Publius Ovidius Naso's "Fasti" (calendar) is undoubtedly his most neglected piece of literature. It is justifiably belittled by his timeless epic the "Metamorphoses," it stands out as dull and lifeless when compared with the bawdy and lusty "Amores" and "Ars Amortoria," and it never reaches the emotional appeal of his famed "Heroides." Although the "Fasti" is a rich storehouse for Roman astronomy, religion, and ritual. And at times--mostly in the prologues to each of the calendars' months--Ovid takes his poetry to a level of creativity and depth that rivals his other poems; but unfortunately these are only short-lived. Another setback to the "Fasti" is the fact only six months out of the calendar year remain (January to June). It is up to question whether or not they were ever finished or simply didn't survive through the centuries; but nonetheless this misfortune is yet another hard knock for the "Fasti." It is certainly difficult to give Rome's most profound poet such a low rating, but when this is sized up with his other works, it doesn't stand a chance.

(Note that this is a review of the Max Notes - some of the reviews on this page seem to refer to the book itself)
I suppose these notes belong to an era when, for better or for worse, students studied the Latin classics for the sole purpose of passing examinations. They are unlikely to stimulate interest. The plot of each book is related in very simple language. There are banal test questions demanding brief factual answers. Sometimes these are inaccurate or assume that a partcular translation is being read. For example in book IV the attitude of Andromeda's parents "struck Perseus as pretty futile" which seems to be an attempt at "nec ferunt auxilium secum sed fletus digno tempore." Then at the end the student is asked to comment on the "casual colloquial speech." I think that only a very advanced classicist can tell whether a piece of Latin is casual and colloquial and this is not a book meant for advanced classicists. The introduction thinks it worth telling us that this is Ovid's only poem written in dactylic hexameters (which might be of interest to a VERY advanced classicist) but then does not explain what a dactyl is.
There is almost no reference to contemporary scholarship about what Romans of Ovid's day thought about the truth of these stories, or about such issues as human sacrifice. Robert Graves and Edith Hamilton are given as authorities.
The illustrations are as wooden as the text, badly drawn and totally unerotic (maybe meant for Catholic schools, or am I being prejudiced?) which seems a particular shame since so many of these stories have inspired unforgettable and sexy illustrations by the greatest artists of all time. I wonder what Max Notes would have made of the Ars Amatoria.

I've read two translations of Ovid's Metamorphoses and enjoyed them so much I wanted to hear them read out loud. The first shock was just how abridged this reading was, it fits on only one cassette. But the second shock is how beyond painful it was to listen to the narration which was less about Ovid's (or Boer's) words, and more about the overacting of the reader. It's the worst thing I've ever listened to, and if this stops even one person from buying the tape, I'll rest easier. Waste of money. Waste of beautiful poetry.

Ovid's Metamorphoses is wonderful, essential reading and gets 5 stars easily.. I like Mandelbaum's translation best.. However here I am reviewing the audio tape reading of the Boer translation with Noah Pikes as narrator. The quality of the recording is horrible, but even worse is the "performance" of the narrator. Because of the extreme histrionics (to put it mildly), poor diction, it is impossible to understand 90% of the words. and the reading is stilted and sounds like Tonto (yes, of the Lone Ranger) reading. It is only a few selections from the Metamorphoses, poorly choosen at that.. easily the worst puchase I've made at Amazon (of over 1500 items so far). 1 Star is too high a rating.. I threw in it the trash..