@Meaningness John Rutherford's isI lovely and easy to read. I have it in Kindle. Edith Grossman's is the standard modern literary version
-
-
-
@schakwin Thank you! 3/3 votes for Grossman so far... - 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@RMHayes Thank you, splendid, very helpful!Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@RMHayes odd coincidence! I have a draft/sketch of a vampire novella set about then. "Sometimes Missing Praetorius" http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Praetorius …Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@Meaningness I've heard VERY good things about Grossman's translation, but haven't read it. (3/3) -
@sean_harnett Thank you very much for all three recommendations!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@Meaningness Edith Grossman's for clarity and currency. -
@taoish Thank you!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@Meaningness Ormsby, because it's free (http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/5921 ) and accurate, altho' sometimes too accurate - to the point of opacity. (1/3)Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@Meaningness My first Quixote was Cohen's, and I still like it: accurate, clear and readable, if occasionally dry. (2/3)Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.