Trailer The Odyssey full trailer

[myrkulyte]

You are using the modern concept of servant.

So if we take this idea, that the word 'servant' in the ancient world implied ownership of another human, what's the problem with using the word slave, since the modern usage of 'servant' implies something different than the ancient use?

The act of translation is to make the words understandable to an audience that doesn't speak the original language, changing the words is the point! If modern readers wouldn't get the implication of the word servant, is slave not more appropriate? How is Wilson's (I note you rudely refer to her by first name, something you don't do for other translators) use of the term objectionable but the usage by previous translators is not?

 

[jian]

You are using the modern concept of servant.

No, I’m using the English meaning of the word. Most people who did the jobs of modern or early modern servants in ancient Greece were slaves, called slaves, and bought and sold and owned. The fact that they did jobs done centuries later in different societies didn’t make them free. Do you understand and accept that basic difference?

Ancient Greek had words for servants and other hired folk who were free and not slaves, such as misthonos (“waged person” which could mean a hired labourer or other kinds of employee). Those words are not used about most people doing servile jobs in the Odyssey. They were slaves and described as such.

Servants are employees, slaves are property. There are and have been various shades between the two concepts in history, such as serf or indentured labourer, but in the Odyssey, the people described with the words doulos, dmos, or similar, are property and it would be very foolish (and inaccurate) to claim otherwise. Were those words always translated as “slave” in older translations? No, often not, for the obvious reasons I’ve already stated. Does the Wilson translation use “slave” more often and correctly? Yes. That’s it, that’s the game.

 

[AnotherGuy]

(I note you rudely refer to her by first name, something you don't do for other translators) use of the term objectionable but the usage by previous translators is not?

I haven't heard anyone else describe Odysseus + Penelope as a heteronormative patriarchal marriage.
It's amazing Emily seeks to be so specific in that relationship but decides to simplify all types of slaves/servants and their specific roles as merely slaves.

 

[jian]

I haven't heard anyone else describe Odysseus + Penelope as a heteronormative patriarchal marriage.
It's an amazing Emily seeks to be so specific in that relationship but decides to simplify all types of slaves/servants and their specific roles as merely slaves.

I don’t see what that has to do with using her first name. Do you know her personally? Has she told you that you can use her first name in correspondence? If not, it just seems rude and childish.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I don’t see what that has to do with using her first name. Do you know her personally? Has she told you that you can use her first name in correspondence? If not, it just seems rude and childish.

I'll be sure to inform people that use Elon instead of Musk how they sound rude and childish.

EDIT: In the same way Emily Wilson takes something that is supposed to be an epic, something with grandeur and instead makes it sound so banal and simplistic I do the same when referencing her.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I don’t see what that has to do with using her first name. Do you know her personally? Has she told you that you can use her first name in correspondence? If not, it just seems rude and childish.

Mod Note:

Please. ENWorld is not a newspaper nor any manifestation of formal society. This is an online discussion forum, and as such, a very informal setting almost by definition.

We insist on civility, not formality. By insisting on societal form over informational function, you weaken your persuasive footing.

Do better.

 

[jian]

I haven't heard anyone else describe Odysseus + Penelope as a heteronormative patriarchal marriage.
It's amazing Emily seeks to be so specific in that relationship but decides to simplify all types of slaves/servants and their specific roles as merely slaves.

As noted before several times, Wilson does indeed use words for roles (such as swineherd or maid) when the description is appropriate and present, but also doesn’t shy away from the word slave when it’s used in the text, unlike previous translators.

And of course Odysseus and Penelope have a heteronormative patriarchal marriage (and Wilson doesn’t use those words in the translation, of course), they are fictional ancient Greeks. Most ancient Greek women could not inherit or own land or other property and everything they had was controlled by a male relative such as a husband or son. Women in democratic states couldn’t vote. Penelope herself probably didn’t own her house (or slaves!) or rule Ithaca; she only held property in the absence of her husband. If she accepted he was dead and married one of her suitors, her new husband would control that property until her son Telemachus came of age, assuming said husband was inclined to let that happen (it was quite common in myth and story for the stepfather to remove the son and take all the property and the father’s former place as king).

Ancient Greek men were encouraged to have sexual and emotional relationships with boys and other men, but not as marriage; marriage could only happen between a man and a woman. Women sleeping with women, on the other hand, was blasphemy. While husbands could have lovers, wives could not, since they weren’t an equal partner in the relationship and were functionally property; in many Ancient Greek states it was completely legal for husbands to murder unfaithful wives, but certainly not vice versa.

In other words, marriage in Ancient Greece was heteronormative and patriarchal by definition, as was the entire social structure. Wilson isn’t even slightly wrong or inaccurate to say so.

 

[jian]

I'll be sure to inform people that use Elon instead of Musk how they sound rude and childish.

EDIT: In the same way Emily Wilson takes something that is supposed to be an epic, something with grandeur and instead makes it sound so banal and simplistic I do the same when referencing her.

Fair enough, I’ve called Musk that before and I don’t know him, I retract the remark.

You can, of course, hold the opinion that Wilson’s translation is less epic (whatever that means) than some others, but I think you’d best read it first if you wish to defend that opinion. I haven’t read it yet either, I’m patiently waiting for it to become available at the library but if this goes on I may have to drop a few quid on doing so.

 

[jian]

Fair enough, I’ve called Musk that before and I don’t know him, I retract the remark.

You can, of course, hold the opinion that Wilson’s translation is less epic (whatever that means) than some others, but I think you’d best read it first if you wish to defend that opinion. I haven’t read it yet either, I’m patiently waiting for it to become available at the library but if this goes on I may have to drop a few quid on doing so.

Sod it, quids dropped.