Περί Φύσιος

by Parmenides, Παρμενίδης, Γεώργιος Καραγιάννης (Μεταφραστής)

Το βιβλίο "Παρμενίδης ο Ελεάτης" είναι η σύνθεση των ερευνών του συγγραφέως επί τριάντα σχεδόν έτη στην Ελλάδα και στη Γαλλία (Παρίσι, Πανεπιστήμιον Paris-I Pantheon-Sorbonne 1974-1976) υπό την καθοδήγηση του Maurice de Gandillac, καθηγητού της Φιλοσοφίας στη Σορβόνη (1946-1977), παλαιότερα δε (1943-46) του Πανεπιστημίου της Λιλλ) και εκ των επιφανεστέρων Γάλλων φιλοσόφων και ιστορικών της Φιλοσοφίας της τελευταίας εκατονταετίας, και ίσως όχι μόνον· το πλήρες προϊόν των ερευνών του συγγραφέως επί του θέματος "Παρμενίδης" και οι οποίες έρευνες, μελέτες, άρθρα και βιβλία δίδουν σε μία αναδημιουργική σύνθεση το παρόν πόνημα.

Η Φιλοσοφία του Παρμενίδη παρουσιάζεται ως θεϊκή αποκάλυψη, ως αποκάλυψη μίας ανώνυμης θεάς που υποτίθεται ότι αποκαλύπτει στον Παρμενίδη την αλήθεια και μόνο την αλήθεια. Το παράδοξο εδώ είναι ότι ο φιλοσοφικός λόγος παρουσιάζεται ως θεϊκή αποκάλυψη, δογματική δηλαδή και αναμφισβήτητη αλήθεια. Αυτό όμως συνιστά ουσιαστικά αναίρεση της ταυτότητάς του. Έτσι η πρόθεση του Παρμενίδη να δείξει μέσα από την ποιητική και συμβολική εικόνα του φανταστικού του ταξιδιού στη χώρα του φωτός την ανάγκη υπέρβασης της απλοϊκής γνώσης από την έγκυρη γνώση της φιλοσοφίας αποδεικνύεται, όσο και αν είναι κατανοητή, αντιφιλοσοφική. Και αυτό ακριβώς είναι το τίμημα της αλαζονικής του πεποίθησης ότι αυτός και μόνον αυτός κατέχει την αλήθεια. Προφανώς καταφεύγει στον ρόλο του υποφήτη της ανώνυμης θεάς για να προσδώσει στον φιλοσοφικό του λόγο μεγαλύτερο κύρος, χωρίς όμως να συνειδητοποιεί ότι με τον τρόπο αυτό ουσιαστικά τον υπονομεύει, αφού ο φιλοσοφικός λόγος είναι πάντοτε αγωνιώδης αναζήτηση της αλήθειας, είναι ελεύθερος στοχασμός και ποτέ ένα είδος θεϊκής αποκάλυψης. Πάντως το περιεχόμενο της δήθεν αποκάλυψης έμεινε τελικά εντελώς ανεπηρέαστο από την μορφή της η οποία είναι ποιητική, μυθική και θρησκευτική.

Πρόλογος του συγγραφέως
Πρόλογος "Lettre - preface" του Maurice de Gandillac (γαλλιστί)
Πρόλογος "Lettre - preface" του Maurice de Gandillac (ελληνιστί)

Α' Εισαγωγή Ι. Δημ. Παπαδή, καθηγητού φιλοσοφίας στο Παν/μιο Κύπρου
Εισαγωγή ΙΙ. του συγγραφέως
1. Βιογραφικά
2. Το ποίημα του Παρμενίδη (κείμενο - μετάφραση)
3. Σύντομη ανάλυση του ποιήματος
Απηχήσεις της παρμενιδικής φιλοσοφίας

Β' 4. Το Α' μέρος του ποιήματος (Αλήθεια)
5. Το Β' μέρος του ποιήματος (τα προς Δόξαν)

Γ' 6. Ερμηνευτικές θεωρίες, σχόλια, δοξογραφικές μαρτυρίες μεταγενεστέρων αρχαίων Ελλήνων φιλοσόφων για την φιλοσοφία του Παρμενίδη
7. Άλλοι αρχαίοι συγγραφείς περί Παρμενίδου

Δ' 8. Η ΣΥΜΒΟΛΗ ΤΗΣ ΦΙΛΟΣΟΦΙΑΣ ΤΟΥ ΠΑΡΜΕΝΙΔΗ ΣΤΟΝ ΠΝΕΥΜΑΤΙΚΟ ΠΟΛΙΤΙΣΜΟ
Η Διαλεκτική του Ταυτού και του Ετέρου και η ανακάλυψη του Όντος
9. Ερμηνευτικές συσχετίσεις της θεμελιώδους προτάσεως του Παρμενίδη "Το γαρ αυτό νοείν έστιν τε και είναι" με αντίστοιχες προτάσεις της ευρωπαϊκής φιλοσοφίας
10. Παρμενίδης ο Ελεάτης και η θεμελίωση της επιστήμης

