A great book which changed the way we look at poetry produced by an oral tradition. Based on fieldwork by Milman Parry Lord shows the structure behind the improvisation and applies the theory to Serbo Croation epic tradition, Homer and French medieval poetry.

A groundbreaking book which redefined the way we look at oral tradition. Oral-formulaic theory developed on Milman Parry's fieldwork applied to Serbo-Croatian singing, Homeric poetry and medieval French epic. I used the book during research on scottish ballads. Now finally a second edition with a wonderful cd.

Like many graduate students in Classical Studies, I had to read _The Singer of Tales_ in a course on Homeric poetry. What I found in it completely altered my understanding of Homer and of epic, and even today it's almost impossible for me to read the _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_ as anything other than oral poems. I did a research paper on another book edited by Albert Lord (_The Wedding of Smailagic Meho_), an epic sung by a Yugoslav Muslim and recorded by Parry in the 1930s. The similarities, both in plot and in formulaic style, between this epic and Homer's are unmistakable. I highly recommend this book; it's much more accessible than Parry's collected papers.

If you are really interested in Greek Literature in general and the "Concepts of the Hero" specifically, then "Pindar's Homer: The Lyric Possession of an Epic Past" and "The Best of the Achaeans" are must reads. These are probably the most difficult books I have ever read. The analysis that has gone into them is incredible.
I have taken Dr. Nagy's Harvard internet class on "Concepts of the Hero" (twice). They have truely been inspiring. These two books are only a small amount of the reading, but the hardest.
The epinician praise poetry of Pindar are on actual historical figures. As Dr. Nagy says, "The poems of Pindar tend to present the composer as a mere function or instrument of the poetry itself. The poems establish their authority primarily by asserting the traditions upon which they are built."
The surviving books of epinicians in order are Olympians, Pythians, Isthmians and Nemeans. They were arranged with the religious one preceding the secular ones: hymns, paeans (addressed to Apollo), dithyrambs (addressed to Dionysus; 2), prosodia or processional songs (2), partheneia or maiden songs (2), hyporchemata or songs with dancing (2), encomia, laments, epinicia.
The paean is in origin a cry or appeal to Apollo as Healer. The dithyramb is a choral song for Dionysus. The partheneion is a song sung by a chorus of maidens. The hyporcheme is a song accompanied by dance. The enkomion is a song sung in a komos or celebratory manor. Pindar several times refers to his epinicia as encomia. They were for victors in the Games. And finally their was the most complex of Pindars achievements in poetry, the epinician. It is the "most profound in its meditation on the nature of human achievement and man's delicately balanced relations with the gods who give success but can also take it away."

Over the last few decades, Nagy has brought the most up-to-date insights in philosophy, anthropology, linguistics and literary theory to bear on the interpretation of ancient Greek literature and culture. This book, _Pindar's Homer_, takes the reader through classic texts of Pindar, Herodotus, Aristophanes and a wide variety of other Greek poets in a radically new interpretation that challenges received views about ancient Greek culture and literature and, indeed, about literature in general. Nagy's analyses draw on careful attention to the form of the literary works, studying in particular how key terms, verse forms, and thematic structures draw their sense from cultural and linguistic traditions, while simultaneously transforming that sense and that culture. It is this play of transformative re-enactment (_mimesis_) of the tradition that is the crucial interpretive horizon of this study. To carry out this interpretation, Nagy draws especially on studies of ancient Greek religious rituals and of Indo-European linguistics to establish the traditional parameters of meaning that the language forms of Greek poetry deploy.

This book is obviously essential reading for any classicist, but it should also be standard reading for any serious student of Ancient Philosophy or of literature in general. It should especially be read in conjunction with his groundbreaking study of Homer, _The Best of the Achaeans_.

I read the first edition of this book in the early 80s when I was in college, and I have to say that few books stimulated my thought about Greek literature and language as well as this book did. Nagy's thesis is interesting and contoversial (there was quite a bit of debate about it in successive issues of the NY Review of Books), and while I don't wish to give a synopsis of his main points without having read the book in such a long time, I can assure you that his intellectual rigour and clear, beautiful writing will, at the least, help you to new perspectives on the Iliad and the Odyssey. I'm buying myself a new copy right now!

I won't try to give yet another summary of the Iliad's plot nor give my insignificant opinion on the importance of Homer to Western Culture. More important is to discuss this translation and the translation of Homer in general.

