Orlando Furioso

I am starting to amass my summer reading list, and towards the top of this list is Orlando Furioso: a work that has flown under my radar for some time now. I have come across a few references to it here and there, but no next to nothing about the work itself.

So to anyone who has experience with this text: do you have a preferred edition? Should I go verse or prose?

For those who, like me, have never heard of this poem, but have an interest in 16th century literature or the tradition of Romance: as far as I know, Orlando Furiso is a Romance/paradoy of Romance. It seems to follow on the tradition of Chanson de Roland but swerves from the themes of duty and honour when the title character abandons his duty to Charlemagne and pursues love instead.

I'll update further when I get to reading the work later this month.

It has been a long time since I read Orlando Furioso. I read the poetic translation by Barabara Reynolds. I thought it quite good... although Reynolds herself admitted that the John Harrington translation from 1591 was perhaps better... written as a near contemporary and armed with the richness of the English language of the time. What I have read of Harrington's translation I quite enjoyed. If I were to read the work again, I'd probably go with Harrington simply because he was a damn decent poet... and this is poetry you are reading... not simply prose narrative...

... And besides... Harrington invented the flush toilet. How can you turn your nose up on that?:lol:

I quite liked William Stewart Rose's translation. Haven't tried Harrington's, though. Also, another Italian epic you should try if you haven't is Jerusalem Delivered by Torquato Tasso. Very influenced by Ariosto. I'd get the Edward Fairfax translation of that.

I read a prose version for my European Literature class many years ago. I absolutely loved it. I would love to read it in verse one of these days and hopefully read it's prequel Inamorato

Thanks for all the input. From what I have gathered, it seems that Harrington's is the best translation (toilet creating aside). However, I've also been looking at the Slavitt translation (the newest verse translation). While there poetry between the two is not even comparable (Slavitt is by not a poet), his objective is to capture the entertainment that this poem inspired in 16th century Italy, particularly by capturing the nature of the narrator (which Harrington seems to downplay, as it would not be the style in England until Fielding and Sterne). Slavitt (according to the introduction of his translation) infuses a bit of Byron's Don Juan into the narrator (as Byron's narrator of Don Juan was heavily influenced by Orlando Furioso. The result seems to be a poem that is not faithful word for word, and not as aesthetic as the Harrington translation, but an interesting endeavour into the spirit of translation.

Of course this is nothing new. Dryden was notorious for finding the spirit rather than the words in his translation. As was pretty much any Romantic (including William Stewart Rose).

And so I will probably have to read both Harrington's and Slavitt's translations - one to appease the literary purist in me, and the other because it peaks my curiosity more and is probably more enjoyable as a summer read.

Read the prose version that came out in Oxford World's Classics. Didn't like it. Sampled the Barbara Reynolds penguin version StLukes talks about but thought the poetry was garbage. Don't know about any others. The story is world class and I've often thought it would be a super film series, better than The Lord of the Rings if some Italian director with the talent of a Fellini wanted to tackle it. One of the things I didn't like was how we switched character viewpoints every chapter. They do this in the George R.R. Martin Song of Ice and Fire series too and I know that puts some people off. Also, the book was billed as a comedy and I was expecting more hilarious moments like say The Canterbury Tales or Don Quixote. My overall impression was that there's a lot of stuff in the book which I like, but I just don't care for the author's presentation of the items, and I'd enjoy the same stories told by someone else more.

I just downloaded Harington's (one R) translation to the Kindle app on my i-pad. I'll try to give it a go later this summer.

force of habit. Although, to be fair, standardized spelling of names was not a big thing back then, so.....who's to say?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mortalterror

Read the prose version that came out in Oxford World's Classics. Didn't like it. Sampled the Barbara Reynolds penguin version StLukes talks about but thought the poetry was garbage. Don't know about any others. The story is world class and I've often thought it would be a super film series, better than The Lord of the Rings if some Italian director with the talent of a Fellini wanted to tackle it. One of the things I didn't like was how we switched character viewpoints every chapter. They do this in the George R.R. Martin Song of Ice and Fire series too and I know that puts some people off. Also, the book was billed as a comedy and I was expecting more hilarious moments like say The Canterbury Tales or Don Quixote. My overall impression was that there's a lot of stuff in the book which I like, but I just don't care for the author's presentation of the items, and I'd enjoy the same stories told by someone else more.

---

This is, according to his preface, Slavitt's complaint about the major translations, and the impetus for his version: he wanted to bring the comedy of the Italian text to the English, which had (again, in his view) been drowned out by Harington's desire to create beautiful poetry.

