Customer Reviews

The Three Theban Plays: Antigone; Oedipus the King; Oedipus at Colonus

5 star:		(15)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Researching translations is never an easy task, and in this case, where you'll have to search on Amazon for the title and the translator to find what you want, it's particularly difficult.

Here's what I've found by comparing several editions:

1. David Grene translation: Seems to be accurate, yet not unwieldy as such. My pick. Language is used precisely, but not to the point where it's barely in English.

2. Fitts/Fitzgerald translation: Excellent as well, though a little less smooth than the Grene one. Certainly not a bad pick.

3. Fagles translation: Beautiful. Not accurate. If you are looking for the smoothest English version, there's no doubt that this is it. That said, because he is looser with the translation, some ideas might be lost. For instance, in Antigone, in the beginning, Antigone discusses how law compels her to bury her brother despite Creon's edict. In Fagles, the "law" concept is lost in "military honors" when discussing the burial of Eteocles. This whole notion of obeying positive law or natural law is very important, but you wouldn't know it from Fagles. In Grene, for example, it is translated to "lawful rites."

4. Gibbons and Segal: Looks great, but right now the book has only Antigone (and not the rest of the trilogy) and costs almost 3x as much. I'll pass. But, from a cursory review, I'm impressed with their work.

5. MacDonald: This edition received some good write-ups, but I wasn't able to do a direct passage-to-passage comparison.

6. Woodruff: NO, NO, NO. Just NO. It's so colloquial it makes me gag. Very accessible, but the modernization of the language is just so extreme as to make it almost laughable. You don't get any sense of the power of language in the play. You just get the story. If you want this to be an easy read, then get Fagles, not this.

7. Kitto: Looks good, though not particularly compelling over either Grene or Fitzgerald (or Gibbons if I wanted to pay so much more).

8. Roche: Practically unreadable the English is so convoluted. Might be the most literal translation, but what's the point unless you are learning Greek and want such a direct translation.

9. Taylor: Way too wordy. Might be more literal, but again, why?

Hope this all helps. Translations can make or break the accessibility of literature. Pick wisely.

There's not much to say about these plays that hasn't been said over the last 2,500 years except, read them. More than once. More than twice.

As to the Fagles translation, as with most of his translations it is very smooth, almost lyrical, quite appealing. But he takes more liberties than I really like a translator to take. You are not reading as close as possible a rendition of what Sophocles actually wrote; rather, Fagles is somewhere between translation and retelling. For the average reader this may be fine, but don't think you're getting pure Sophocles, or as pure as is possible with a translation.

If all you want is an enjoyable read that is reasonably close to what Sophocles wrote, Fagles is fine. For more scholarly accuracy, try the translations by Greene, Fitzgerald, or Wyckoff. For a very good set of alternate translations which have as much fluidity as Fagles and a bit more faithfulness to the original, try the Fitts/Fitzgerald translations.

One benefit to the Fagles translation is the introductions by Knox, which are excellent (nearly as good as his superb introduction to Fagles' Odyssey).

One detriment, for me, is that the volume presents the plays in the order they were written, not in the order of the (relatively) unified story which they present. (It's sort of like reading Shakespeare's Henry VI plays before his Henry IV and V plays; that's the order he wrote them in, but the Henry V and VI plays make more sense if you've read the Henry IV plays first.) I accept that Sophocles didn't write these as a trilogy (as many Greek play sets were), but still, I think for the reader previously unfamiliar with them or their history and simply reading them in the order presented (perhaps a reader who doesn't start by reading all the introductions, but plunges straight into the plays), I think it's a bad decision.

All in all, a fine choice of a translation, but not the only fine choice. But definitely read these plays, choosing whatever translation you prefer (unless, of course, you can read them in the original Greek!)

There are a few versions of the Three Theban Plays out there for you to buy, but this is the one I most highly recommend. And it all comes down to a key word: translation.

I really like the work that Robert Fagles does on his translations. They are easy to read, fluid, and still manage to be poetic. There's a lot of work put into these pages, and it shows.

For work or for pleasure, The Three Theban Plays is an important part of dramatic history that everyone should read. If you're reading it, read it the best way that you can. Get this translation, and get it now.

In my Grade 12 English class, we studied both Oedipus Rex and Antigone. However, the translation we used was markedly inferior to this one, which I found halfway through the course in a used book store. Fagles has managed to retain Sophocles's original spirit while using modern English idioms and grammar. I highly recommend it.

I try to reread Sophocles every few years, both because I enjoy him and because I find him a moral tonic. Since I can only haltingly stumble through his Greek, I always read translations, and I read a different translation each time.

When one reads a translated literary work, one is reading a piece of literature that, in a manner of speaking, is "co-authored." Translation isn't, can't, and oughtn't to be a mechanically isomorphic transliteration of the original text. Translators--good ones, anyway--are artists in their own right. The choices they make in deciding how best to render the original text reflects not only their own creative sensitivity, but also their cultural context. Different translators, because of the variability of their temperaments, talents, and times, focus on different inflections. (In this regard, they're not unlike stage directors, who also "co-author" the plays they present.) So one never reads Sophocles, unless one reads the original Greek. One always reads Fagles' Sophocles, or Fitzgerald's Sophocles, or X's Sophocles.

I think Fagles and Sophocles make a marvelous collaboration. In fact, I like this translation better than any other I've read over the past half-century (and I've liked some others very much). Fagles has the soul of a poet (his volume of poems, I, Vincent, is very good indeed), and his rendering of "Antigone" and "Oedipus the King" are especially fine. Like all translators, he has a spin that mirrors the fears and hopes of his own time. In Fagles' case, it's what the existentialists would call nausea or anxiety over the absurd contingency of existence. For example, Oedipus the King [1442], after learning of his unhappy fate:

...the agony! I am agony--
where am I going? where on earth?
where does all this agony hurl me?
where's my voice?
winging, swept away on a dark tide--
My destiny, my dark power, what a leap you made!