When it comes to classic works of poetry in translation, such as those of Homer, Vergil, Dante and others, the translation makes all the difference. The type of translation, whether in rhyming verse, blank verse, prose etc., whether it is a strict line by line or more liberal translation, whether the wording and idioms are old fashioned or modern, can play such a great role that one translation may be completely different than another. This fact is probably often overlooked and attributes to the neglect of these classics, since a bad or difficult translation makes the poem seem tedious or dull.

Since Chapman's first translation of Homer into English in 1611 there have been dozens of others. Chapman's translation remains a classic, though its heavy and elaborate rhyming Elizabethan style and old wording make it quite laborious to read today. The next great translation was that of the renowned Enlightenment poet Alexander Pope; his Iliad was published progressively between 1715 and 1720. Pope's translation is in rhyming verse with his heroic couplet and is eminently poetic. It is considered the greatest translation of Homer into English (Dr. Johnson called it "the noblest version of poetry which the world has ever seen") but it is not as plain and straightforward as Homer apparently is in the original. It is mostly for this reason that Pope's translation has been critized as being more the work of the poet Pope than the poet Homer.

Of the more recent verse translations a few are worth recommendation. The latest translation is usually better than its predecessors, though each one is different. That of Richmond Lattimore takes a strict approach. His verse lines are long and the syntax unfortunately seems somewhat unnatural because he is attempting to imitate the stress patterns and flow of the original Greek hexameter. His translation tries to stay as close to the original Greek as possible and retain the form of epic language. The next translation is the one here, that of Robert Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald's translation is more modern, uses a shorter verse line and a natural English syntax. His translation is much easier to read and still retains the nobility of an epic poem. Finally, there is the translation of Robert Fagles. His translation is in blank verse, modern, rapid, simple and flowing. The noble simplicity of Greek style that the art historian Winkelmann so praised should also be found in a good translation of Homer. Like Fitzgerald, Fagles strives towards this and most approaches the ideal set out by the English poet and scholar Matthew Arnold for a translation of Homer: "Homer is rapid in his movement, Homer is plain in his words and style, Homer is simple in his ideas, Homer is noble in his manner." Fagles also uses the accepted Latin form of most Greek names: rather than "Akhilleus" he uses Achilles, rather than "Kyklops" he uses Cyclops. Lattimore and Fitzgerald sometimes annoyingly use the Greek versions, for no valid reason. They should have followed Arnold's advice on this point, who called such unnatural effect "pedantry" and claimed that the insistance on using the Greek variant for well-known names makes us "rub our eyes and call out 'How exceedingly odd!'." Finally, the narrative prose translations are in my opinion the remotest from epic poetry and should be avoided, especially since there are good verse translations available.

The Everyman's Library editions of the Iliad and Odyssey are far more poetic, powerful, and grand than the common modern insipid prose versions. (I confess that I am puzzled by the popularity of such prose versions.) The writings of Homer were a centerpiece of Greek culture for a thousand years, and were so powerful that, 700 years later, Alexander the Great coveted a reputation as a modern Achilles! A translation MUST attempt to do justice to so great and lasting a work. After purchasing a highly praised modern prose translation I was deeply disappointed. So I put SEVERAL translations side by side and read from all of them. The Everyman's Library editions were excellent. Thorough reading confirmed this opinion. I am at this moment clicking through a search of all of the Everyman's Library books in hopes of finding other equally good translations. The bindings of the cloth hardcover books are exceptionally well built. I would recommend buying the hardcover editions; these books you WILL be re-reading. (Note: If you enjoy much popular writing then this review isn't meant for you.)

Dr. Fitzgerald's translation of Homer's 'Iliad' is, in short, stunning. This myth-like, ten dayaccount of the onset of the Trojan War is mind-boggling. Like Victor Hugo, Homer makes his characters larger-than-life, and imbues the story with divine intervention from none other than the Greek Gods and Goddesses. Fitzgerlad's translation is concise while maintaining the poetic flow of the original narrative. I suggest reading his introduction both before and after the main story. When you read it after reading the main text, it will be all that more interesting and relevant, and serves as a bit of a refresher regarding what you have just read. While 'The Odyssey' strikes me as more engaging, due to its quicker pace and more fantastical plot, 'The Iliad' is just as readable, for it is a proud story of proud men, women, and Gods, and will leave you calling out for Zeus to help you win your next important life battle.