Customer Reviews

Penguin Classics Divine Comedy #1 Hell

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

First of all, a warning: the "Comedy" is a complex work, and we are constantly updating our understanding of it. However, once one has finished whatever annotated and/or translated version is currently at the apex of knowledge, it is well worth going back to Sayers. I would dare to say that this is one of the classic translations, one of the best from that phase of Dante studies (for example, though she is obviously tempted towards a Freudian reading, she actually tries to resist its more absurd results). Its funny how many Danteans still do not get beyond the Inferno...

This review relates to the volume 1 of Dante Alighieri's
-The Divine Comedy-, Hell; Translated by Dorothy L. Sayers,
Penguin Classics, 1949. 346 pp.
Other reviewers have spoken to the perceived weaknesses
and problems with this particular translation and
volume, with Ms. Sayers' "Introduction" and "Notes."
Perhaps one should be warned before entering its portals,
as constructed by Ms. Sayers, that this is not an "easy"
Hell to assimilate.
Yet, at the beginning of her "Introduction," she presents
the offering in an inviting fashion: "The ideal way of
reading -The Divine Comedy- would be to start at the first
line and go straight through to the end, surrendering to
the vigour of the story-telling and the swift movement
of the verse, and not bothering about any historical
allusions or theological explanatios which do not occur
in the text itself. That is how Dante himself tackles
his subject."
Some readers may not find Ms. Sayers' translation to be
one that lends itself to "swift movement of the verse."
The value here, however, is the wealth of information
provided in both the "Introduction", the Notes, and
in the map drawings which clearly help the mind's eye
understand the "lay-out" of Hell as depicted by Dante.
The value of Ms. Sayer's "Introduction" is its clear
presentation of HER view of Dante, his work, his value,
his meaning, and his emphases.
She concentrates on the Images of Hell and on the Christian
doctrine implicit in the work. This translation is in
keeping with that emphasis, for it is structured,
somewhat restricted, and presents "Dante's" voice
as more attuned to the didactic and lecturing. Even the
voices of the denizens of Hell have the tones of
stern lesson-learning rather than evoking pity for
their failed virtue and blind human proclivities.
The problem with some readers, and some viewers of
Christianity, is trying to reconcile the idea of
stern, unrelenting, eternal Judgment and damnation
for sins with the idea of God's eternal Love, or as
Ms. Sayers translates the second tercet of Dante's
*terza rima* on the lintel of the entrance to Hell:
Justice Moved My Great Maker; God Eternal
Wrought Me: The Power, And The Unsearchably
High Wisdom, And The Primal Love Supernal.
Ms. Sayers will have no human shilly-shallying with
Dante's intent or the purpose of Hell. And that,
though it may appall some readers, is to the good;
for it forces the reader to confront whether or not
he or she accepts or does not the Christian doctrinal
views -- and helps the reader to understand the
serious nature of choosing one's faith and one's
religion, or not.
After each Canto, Ms. Sayers uses the same very
helpful devices for explaining the preceding Canto:
first, she discusses the main Images to be found in
that particular Canto in a very clear, full, doctrinal
way -- and then, she has the numbered notes which
explain allusions and phrases which Dante uses in
the work.
For instance, after Canto I, we find: "The Images.
-The Dark Wood- is the image of Sin or Error -- not so
much of any specific act of sin or intellectual perversion
as of that spiritual condition called "hardness of heart",
in which sinfulness has so taken possession of the soul as
to render it incapable of turning to God, or even knowing
which way to turn." Similarly, after Canto III, we find
this note concerning the phrase "the good of intellect":
"In the -Convivio- Dante quotes Aristotle as saying:
'truth is the good of the intellect'. What the lost souls
have lost is not the intellect itself, which still functions
mechanically, but the -good- of the intellect: i.e., the
knowledge of God, who is Truth."
This is an excellent edition for the scope of Ms. Sayers'
medieval scholarship and doctrinal insights. Though it
may be hard sledding for the tender-hearted. There
have always been several ways of seeing the road to
Hell -- in this version, once one strays from the
straight and narrow, there is only the crooked and
pit-full, not pitiful.
-- Robert Kilgore.

Well,I just had to write this since reading Hell and Purgatory.I used 3 versions.I read both books using the Sayers and Mandellbaum version.The sayers version is the BEST of all version,especially the notes.The Sayers notes and her commentary is the finest,and trying to view this book from a christian point-of-view,her notes are essential to any reader.Now,I will say this,the Mandellbaum version is not as beautiful as Sayers,but it is more literal.You get a better view of what is happening.So...I would reccomend reading the book from sayers and mandellbaum together.Or get some Cliff notes,to get a literal version.But...you absolutley need the sayers book,at the very least for the commentary and notes,or you'll never know what truley is happening in the book.Yes!...the sayers version is christian,and non-compromising,....but what do you expect?Its a christian book!If you want a humanist secular view get any other version.

