Hacker News Reader

>but if the Greek word used to describe Telemachus means something like "presence of mind," to hint at the boy growing up to be a man worthy of such a father, and then the translated words chosen are things like "whined" and so forth, you tell me.

The word used for Telemachus could be translated as "prudent" and "judicious". In the way it was perceived for what a kid should be growing up in the times, we could also call it "well rounded".

Of different ways to evaluate translation, whether or not the translator had an agenda against the protagonist of the work they’re translating is a strange criticism. Personally, I became a fan of Wilson after reading her Euripides, I think it was Trojan women or something. I didn’t know why, but I just really enjoyed reading it. I think her popularity is that she makes the poetry come alive. I don’t know if style is the right word but something like that. Translation is always a set of compromises. Better to have more translations, and for translations to be varied in their goals and methods. Her translations make reading enjoyable for me. She wouldn’t be the translation I would choose for other purposes, but to sit down and enjoy the reading, I like her a lot.

I don't think it's a strange criticism. As a reader, I shouldn't have to worry about the translator having some kind of weird resentment towards characters in the text.

My observation is that when it comes to this particular translation, people come out of their way to get offended on behalf of main characters over completely minor decisions.

For the record, overall they come across very well. They are interesting. They make sense. They act consistent with situations they are in. They do not get criticized or insulted, nothing like that. But there is this weird assumption from some people that if they do not come like totally perfect alpha heroes in every single subtle situation, it is an ideological agenda against the guys.

Actually, I'm offended on behalf of Western civilization.

Well, if it’s not good then who cares. If it is good, but subversive for lack of a better term, then that strikes me as worthy. Most work done in that spirit is bad because it’s low quality, not just because it’s agenda driven. I’m all for quality over purity, if it gets more people to read and enjoy.

It is not subversive and I did not said it is subversive.

I said people go out of their way to act offended. And very often worh fascinating caveats like "I did not read it" or with "I don't understand original but Google translator of characters name is something nice therefore every single word must be super flattering." And then get offended over passages that are flattering, but I guess not enough.

That's a dealbreaker for me.

regardless of how we feel about "victims," in the ancient world they had no sympathy at all. The thought didn't even occur to them.

in the ancient world they had no sympathy at all

You can disabuse yourself of this misconception by reading some of the works in any translation.

and you can disabuse yourself of your arrogance by reading anything from the ancient world.

They were human beings, essentially biologically identical to us, and felt compassion - a universal human emotion and an evolutionary advantage and necessity.

What basis is there for the idea that they were sociopaths? Plenty of ancient literature is concerned with these things. Plenty of modern literature overlooks it - play most computer games, for example.

One of the most striking things about ancient Greek and Roman literature is how dehumanising it is about slaves, especially when slaves were regarded en masse, as a class, and not as individual human beings. In those societies, slaves could and were regularly beaten, raped, or killed with impunity. Compassion is indeed a perennial human emotion, and it must have existed because some slaves were set free (though even here this could have been due to a master’s fondness for a slave that arose out of e.g. sexual exploitation of the latter). Yet at the same time, mass killings of slaves in ancient literature – and this is something depicted on a number of occasions – do not feature the same poignancy as modern Western readers would expect.

Modern Western literature and cinema are full of compassion-less killings. And mass Murders or torture and rape.

> In those societies, slaves could and were regularly beaten, raped, or killed with impunity

What is the basis for that? I read it as the imagination of the contemporary reactionary movement - the idea that a sort of sociopathology is a normal human condition, and compassion about others and a belief in their rights is a fake contrivance (of liberalism). But the evidence points strongly the other way. Still, there is plenty I don't know about the ancient Greek and Roman literature.

See, for example, Kyle Harper’s Slavery in the Late Roman World, AD 275–425, Cambridge University Press, 2011. In spite of the title, it contains much detail on Roman slavery in previous eras, and is one of the most accessible (to an educated readership) presentations of the phenomenon.

Thank you! A commenter who actually knows a bit of what they are saying! I will take a look at it.

From my knowledge of other such situations, enslaved people have many fewer rights, customary and legal, but not none. Humans will still be sickened by seeing other humans do bad things; there are limits. Also, they want the enslaved people to be pacified and cooperative, not murderous and angry.

"they" : we're talking about the literature that's survived. Where killing all the men and selling the women & children into slavery after capturing a city was standard practice.

Please cite some of the "Plenty of ancient literature is concerned with these things."

The word "sociopath" gives you away. Nearly every ancient hero could be thus described.