BMCR 2008.10.07, D. A. Raeburn, Electra and Other Plays

D. A. Raeburn (trans.), Electra and Other Plays. Penguin Classics.
London:  Penguin, 2008.  Pp. xlvi, 309.  ISBN 9780140449785.  $12.00
(pb).

Reviewed by P. J. Finglass, University of Nottingham
([email protected])
Word count:  741 words
-------------------------------
To read a print-formatted version of this review, see
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2008/2008-10-07.html
To comment on this review, see
http://www.bmcreview.org/2008/10/20081007.html
-------------------------------

This new translation by David Raeburn replaces the dated version by E.
Watling, published by Penguin in 1953. The prospective audience of the
book is given (p. xli) as (I summarise) the general reader, students,
and actors, and all three groups are likely to find it valuable.

The book's Preface is followed by a helpful Chronology. The General
Introduction, written by Pat Easterling, is a masterfully brief (23
pages) and stimulating piece: the sort of thing that looks easy to
write until you try to do it yourself. Six pages of Further Reading
follow, containing just the right amount of bibliography. Then comes a
'Note on the Translation' (six pages), in which Raeburn explains some
of the principles behind his rendering of the four plays.

The translation of each play is preceded by a brief Preface, which
follows a similar pattern: The Tradition, Synopsis, Interpretation,
Staging, Casting, Dramatic Technique. Raeburn packs a great deal into
these sections: he has strong views on many aspects of the dramas, and
whether one agrees or disagrees they are likely to provoke thought.
These Prefaces are supplemented by 43 pages of notes at the end of the
volume, providing factual information and suggestions for the
interpretation of the plays. Again, these are likely to prove extremely
useful for Raeburn's target audience. The volume concludes with a
four-page appendix entitled 'The Ancient Greek Theatre and the Tragic
Poet's Task' and a 'Glossary of Proper Names' (pp. 304-9).

Throughout his Prefaces and notes Raeburn shows considerable interest
in the staging of the plays, and is not afraid to argue for
controversial views: so, for example, he argues (with Scott Scullion)
against the idea that there was a change of scene in Ajax (pp. 67-8).
He often sees significance in the fact that a given actor will have
played more than one character (pp. 8, 66-7, 132, 198, 299 n. 53). But
when characters enter and leave the stage we are not always told where
they are going to (or from): this information, essential for producing
the play whether in our heads as we read or on stage, ought to have
been included throughout, with disputed cases signalled in the notes.

The title page says not just 'Translated by David Raeburn', but
'Translated and edited by David Raeburn': rightly, for while the text
which Raeburn translates is closest to that of Lloyd-Jones and Wilson
(p. xliv), he has exercised considerable independence of judgment in
textual decisions throughout, rather than simply following a given
edition. When Raeburn deletes a line or lines, he usually tells us in
his notes that he is doing so (though not always: cf. Tr. 84, 362-3,
Aj. 314, 555b, 1417), which again is a service to his readers.

The English of Raeburn's translation is easy to read and would, I am
sure, sound good in performance. Raeburn carefully steers a course
between the two extremes of a literal translation which would fail to
convince as English, and a free translation whose creative power would
owe more to the translator than to the original author. As with any
translation, there is, of course, some scope for improvement.
Occasionally we see cliche/s slipping in,[[1]] as well as images which,
while striking in themselves, do not correspond to anything in the
Greek.[[2]] Raeburn seems quite fond of curses, and introduces new ones
into his translation;[[3]] he also has a tendency to make a passage
seem more lurid than it actually is.[[4]] Sometimes even small
additions can have quite an impact on our interpretation of a
passage.[[5]] But something will always be lost in translation; any
rendering of Sophocles will contain its problems, and Raeburn's has
fewer than most. Overall, readers can rely on Raeburn to provide a
version that is both readable and generally reliable, neither an easy
task with this poet.

The lyric sections are rendered in the metres of the original: rightly,
Raeburn is determined that his readers should appreciate as fully as
possible the musical dimension of these plays. The result is an elegant
set of lyrics which will no doubt go down as well in performance as
they do on the page. I urge readers to look up their favourite odes and
appreciate them anew in Raeburn's attractive verses; I personally was
particularly taken by the first stasimon of Electra (pp. 151-2). This
is perhaps the most distinctive feature of this welcome volume, which
marks a distinct improvement on the book that it replaces.[[6]]

------------------
Notes:


1.   E.g. Aj.  752 'by hook or crook', El. 684-6 'Orestes ... took |
The spectators' breath away', 945 'no pain, no gain', Phil. 375 'I
pulled no punches'.

2.   E.g. Aj. 381 'the army's pile of dung', a conspicuously untragic
expression. The rendering of imagery in translation is, of course, a
notoriously difficult task, but I suspect that many of Raeburn's
readers will assume that when Raeburn refers to 'dung', that Sophocles
did so too.

3.   In El. 195-6 'the bronze axe struck and felled him down | And the
blood ran down the flagstones' the second line is an invention; so also
with Aj. 459 'the whole of Troy and its blood-stained plains', where
the Greek says just 'these plains'.

4.   Cf. Aj. 643 'Cursed as Aeacus' sons were', El. 511 Myrtilus
'cursed the race of Pelops', El. 1496 'The curse of Pelops' house!' On
the Myrtilus passage Raeburn admits (pp. 284-5 n. 33) that 'the
translation refers to the curse (511) more explicitly than the Greek
original', but it might have been better to say 'the translation refers
to a curse, whereas the Greek original does not'.

5.   For example, in the prologue to Philoctetes Raeburn's Neoptolemus
treats Odysseus with great deference, addressing him 'Odysseus, sir!'
(Phil. 26), 'You're right, sir' (88), and 'Of course, sir' (122). But
at 88 and 122 there is no vocative in the Greek, while the address at
26 is better rendered 'Lord Odysseus' rather than 'Odysseus, sir'.
Odysseus is the dominant figure at this stage, but Neoptolemus is not
simply his subordinate: he is also a significant, albeit young,
chieftain in his own right, and Odysseus has to go to some lengths to
persuade him to undertake the plot against Philoctetes. Raeburn's
vocatives do not help our understanding of their relationship, and may
in fact hinder it.

6.   The book is attractively presented and accurately printed. I
noticed one misleading misprint: on p. 73, the name 'Teucer' has
dropped out of the list of characters, and the closing up of the
resulting gap has turned the Messenger into Ajax's half-brother.