You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.57 AVERAGE
3.57 AVERAGE
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
jestem naprawdę pozytywnie zaskoczony????jak na początku strasznie mi się nie chciało, tak im dalej, tym lepiej!! edyp trochę dramatic
challenging
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This review is of the translation by George Young.
I mean, if Aristotle liked it, that's enough for me.
George Young has a Master's degree in Applied Translation Studies from the University of Leeds, so he's certainly qualified. The Johnston edition and the Fagles edition are both good in terms of readability, arguable on the accuracy, and overall quite solid. The most clinically accurate version in my opinion the Hugh-Lloyd Jones edition, a facing page translation that is part of the Loeb collection.
I find it interesting how the noun τύραννος in the title (Οιδίπους Τύραννος) is commonly translated as the Latin rex or English king, when the Ancient Greek words most commonly denoting king were ἄναξ[1] and βασιλεύς.[2] As a noun the word τύραννος, possibly borrowed from Lydian or a similar language, referred either to an absolute ruler of gods or kings or to a dictator or despot. It was initially applied as an epithet to the Lydian king Gyges (Γύγης). As an adjective it could signify either the positive (kingly, royal, regal) or negative (imperious, despotic) aspects of absolute rule. The modern English word tyrant can trace its lineage back to τύραννος via Latin tyrannus (despot, tyrant), Old French tyrant,[3] and Middle English tyraunt, tiraunt, tyrant, tyrante. A more accurate title could be "Œdipes the Tyrant," maybe.
[1] Often used to refer to Apollo. The vocative ᾰ̓́νᾰ is only used in the phrases ὦ ἄνα (O king) or ὦνα, and Ζεῦ ἄνα (O Zeus), and always as an address to gods.
[2] During specific periods of Greek history this term was also used to describe certain foreign leaders of comparable authority, such as the Persian kings and Roman Caesars. In this usage it often adopted certain modifications, such as a lack of definite article or the use of the adjective μέγας.
[3] From the addition of a terminal -t to tiran, tyran via a back-formation related to the development of French present participles out of the Latin -ans form.
I mean, if Aristotle liked it, that's enough for me.
George Young has a Master's degree in Applied Translation Studies from the University of Leeds, so he's certainly qualified. The Johnston edition and the Fagles edition are both good in terms of readability, arguable on the accuracy, and overall quite solid. The most clinically accurate version in my opinion the Hugh-Lloyd Jones edition, a facing page translation that is part of the Loeb collection.
I find it interesting how the noun τύραννος in the title (Οιδίπους Τύραννος) is commonly translated as the Latin rex or English king, when the Ancient Greek words most commonly denoting king were ἄναξ[1] and βασιλεύς.[2] As a noun the word τύραννος, possibly borrowed from Lydian or a similar language, referred either to an absolute ruler of gods or kings or to a dictator or despot. It was initially applied as an epithet to the Lydian king Gyges (Γύγης). As an adjective it could signify either the positive (kingly, royal, regal) or negative (imperious, despotic) aspects of absolute rule. The modern English word tyrant can trace its lineage back to τύραννος via Latin tyrannus (despot, tyrant), Old French tyrant,[3] and Middle English tyraunt, tiraunt, tyrant, tyrante. A more accurate title could be "Œdipes the Tyrant," maybe.
[1] Often used to refer to Apollo. The vocative ᾰ̓́νᾰ is only used in the phrases ὦ ἄνα (O king) or ὦνα, and Ζεῦ ἄνα (O Zeus), and always as an address to gods.
[2] During specific periods of Greek history this term was also used to describe certain foreign leaders of comparable authority, such as the Persian kings and Roman Caesars. In this usage it often adopted certain modifications, such as a lack of definite article or the use of the adjective μέγας.
[3] From the addition of a terminal -t to tiran, tyran via a back-formation related to the development of French present participles out of the Latin -ans form.
A good play to introduce yourself to Sophocles works. A renown play about a tragic hero who fails to realize his ignorance until he is met bluntly with the truth of his fate. Oedipus the King is still one of the works where Greek mythology always alludes to, and where tons of modern works allude to as well for its brilliant plot and storytelling.
Read this for Uni and wow I enjoyed it a lot, even more in the discussions about it.
It's funny how so many people were saying that Oedipus wasn't guilty, that destiny did him wrong, that his parents did him wrong, but on the other hand he killed people, knowing who he was or not, he took the throne and married Jocasta, he was responsible for it, even if not aware of what it meant.
I have to quote my professor "In the light of reason inevitably hovers the shadow", there were a lot of symbolism of this shadow, of ignorance, of blindness, how even us nowdays or back then, no matter how lucid we are there will always be a blind spot in our wounds. Even more than that, how when things start coming to light, nobody wants to see it, Oedipus, Jocasta at some point they started to realize what had happened, but that hurts too much, they didn't want to know. The symbolism of him taking his eyes off or the blind prophet, it's just genius.
It's funny how so many people were saying that Oedipus wasn't guilty, that destiny did him wrong, that his parents did him wrong, but on the other hand he killed people, knowing who he was or not, he took the throne and married Jocasta, he was responsible for it, even if not aware of what it meant.
I have to quote my professor "In the light of reason inevitably hovers the shadow", there were a lot of symbolism of this shadow, of ignorance, of blindness, how even us nowdays or back then, no matter how lucid we are there will always be a blind spot in our wounds. Even more than that, how when things start coming to light, nobody wants to see it, Oedipus, Jocasta at some point they started to realize what had happened, but that hurts too much, they didn't want to know. The symbolism of him taking his eyes off or the blind prophet, it's just genius.
Second reading was better, spaced several years after the first reading. Read Robert Fagles' translation.
There's no particular reason why Oedipus was sentenced to his fate. Oedipus, after all, does his best for Thebes. In the span of a few short hours, Oedipus loses his family--both his fathers, his mother-wife, his sibling-children. Perhaps that's why his story is all the more devastating. What will happen is known from the onset. It's the unraveling, the undoing that is so fascinating and moving.
There's no particular reason why Oedipus was sentenced to his fate. Oedipus, after all, does his best for Thebes. In the span of a few short hours, Oedipus loses his family--both his fathers, his mother-wife, his sibling-children. Perhaps that's why his story is all the more devastating. What will happen is known from the onset. It's the unraveling, the undoing that is so fascinating and moving.
dark
mysterious
fast-paced
reflective
sad
fast-paced