reins and arrived at once

and entered the famous god of fires mansion,

chafing with lust for Aphrodite crowned with flowers.

Shed just returned from her fathers palace, mighty Zeus,

and now she sat in her rooms as Ares strode right in

and grasped her hand with a warm, seductive urging:

“Quick, my darling, come, lets go to bed

and lose ourselves in love! Your husbands away—

by now he must be off in the wilds of Lemnos,

consorting with his raucous Sintian friends.”

 

So he pressed

and her heart raced with joy to sleep with War

and off they went to bed and down they lay—

and down around them came those cunning chains

of the crafty god of fire, showering down now

till the couple could not move a limb or lift a finger—

then they knew at last: there was no way out, not now.

But now the glorious crippled Smith was drawing near…

hed turned around, miles short of the Lemnos coast,

for the Sungod kept his watch and told Hephaestus all,

so back he rushed to his house, his heart consumed with anguish.

Halting there at the gates, seized with savage rage

he howled a terrible cry, imploring all the gods,

“Father Zeus, look here—

the rest of you happy gods who live forever—

here is a sight to make you laugh, revolt you too!

Just because I am crippled, Zeuss daughter Aphrodite

will always spurn me and love that devastating Ares,

just because of his striking looks and racers legs

while I am a weakling, lame from birth, and whos to blame?

Both my parents-who else? If only theyd never bred me!

Just look at the two lovers . . . crawled inside my bed,

locked in each others arms-the sight makes me burn!

But I doubt theyll want to lie that way much longer,

not a moment more-mad as they are for each other.

No, theyll soon tire of bedding down together,

but then my cunning chains will bind them fast 360

till our Father pays my bride-gifts back in full,

all I handed him lor that shameless bitch his daughter,

irresistible beauty-all unbridled too!”

So Hephaestus wailed

as the gods came crowding up to his bronze-floored house,

Poseidon god of the earthquake came, and Hermes came,

the running god of luck, and the Archer, lord Apollo,

while modesty kept each goddess to her mansion.

The immortals, givers of all good things, stood at the gates,

and uncontrollable laughter burst from the happy gods

when they saw the god of fires subtle, cunning work.

One would glance at his neighbor, laughing out,

“A bad day for adultery Slow outstrips the Swift.”

“Look how limping Hephaestus conquers War,

the quickest of all the gods who rule Olympus!,,

“The cripple wins by craft.”

“The adulterer,

he will pay the price!”

So the gods would banter

among themselves but lord Apollo goaded Hermes on:

“Tell me, Quicksilver, giver of all good things—

even with those unwieldy shackles wrapped around you,

how would you like to bed the golden Aphrodite?”

 

“Oh Apollo, if only!” the giant-killer cried.

“Archer, bind me down with triple those endless chains!

Let all you gods look on, and all you goddesses too—

how I’d love to bed that golden Aphrodite!”

 

A peal of laughter broke from the deathless ones

but not Poseidon, not a smile from him; he kept on

begging the famous Smith to loose the god of war,

pleading, his words flying, “Let him go!

I guarantee you Ares will pay the price,

whatever you ask, Hephaestus,

whatever’s right in the eyes of all the gods.”

 

But the famous crippled Smith appealed in turn,

“God of the earthquake, please don’t urge this on me.

A pledge for a worthless man is a worthless pledge indeed.

What if he slips out of his chains-his debts as well?

How could I shackle you while all the gods look on?”

But the god of earthquakes reassured the Smith,

“Look, Hephaestus, if Ares scuttles off and away,

squirming out of his debt, I’ll pay the fine myself.”

 

And the famous crippled Smith complied at last:

“Now there’s an offer I really can’t refuse!”

 

With all his force the god of fire loosed the chains

and the two lovers, free of the bonds that overwhelmed them so,

sprang up and away at once, and the Wargod sped to Thrace

while Love with her telltale laughter sped to Paphos,

Cyprus Isle, where her grove and scented altar stand.