I'm going to rate this based on its value as nonfiction, as a work to study, instead of on its value as fiction.

Dorothy Sayers' translation is vastly more readable than the dreadful Carlyle-Wicksteed version, which has the poetic merit of a chain link fence. She translated into terza rima, the same form Dante used, and kept a pretty similar pentameter throughout; she sometimes uses assonance or consonance instead of true rhyme. Poetry is horrendously difficult to translate, for reasons that should be obvious. The notes are more informative and useful than those to be found in Carlyle-Wicksteed, providing the modern reader with more explanation of the philosophical and theological ground of the work. I suspect that this is the very closest a reader who can't read old Italian is going to get to the original.

If I were rating it as fiction--honestly, I like narrative verse, in general, but so far, I don't like Dante in many respects. The physical architecture of the world is interesting--reading this should, one would hope, dispose of that canard that holds that the medievals thought the world was flat. His habit of making references to people of his own time and corner of the world, without explanation, impresses me as rather a large fault: he couldn't reasonably have expected the knowledge that would make such references intelligible without notes to survive for very long, even in his own country. Aside from, that, the impression I'm getting of his God is, most assuredly, not the one he means to convey artistically. The punishments of the sinners in Hell often hit me as excessive; and what kind of a being is it that would send the righteous pagans and unbaptized children to Limbo instead of giving them a chance at Paradise? Since God is the one making the rules, the exclusion says something about His character that colors the story for me in a way I very much doubt Dante intended. I can't view the God who'd do that as the most merciful and just of all intelligences: it certainly isn't mercy as I know it, and when did it become just to condemn someone for not doing something they could not possibly have done? Dante is greatly praised by people whose work I greatly respect, Dorothy Sayers and C.S. Lewis among them, but I'm afraid he often leaves me cold. I so far haven't managed to assume a mindset where Dante's God could inspire 'the love that moves the stars.'

Having wanted to read Inferno for a long time, I was glad to find Dorothy Sayers' translation since I value her own writing. I'm no scholar, so I can't compare this critically to the numerous other translations available. I just come looking to enjoy reading and understanding great classic literature on occasion. It takes a great deal of background information to appreciate this work. The Divine Comedy can be examined from many different angles: Poetry, allegory, theology, a spiritual journey, a love story. Sayers' introduction and notes, and the diagrams and drawings in this book were a great help to me. Some may argue that the scholarship is a bit dated, but Sayers clearly loved The Divine Comedy and wanted her readers to appreciate it also. The result of her work was a very interesting reading experience for me, better than I expected. I particularly enjoyed the insights she incorporated into the notes from Charles Williams' book, The Figure of Beatrice. (Sayers dedicated her translation of The Divine Comedy to Williams.) The verse might make it a little more difficult to get the meaning until you get used to it, but I think it's worth the effort. Once I found a good reading pace, I didn't find the rhyming forced as some readers have. (It might seem that way if you look for it.) It must be a difficult thing to try to give readers of English the same experience that Dante's Italian readers had and I think that was Dorothy Sayers' goal. She got me interested enough to take seriously her claim that readers of Dante are cheating themselves if they stop after Inferno. On through Purgatory to Paradise ... It must only get better from here.

"And I shall sing about that second realm/where man's soul goes to purify itself/and become worthy to ascend to heaven..."

Having finished his tour of hell and its residents, Dante Alighieri turns his attention to a more cheerful (if less juicy) supernatural realm. "Purgatorio" is less famous than its predecessor, but it's still a beautiful piece of work that explores the mindset not of the damned, but of sinners who are undergoing a divine cleansing -- beautiful, hopeful and a little sad.

Outside of Hell, Dante and Virgil encounter a small boat piloted by an angel and filled with human souls -- and unlike the damned, they're eager to find "the mountain." And as Hell had circles of damnation, Purgatory has terraces that the redeemable souls climb on their way towards Heaven, and none of the people there will leave their terrace until they are cleansed.

And the sins that are cleansed here are the seven deadly ones: the proud, the envious, the wrathful, the greedy, the lazy, the gluttonous, and the lustful. But as Dante moves slowly through the terraces, he finds himself gaining a new tour guide as he approaches Heaven...

I'll say this openly: the second part of the "Divine Comedy" is simply not as deliciously entertaining as "Inferno" -- it was kind of fun to see Dante skewering the corrupt people of his time, and describing the sort of grotesque punishments they merited. But while not as fun, "Purgatorio" is a more transcendent, hopeful kind of story since all the souls there will eventually be cleansed and make their way to Heaven.

As a result, "Purgatorio" is filled with a kind of eager anticipation -- there's flowers, stars, dancing, angelic ferrymen, mythic Grecian rivers and an army of souls who are all-too-eager to get to Purgatory so their purification can start. Alighieri's timeless poetry has a silken quality, from beginning to end ("Here let death's poetry arise to life!/O Muses sacrosanct whose liege I am/and let Calliope rise up and play") and it's crammed with classical references and Christian symbolism (the Sun's part in advancing the soiled souls).