Ε' 11. Η φιλοσοφία του Παρμενίδη και η θεμελιώδης πρόταση της σκέψεώς του "Το γαρ αυτό νοείν έστιν τε και είναι" από την άποψη της ψυχολογίας των βαθών
12. Επίλογος

ΣΤ' Βιβλιογραφία

Genres: Philosophy, Poetry, Classics, Nonfiction, Greece, Metaphysics, Ancient History

558 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 496

About the author

Parmenides of Elea (greek: Παρμενίδης)was an ancient Greek philosopher born in Elea, a Greek city on the southern coast of Italy. He was the founder of the Eleatic school of philosophy. Parmenides was also a priest of Apollo and iatromantis. The single known work of Parmenides is a poem which has survived only in fragmentary form. In this poem, Parmenides describes two views of reality. In The Way of Truth (a part of the poem), he explains how reality is one, change is impossible, and existence is timeless, uniform, and unchanging. In The Way of Opinion, he explains the world of appearances, which is false and deceitful. These thoughts strongly influenced Plato, and through him, the whole of western philosophy.

Reviews

[Sense of History]

According to editor David Gallop the Greek Parmenides (late 6th and first half of the 5th century BCE) was the first one who wrote a book in prose, and the first who can be considered a philosopher in the modern sense of the word. Only 150 lines of his sole work have survived, very fragmentarily, imbued with an obscurity that has since led to a library of interpretations.

Gallop here offers the original text of what has survived (or at least a reasoned reconstruction of it), a fairly literal translation, and above all, a great deal of explanation and commentary. In this explanation, he frequently takes a stand, with arguments of course, but Parmenides remains an inimitable author. It is perhaps no coincidence that Heidegger, in particular, made it his philosophical starting point.

I, for one, am surprised by the philosophical depth of Parmenides' work, as if he were the first to address the question of Being and Non-Being, and of the essence of Being in very abstract terms. That may be misleading, because similar musings can also be found in Egypt and Mesopotamian writings, but in much more veiled terms. Perhaps Parmenides was simply the first to do so, using an abstract terminology and a reasoning style that feel more familiar to us, now. And in that sense, therefore, it could be misleading. I am not well-versed enough to make an unequivocal judgment on this matter, but given the incomplete nature of his surviving work, I think it best to limit oneself to very cautious statements here.

[Einzige · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ontological vandalism

The genesis of everything hated in philosophy can be found in these roughly 2500 year old fragments. Parmenides is a philosopher who uses incredibly pedantic analysis of the definitions of words/concepts to come to radically bizarre and pointless conclusions that are nevertheless difficult to refute. Not only that but these ideas aren't expressed directly but poorly, in a poem, and its not just a modern issue even the ancients with the complete text had problems with it.

His syntax is replete with multiple ambiguities, that are often so teasing as to argue wilful obscurantism, or at least a certain perversity, on their author’s part. In antiquity his verse style was criticized as obscure and dry, reading ‘more like prose than poetry,’ as Proclus remarks

As for ideas the core of his ideas they boil down to the consequences of what happens when nothing is literally no thing and hence - doesnt exist. With “nothing” not existing, only that which “is” exists, now this seems innocent enough but naturally it doesnt stop there. For Parmenides if all that exists is what is, then this “is” must have always existed – because it cant have come from nothing (as otherwise that nothing would actually be a something, eg something that can give existence to what is) and if what is doesnt have a beginning there cant be an end – therefore all the change and death we see is literally an illusion. From these foundations all kinds of arguments are spawned from the perfection of everything to movement not being possible.

That said this would have to be the best source on Parmenides possible, unlike other works it doesn’t just provide one translation, it provides multiple variant translations and discussion on their differences which is invaluable for works as fragmented and unclear as this.

[Quiver · Rating 4 out of 5]

Heraclitus said that time flows (panta rhei), thereby kickstarting what would come to be known as the dynamical perspective on time, the so call A-series or Presentism. Opposed to Hercalitus's perspective is that of Parmenides. For him time is static, the arrow of time is present at all points, always, the future and the past are as extant as the present. Today, Parmenides's point of view is called the statical perspective, the B-series or Eternalism. In everyday life we use both perspectives, we talk about a fixed appointment on the 10th of April (static), but we also talk about something happening later or earlier (dynamic).

With that in mind, I wished to read the locus classicus for Parmenides thought, and judge the enigmatic text myself.

Enigmatic it is, difficult to parse and at times hard to approach without the guidance of introductory notes, supplementary comments, and footnotes—all of which are provided in this version.

I leave you with a quote regarding Being as Sphere. It's a joy to ponder.

Since, then, there is a furthest limit, [it] is completed,
 
From every direction like the bulk of a well-rounded sphere,
 
Everywhere from the centre equally matched; for [it] must not be any larger

Or any smaller here or there;
 
For neither is there what-is-not, which could stop it from reaching
 
[Its] like; nor is there a way in which what-is could be
 
More here and less there, since [it] all inviolably is;
 
For equal to itself from every direction, [it] lies uniformly within limits.