There the Graces bathed and anointed her with oil,

ambrosial oil, the bloom that clings to the gods

who never die, and swathed her round in gowns

to stop the heart…an ecstasy—a vision.

 

That was the song the famous harper sang

and Odysseus relished every note as the islanders,

the lords of the long oars and master mariners rejoiced.’

We’ll Help You Find Your Next Great Book. (Spoiler: It’s the ‘Odyssey.’) | The New York Times

‘As the critic and classicist Daniel Mendelsohn puts it in the introduction to his recent translation, “The ‘Odyssey’ bequeathed to the West entire genres,” from science fiction to romantic comedy. In that spirit, we offer this guide, confident that whatever kind of story you’re looking for, you’ll find it in Homer.’

[Via]

Emily Wilson: “stylistic pomposity is entirely un-Homeric.”

Emily Wilson and Book Cover for Circo del Herrero imagery ‘The notion that Homeric epic must be rendered in grand, ornate, rhetorically elevated English has been with us since the time of Alexander Pope. It is past time, I believe, to reject this assumption. Homer’s language is markedly rhythmical, but it is not difficult or ostentatious. The Odyssey relies on coordinated, not subordinated syntax (“and then this, and then this, and then this,” rather than “although this, because of that, when this, which was this, on account of that”). I have frequently aimed for a certain level of simplicity, often using fairly ordinary, straightforward, and readable English. In using language that is largely simple, my goal is not to make Homer sound “primitive,” but to mark the fact that stylistic pomposity is entirely un-Homeric. I also hope to invite readers to respond more actively with the text. Impressive displays of rhetoric and linguistic force are a good way to seem important an invite a particular kind of admiration, but they tend to silence dissent and discourage deeper modes of engagement. A consistently elevated style can make it harder for readers to keep track of what is at stake in the story. My translation is, I hope, recognizable as an epic poem, but it is one that avoids trumpeting its own status with bright, noisy linguistic fireworks, in order to invite a more thoughtful consideration of what the narrative means, and they ways it matters.

All modern translation of ancient texts exist in a time, a place, and a language that are entirely alien from those of the original. All modern translations are equally modern…I have tired to make my translation sound markedly poetic and sometimes linguistically distinctive, even odd. But I have also aimed for a fresh and contemporary register. The shock of encountering an ancient author speaking in largely recognizable language can make him seem more strange, and newly strange. I would like to invite readers to experience a sense of connection to this anent text, while also recognizing its vast distance from our own place and time. Homer is, and is not, our contemporary.’ -Emily Wilson, “Introduction,” The Odyssey. 

BookTuber Tuesday – Emily Wilson: On Gender and Being the First Woman to Translate Homer’s Odyssey into English

GABBLER RECOMMENDS: The First Woman to Translate the ‘Odyssey’ Into English The classicist Emily Wilson has given Homer’s epic a radically contemporary voice. By WYATT MASON

“If you’re going to admit that stories matter,” Wilson told me, “then it matters how we tell them, and that exists on the level of microscopic word choice, as well as on the level of which story are you going to pick to start off with, and then, what exactly is that story? The whole question of ‘What is that story?’ is going to depend on the language, the words that you use.”

Throughout her translation of the “Odyssey,” Wilson has made small but, it turns out, radical changes to the way many key scenes of the epic are presented — “radical” in that, in 400 years of versions of the poem, no translator has made the kinds of alterations Wilson has, changes that go to truing a text that, as she says, has through translation accumulated distortions that affect the way even scholars who read Greek discuss the original. These changes seem, at each turn, to ask us to appreciate the gravity of the events that are unfolding, the human cost of differences of mind.