I have read and/or sampled William Stewart Rose's, Barbara Reynolds', Guido Waldman's and David R. Slavitt's. My favorite is Barbara Reynolds as the translator.

I first tried reading Orlando furioso by going the cheap and easy way of using a free online copy that was translated by Rose. I found it stiff, hard to understand, and confusing. I tried several cantos and found the process to be painful.

Then, I bought volume 1 by Reynolds and it was as if I had been in a darkened room and someone turned the light on. I liked reading it as a poem with rhymes. It wasn't sing-songy annoying that some poetry can be.

Later, I discovered Waldman's. it is adequate, but I find it has some physical drawbacks in that it has a tiny font and the paragraphs are harder to read than Reynolds' version with lots of easy to read white space.

With an epic story, like this making it easy on your eyes is something to consider besides just the text.

Slavitt's version has flaws as far as I am concerned. The biggest flaw is that his editor was concerned mostly by page length over content. He turned in a complete translation of the entire poem and they abridged it. There are many passages that flatter the patrons of Ariosto and those could have been cut without losing any important text. However the editor(s) went beyond that and eviscerated many subplots and merely summarized entire passages or even entire cantos. Some of my favorite parts of the poem were deleted.

I realized that early on as I was evaluating the book and gave it away to a friend, because I no longer wanted it in my house.

The ebook version appears to be an electronic reproduction of the abridged print edition, so I wouldn't recommend that either.

I have a question for you, Bradamante. Why do you think the Warrior Maiden had a role in the French chivalric epics, but not in the English? Do you have any theories about that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ecurb

I have a question for you, Bradamante. Why do you think the Warrior Maiden had a role in the French chivalric epics, but not in the English? Do you have any theories about that?

---

Britomart from Edmund Spenser's Fairy Queen is a woman warrior. This was written after Boiardo and Ariosto wrote their masterpieces, so it is likely Spenser may have been influenced by their work.

I would also argue that Bradamante, the heroine of Boiardo and Ariosto was based archetypically on Jeanne d'Arc who had died several decades before Boiardo wrote Orlando innamorato.

Bradamante is described as having a white shield and plume, riding on a white horse, having cropped hair and dressing like a man. She was also given the nickname of "The Maid."

Perhaps the Matters of England do not have women warriors included in their narrative because those legends were written before Jeanne d'Arc was alive, but they could have been inspired by other women warriors such as Boudicca the warrior queen of the Iceni tribe who led a rebellion against the Roman occupation of Britannia.


BTW, if anyone is interested in reading Orlando innamorato there really is only one edition to read. Charles Stanley Ross' complete and unabridged translation published by Parlor Press in 2004. Do not bother reading the previous edition by Oxford University Press, because not only is it abridged - it does not include Book 3 which describes the invasion of the North African Muslim Army

Thanks, Bradamante. I've loved the Charlemagne legends since I ws a child (although I'm no expert, like you apparently are). My library doesn't have "Quest of the Warrior Maiden", I'm sure you'll be shocked to hear. However, perhaps that means I'll buy it, and then you'll be rich beyond the dreams of men (OK, maybe not).

I was looking into Orlando Inamorato as well - thanks for the advice!

Ecurb,
Did you read Bullfinch's Mythology as a child? I had not been aware of Carolingian legends until about ten years ago. I cut my teeth on Greek mythology.

I was blown away when reading Orlando furioso for the first time of the storyline of Bradamante and Ruggiero. I wondered why I had never heard of this kick-*** warrior maiden from literature. I knew all about Guinevere/Arthur/Lancelot and Tristan & Isolde, but had never heard of Bradamante and Ruggiero.

I felt their story needed to be championed and so I took on the ambitious project of adapting both Orlando innamorato and Orlando furioso into a novel for modern day audiences. I like to think I cut out all the boring parts and made a narrative that is easier to follow. I hope that should you read my novel that you find it as enjoyable as you would your favorite novel based on Arthurian legends.

Mortalterror,
I agree that Ariosto made too many POV shifts. Think there were many subplots that didn't really add to the forward through line of the overarching narrative. There were also character arcs that were left hanging without any resolution. However, that is probably not something most readers would come away with because they are overwhelmed by the magnitude of the story.

Charles Darnay
If you are interested in reading both epic poems, I would recommend starting with Boiardo's poem since it was written first and the events ongoing in Ariosto's poem are a continuation of that beginning. It will make more sense for you. I have more recommendations, but will have to finish those thoughts in another message later.