And the trip through Purgatory seems to have a strong effect on Dante's self-insert, who appears less repulsed and more fascinated by what he sees there. It's hard not to feel sorry for him when the paternal Virgil exits the Comedy, but at least he has someone else appears to guide him.

The middle part of the Divine Comedy isn't as juicy as "Inferno," but the beauty of Dante Alighieri's writing makes up for it."Purgatorio" is a must read... and then on to Paradise.

A warning: this is by now an rather old translation, and theres always more to explore in Dante. That being said, it has many insights newer translations lack, and its a brilliant example of a period - if you want to understand how the understanding of Dante has developed, this is a must.
Oh, and by the way, if one can read of the Earthly Paradise and not be moved, one is cheating oneself (as I found out, fortunately). Purgatory is just as much worth the effort as its two Higher and Lower brothers.

Penguin is a great company, but they've allowed their greatest vice (outdated translations) to effect their edition of no less a figure than Dante. Sayers's translation is hopelessly archaic and dry as dust -- for instance, the crude body language used by Dante is softened for protestant sensibility. Its also completely restrained by suffocating adherence to Dante's rhyme scheme.

Modern attempts at translating Dante, which are much more modest, honest, and mature, start with John Ciardi. Allen Mandelbaum also did a fine translation put out by (if I recall correctly) Signet Classics, with the Italian text facing the English. I haven't personally read Mark Musa's translation, but he's a fine scholar and I hear its pretty good.

All that having been said, this edition is nicely presented at least. Diagrams, detailed notes, and legnthy introductions. Its just unfortunate that Penguin couldn't provide a more fresh approach to the great poet.

Dorothy Sayers was a fine mystery author and a knowledgable scholar of medieval literature. And once upon a time, this *was* one of the best available translations in English. Times change, however, and new English translations have come along that do a far better job than Sayers' does.

The biggest problem with Sayers translation, in my humble opinion, is her attempt to preserve Dante's rhyme scheme. In her introduction, The fact of that matter is that Italian is a language in which rhymes are frequent, easy, and melodious. In English, having every other line rhyme just sounds cloying and contrived. It also makes the reading more difficult, because of the inverted syntax, archaic vocabulary, and awkward rhythmsand that Sayers has to use in order force the rhymes in there. Oh sure, the fact that she was able to it at all is impressive. But it still doesn't make for a palatable rendition Dante's supple language (which, even to modern Italians reads smoothly and vernacularly, and not at all awkward.) Those who really want some retention of Dante's rhymes would do far better with Robert Pinsky's translation (which uses 'soft rhymes' and doesn't force them when they won't fit). Alan Mandelbaum's and John Ciardi's translations are good too.

Another problem with Sayers edition are the notes. While, on the one hand, they can very helpful to a first-time reader, they are also outdated. If you want to know what Oxford scholars thought about Dante a half-century ago, Sayers notes are great for that. And I don't say that to be dismissive, those 1940's Oxford medievalists had a lot of very good things to say. However, the fact of the matter is that Dante studies-- and medieval scholarship have changed a lot in the past half-century-- and reading her notes is something like reading a half-century old textbook of American history. They leave out a lot of things that probably ought to be discussed.

An even bigger problem with the notes here, I think, is that the author too readily presents her notes as "The Truth" (with a capital "T") about the poem-- as if there were only one correct way to interpret it and its details. Her interpretations are often insightful, suggestive, and they will greatly help the first-time reader-- but they are so didactic in their style that they may overlyy contrain the reader's freedom of interpretation. It's more like she's trying to use her notes to tell you, "The poem means this", rather than using them to background information and context so that you can figure out what *you* think it means on your own.

And, at the risk of sounding like I'm "politically correct", the fact of the matter is that there also are some biases in her notes that, to me, seem rather glaring today. This is particularly evident where she explains why Dante places Mohammed in the part of Hell with the schismatics. Rather than simply pointing out that medieval Christians erroneously believed that Islam began from a schism within Christianity, Sayers uses the occasion to make a few denigrating comments about Islam (which she insists upon referring to as "Mohammedism"). Again, I don't hold this against Sayers per se... She wrote this book among and for a coz y community of Oxford Christians over a half-century ago.... and it's naturally going to be show its colors in that regard. But, for us folks who are reading it today, in the 21st century, well... maybe the notes just need to be updated a bit.

Anyway, when all's said and done, Dante's work is masterful, and even Sayers' awkward translation and outdated notes can't completely conceal that. However, I really think readers would be better off sticking to the Ciardi, Mandelbaum, or Pinsky translations of the _Inferno_. (My preference is for the Pinksy, but to each his own...)

If Shakespeare's moral is love, Dante's is also. We must not read Divine Comedy with simplicity, even the episode of the sodomites (homosexuals) is ambiguous: Dante praises his master the most. Wasn't it a critic on his time prejudices? Dante holds Middle Ages and surpasses all.