Odyssey Everyman

>>8926096
Found them on Amazon too, still don't understand the difference. But the price difference is rather big.

>https://www.amazon.co.uk/Odyssey-Everymans-Library-Classics/dp/1857150945

>https://www.amazon.co.uk/Odyssey-Everymans-Library-Classics-Contemporary/dp/0679410473

>>8926096
I don't get why this board has an obsession with Fitzgerald. I'm currently reading his translation of the Iliad and I kinda regret not having bought the more modern Fagles translation. He needlessly uses archaic and obscure words when other more simple words could have been used.

It's just no fun having to turn to the dictionary all the time. I'm getting Fagles' Odyssey for sure now.

>>8926167
Well I was considering Fagles and Fitzgerald too but seeing how it's actually cheaper to get the hardbacks from Everyman than it is from Penguin boxset, I decided on the Fitzgerald Everyman.

And like you said, people on /lit/ keeps recommending Fitzgerald over Fagles but did not realize it might have really archaic English... More so than Moby-Dick for example?

>>8926096
I did the same thing (not my first copies, mind you). Only the Odyssey is here yet, but I definitely recommend it. The book is lovely and sturdy.
>>8926167
Pleb.

>>8926216
People who get their validation out of obsessing about a particular translation despite it being undoubtedly outdated are the real plebs.

>>8926190
>More so than Moby Dick

Haven't read MB, but if you know what a heifer is, you should be fine.

Still, I expect the Fagles translation to be more enjoyable to read.

>>8926464
>words
>outdated

>>8926167
Fagles loved Fitzgerald's translation, saying that it brought Homer up to greatness in the English language.

>>8926510
>inb4 "Lattimore is the actual patrician choice"

>>8926537
for iliad it is

>>8926772
Why should it be the right choice for the Iliad and not for the Odyssey? Seems dubious to me.

File: antiques.png (24KB, 739x467px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 739x467px

>>8926096