What more could one ask of a translator than that s/he remain loyal to the ancient text being interpreted while rendering it in such a way as to speak to contemporary readers? For translators aren't transliterators or transcribers. They're not secretaries. They're artists.

Sophocles's plays, of course, need no comment. But what is important to know about this book (or its rivals) is the quality of the translation and the introductory essays.

Although I have not read the original Greek text and cannot judge its accuracy, Fagles's translation is a pleasure to read in English. I compared this volume with many others and found this to be my favorite translation. (Penguin Classics can usually be trusted for good, readable translations.)

Knox's essays were similarly good. He wrote one general introduction to Greek theater, and then one introduction for each play. The essays help put the plays in context, which is crucial to understanding, by explaining the salient facts of Greek drama, the mythological background of the Oedipus story, and whatever controversy the plays might have engendered. I especially enjoyed Knox's introduction to Oedipus Rex, which is worth reading by itself (assuming you've already read the play at some point).

In summary, this is the edition to buy. But be careful--there are TWO Penguin Classics editions, and only one has the Fagles translations and Knox essays.

"Antigone" is one of the 5 greatest plays in Western literature, and from this beautiful translation, it is easy to see why. The language absolutely captures each dramatic moment, from the first confrontation between Antigone and Creon, to the warnings of Ismene, to the callous indifference of the guards, to the immortal Hymn to Man chorus. Additionally, Knox's introduction is superb. If anyone has any doubt what is meant by "the glory that was Greece," read this wonderful volume from cover to cover--twice.

As I've gotten older I've decided to add some culture into my life by reading some of the classics that I either read many years ago or haven't read at all. I had read Oedipus the King but neither of the other plays that are part of the "trilogy."

As a Christmas gift I actually received two different copies-The Grene translation and the Fagles translation. I ultimately chose the Fagles translation for a couple of reasons:

1. I liked the translation better. I've also read Fagles' Homer translations and thought they were excellent to read. I'm not a Greek scholar so I can't comment on how close the translation is to Sophocles' original (plus there are more than a few reviewers who have wonderful summaries comparing the various translations). I really liked how the text flowed and thought that Fagles kept to the spirit of the original. When there were issues with the original language (different interpretations of Greek words, for example), the endnotes in the back of the book explained why it was translated in that way. There was also a short note at the end of the book that gave a brief history of Sophocles' plays and how they came to us today-it was very interesting. Bottom line-I just preferred Fagles' translation over Grene's.

2. The introductions by Bernard Knox. Anyone who has read Fagles' Iliad and Odyssey know how wonderful the introductions by Knox are. There is an overall introduction that gives an overview of the three plays and then each play has it's own introduction as well. Now usually I agree with others that say don't read the introductions until after you read the plays, but in this case they were so interesting and gave so much insight to the historical background of the plays that I recommend reading them first. I actually found myself going back to them while I was reading the plays as well. The Grene translation was very lacking in this respect.

If you've never read the plays and don't know anything about the plot I will say that there are major spoilers in the introductions. Also, as has been pointed out by others, the plays are not in chronological order but in the order Sophocles wrote them. The chronological order is Oedipus the King, Oedipus at Colonus, and Antigone. Presenting it in written order shows how Sophocles' thoughts on the various themes evolved.

Also mentioned by others are the endnotes. Again, if you've read the Fagles' translations of Homer's works you'll know what to expect. If you liked the Homer endnotes you'll like these as well. I personally liked how he would have an endnote for the various Chorus parts that gave an overview of the Chorus' responses, including the rhyming meters in the original Greek.

So if you're interested in the plays and have never read them, you won't go wrong reading these translations.

I just saw the 1957 film of Oedipus Rex. Wo - ow. What a story.
And this translation by Robert Fagles is extremely good. Sophocles' drama is so simple, and so perfect, that it will probably never be forgotten! This is the ancestor to Hollywood - from 2500 years ago. THRILL to the dramatic exposition of Oedipus' unknowing sins! LAUGH at the gorgeous double-entendres in every second line! SHUDDER at the scene where Oedipus and Jocasta think they have the prophecy licked, and laugh at the gods!

This is fine drama, no mistake. I have not yet read the other two Theban plays in this volume, but I'm sure they're great too.

Oh by the way: Australian readers take note. The cover of the Aussie edition has no fewer than EIGHT typing and setting errors! "Robert Eagles??" "Thebian Plays??" I see from Amazon that the American edition is corrected. But Australian readers should take note. I don't know, maybe someone accidentally submitted a draft?
To make sure you have the right edition, read the spine. The stuffed-up version says "THEBIAN PLAYS"...ooer.

The three Theban plays are a great way to introduce high school student into classical Greek literature. While the introductions can be lengthy, and give away the story, the plays are quite short and good for students like myself with the attention span of a infant. Both plays a very dramatic and filled with scandal which is something that the tens of today can relate to. The first play, Antigone, tells of a woman who fights for her right to give her brother a proper burial, and even though she is dating the son of the king she is sentenced to death. This causes uproar within the royal family eventually showing that the king's rash actions and need for power leads to the dismantling of his own household.
The second play, Oedipus the King, tells the tale the grown son of the king of Thebes that had been given away at birth, in an effort to avoid a prophecy by a blind prophet. Everything that they tried to avoid comes true in the most unfortunate of fashions. For those who enjoy the modern media it can be compared to a celebrity sex scandal.