The first of these changes is in the very first line. You might be inclined to suppose that, over the course of nearly half a millennium, we must have reached a consensus on the English equivalent for an old Greek word, polytropos. But to consult Wilson’s 60 some predecessors, living and dead, is to find that consensus has been hard to come by. Chapman starts things off, in his version, with “many a way/Wound with his wisdom”; John Ogilby counters with the terser “prudent”; Thomas Hobbes evades the word, just calling Odysseus “the man.” Quite a range, and we’ve barely started. There’s Alexander Pope’s “for wisdom’s various arts renown’d”; William Cowper’s “For shrewdness famed/And genius versatile”; H.F. Cary’s “crafty”; William Sotheby’s “by long experience tried”; Theodore Buckley’s “full of resources”; Henry Alford’s “much-versed”; Philip Worsley’s “that hero”; the Rev. John Giles’s “of many fortunes”; T.S. Norgate’s “of many a turn”; George Musgrave’s “tost to and fro by fate”; the Rev. Lovelace Bigge-Wither’s “many-sided-man”; George Edgington’s “deep”; William Cullen Bryant’s “sagacious”; Roscoe Mongan’s “skilled in expedients”; Samuel Henry Butcher and Andrew Lang’s “so ready at need”; Arthur Way’s “of craft-renown”; George Palmer’s “adventurous”; William Morris’s “shifty”; Samuel Butler’s “ingenious”; Henry Cotterill’s “so wary and wise”; Augustus Murray’s “of many devices”; Francis Caulfeild’s “restless”; Robert Hiller’s “clever”; Herbert Bates’s “of many changes”; T.E. Lawrence’s “various-minded”; William Henry Denham Rouse’s “never at a loss”; Richmond Lattimore’s “of many ways”; Robert Fitzgerald’s “skilled in all ways of contending”; Albert Cook’s “of many turns”; Walter Shewring’s “of wide-ranging spirit”; Allen Mandelbaum’s “of many wiles”; Robert Fagles’s “of twists and turns”; all the way to Stanley Lombardo’s “cunning.”

One way of talking about Wilson’s translation of the “Odyssey” is to say that it makes a sustained campaign against that species of scholarly shortsightedness: finding equivalents in English that allow the terms she is choosing to do the same work as the original words, even if the English words are not, according to a Greek lexicon, “correct.”

“What gets us to ‘complicated,’ ” Wilson said, returning to her translation of polytropos, “is both that I think it has some hint of the original ambivalence and ambiguity, such that it’s both ‘Why is he complicated?’ ‘What experiences have formed him?’ which is a very modern kind of question — and hints at ‘There might be a problem with him.’ I wanted to make it a markedly modern term in a way that ‘much turning’ obviously doesn’t feel modern or like English. I wanted it to feel like an idiomatic thing that you might say about somebody: that he is complicated.”

I asked: “What about the commentator who says, ‘It does something that more than modernizes — it subverts the fundamental strangeness of the way Odysseus is characterized.’ I’m sure some classicists are going to say it’s flat out wrong, ‘Interesting, but wrong.’ ”

“You’re quite right,” she replied. “Reviewers will say that.”

How, I asked, would she address such a complaint from someone in her field?

“I struggle with this all the time,” Wilson said. “I struggled with this because there are those classicists. I partly just want to shake them and make them see that all translations are interpretations.” Most of the criticism Wilson expects, she says, will come from “a digging in of the heels: ‘That’s not what it says in the dictionary, and therefore it can’t be right!’ And if you put down anything other than what’s said in the dictionary, then, of course, you have to add a footnote explaining why, which means that pretty much every line has to have a footnote. …” Wilson paused. “That goes to what this translation is aiming to do in terms of an immersive reading experience and conveying a whole narrative. I don’t know what to say to those people, honestly.” Wilson laughed her buoyant laugh. “I need to have a better answer to them, because they will certainly review it, and they will certainly have a loud voice. They just seem to be coming from such a simple and fundamental misunderstanding.”

“Of what?”

“Of what any translation is doing.”

What a translation is doing — and what it should do — has been a source of vigorous debate since there were texts to translate. “I’m not a believer,” Wilson told me, “but I find that there is a sort of religious practice that goes along with translation. I’m trying to serve something.”

[Via]