I'm all in favour of experimental, art books--only maybe I'm not. While I found a few striking images in this minimal translation of Sophocles, I was also puzzled. What do the illustrations have to do with anything? They didn't add anything for this reader. And the random gaps in the text? For all the power of the translation (and Carson is a Classicist in her day-job), this is the sort of publication that makes art books (like art movies) seem like a euphemism for random obscurity. ... by the unimprovable, unbetterable anne carson.if i could only figure out what all the drawrings were abt, that would've been great.the thing is, carson really doesn't need to be illustrated. she's evocative enough to ... ah ... launch quite a few ships.oh yes, and it's only 4 stars because i really don't think of this starring business as a science, so first of all i don't care about defending it. but it's because she didn't write it in the first place (translators everywhere, if you can find me, i will negotiate with or over pinots) even if this goes beyond mere 'translation'. now that i think of it, perhaps not entirely irrelevantly, on the 1 month anniversary of my father's passing on to the land of the shades.
What do You think about Antigonick (2012)?
Reread and wow. I think I was just being a grumpy asshole the first time I read it.
—bjsewell
inventive, clever, quick. illustrations not so great tho.
—kelly
Cried in the Ike Box while Antigone lamented.
—johncenagirl617
