I can't find a page on the wiki or anything, my apologies

hollander

>>8494878
thank you <3

John Ciacco is the best for one volume.

>>8494888
but promise that you'll read at least the 4th canto from inferno in italian

>>8494913
i don't know what that means this would be my first book i've read to completion in years

>>8494878
Musa for beginners (has just enough notes to skim reading), Hollander for people who are to spend months dedicated to studying TDC.

>>8494910
I mean John Ciardi. I like the Hollanders but I can't trust the guy's wife.

>>8494931
Ciardi is a shit modern poet and a forced meme. OWC editions are mediocre, and Ciardi's translation for them is not an exception.

Go with Musa or Hollander, depending on which mode of study you intend on, based on >>8494928.

File: chart.png (2MB, 2000x7594px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x7594px

>>8494633

HEY DANTEANON FINISH YOUR FUCKING CHART

>>8494938
zz I will at some point

>>8494936
? OWC doesn't use ciardi. it's sisson.

>>8494945
Whoops, mixed up my dark red covers.

Ciardi Dante is published by New American Library. Still mediocre, unless one wants a failed approximation of terza rima, for whatever reason. Ciardi's translation will fade in time, as did all the versions of Homer that tried (and failed) to distribute English across hexameter.

>>8494938
really no reason for going with Singleton for a first read.

>>8494633
I find Mandelbaum to be best.

>>8495005
Did you even fucking read it? It says it's distinguished by its notes, not for the translation. It's primarily recommended for study.

>>8495009
Mandelbaum is garbage. There's no reason for his translation to exist with Hollander and Singleton on shelves.

how many people on /lit/ have actually read multiple translations of dante and did serious comparisons? you guys seem to have super strong opinions on this topic...

>>8495021
Likely between 0-15.

>>8495042
I have, since Divine Comedy is my favorite work of literature. So I make up at least one of those 15.

I read Hollander and it was superb. No complaints.

>>8495015
>Mandelbaum is garbage
yeah na gonna have to heartily disagree there. one of the most readable translators. takes liberties, but liberties must be taken.

>>8495021
I have. Recently I've been having a ton of fun with good faithful prose versions, especially Durling/Martinez and also Sinclair. Perhaps unsurprisingly, by eschewing English poetic meters these prose translators can be much more faithful and at the same time poetic than the metered translators. I'll probably return to meter one day but, for now, it's prose for me.

>>8495748
Forgot to mention, I originally got into these two translations because the notes were so damn insightful, so much more so than the average historical fact dump notes. I was like "prose Dante? Fuck that I'll just read the notes" but then the prose poetry was also fucking awesome

I've always liked Longfellow's the best, though I know I'm in the minority

>>8494878
>>8494878
this

>>8495720
I don't even like Ciardi, but there's no point for Mandelbaum's translation to exist when Ciardi and Hollander have translations out.