[Naopako dete · Rating 5 out of 5]

Putovanje

[Murat Dural · Rating 4 out of 5]

Erken dönem felsefe tarihinin çok önemli isimlerinden biri Parmenides'in hayatı ve günümüze kalan kısıtlı eseri; çok detaylı nefis bir "Önsöz", orijinal Antik Yunanca metnin diğer sayfasında güzel Türkçe çeviri ve her sayfanın devamında felsefe ve Parmenides öğretisine dair Antik Yunanca keimelerin açıklaması. Alfa Yayınları ve eseri meydana getiren Kaan H. Ökten'e tebrik ve teşekkürlerimle.

[sam · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very foundational presocratic, I can easily see where Plato derived much inspiration from. Very cool!

[LaMarx · Rating 1 out of 5]

I hate him.

[Lisa · Rating 5 out of 5]

For those with little prior exposure to pre-Socratic philosophy, it’s hard for me to imagine a more helpful starting point than this volume on Parmenides prepared by David Gallop. The introduction clearly lays out Parmenides’ logical argument as well as pointing out areas where scholars are in conflict about the interpretation. Gallop apparently assimilated all the major academic publications on Parmenides (up to the original publication of this volume in the early ‘80s), notes the sources that have led to his own understanding, and summarizes alternate arguments where they differ from his own preferred reading. The fragments are presented in the original Greek (or in one case Latin) with the English translation on the facing page. Numerous alternative translations are provided in notes on each page for the reader’s consideration. The original source paragraphs from which the fragments were collected are provided in a separate section, as are general ancient “testimonia” about Parmenides and his writings. For those who want to dive deeper, there is a handy “Bibliographical Note” to give direction to your reading of sources that are listed in the actual Bibliography.

The book is also physically pleasing—a beautiful aqua cover (featuring a bird in a medallion!), lightweight textured pages, wide margins. I originally balked at spending $40 on one slim volume about one philosopher, but I feel as though I have gotten my money’s worth. I wonder if any further progress has been made in Parmenidean scholarship since the original publication of this book in 1984. The intrigue of Parmenides’ non-intuitive argument (that everything that exists is unchanging and part of a static plenum) is captured here, as well as the regret for what we will never know.

[Sahiden35 · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Zira ne var olmayan vardır, bu durdurabilirdi onu erişmeden hemhâl olana, ne de varolan varolandan olabilir
orada daha fazla burada ise daha az, madem ki evren el değmemiştir;
eştir her yönden, hemhâl bir biçimde sınırlarında hüküm sürer."

[Lucas · Rating 4 out of 5]

More than meets the eye!

[Illiterate · Rating 3 out of 5]

Poem on pursuing timeless truth not mortal opinion. The truth seems to consist of monism and the law of noncontradiction.

[Yupa · Rating 2 out of 5]

Bompiani vs. BUR: 0-3

Il testo lo conosciamo tutti (più o meno).
Quindi, parliamo dell'edizione. Parliamone male.
Introduzione troppo breve per un testo e un autore su cui invece ci sarebbero tonnellate di cose da dire (o dette da altri da riferire). Poi, al di là delle tesi del curatore (discutibili o meno), viene riportato troppo poco sulle interpretazioni alternative su Parmenide, e ce ne sarebbero, e sarebbe quanto meno necessario fornirle...
Apparato di note poverello, soprattutto per quanto riguarda le varianti, che dovrebbe essere vitale riportarle per un testo di 2.500 anni fa pervenutoci a frammenti...
Poi ci sono i soliti numerosi refusi, errori di stumpa e/o di battitura, tipica malattia di queste edizioni bompiani.
Punti positivi: ampia bibliografia; prezzo relativamente basso e libro maneggevole (per meno di 10€ ti porti Parmenide in tasca).
Per chi desidera di più Bompiani ha pubblicato la stessa opera in un lussuoso volumone, di cui questa dovrebbe essere la versione mignon.
Ma se si desidera di meglio a basso prezzo c'è l'edizione economica BUR (con un'eccellente introduzione, e provocatoria nelle tesi) al cui confronto questa Bompiani sparisce...

[Joan Sebastián Araujo Arenas · Rating 3 out of 5]

Parménides creía, y lo dejó bien en claro en esta obra, que lo único sobre lo que debía pensarse y hablarse en filosofía era sobre el «ser». Y si bien Aristóteles abogaba que el «ser se dice de muchas maneras» ―aunque las principales sean sólo cuatro definiciones―, Parménides no habría estado de acuerdo con él.

Su «ser» es:

1) Eterno ―por lo que es ingénito e imperecedero―.
2) Homogéneo ―por lo que es indivisible y continuo―.
3) Inmóvil y limitado ―lo que quiere decir que mantiene su identidad―.
4) Completo y perfecto.

Y si bien Gorgias planteó...

El resto del escrito se encuentra en mi blog: https://jsaaopinionpersonal.wordpress...

[Erik Graff · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this book to help with Reginald Allen's course on Plato's Parmenides at Loyola University Chicago. Of all the books read in that regard, this was the most helpful when I later composed a paper on his Proem.

[Donald · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm confused by the translation of βροτων γνωμη (fragment 8) as "opinion of mortals" when it's obviously in contrast with βροτων δοξας (fragment 1), but that is a minor quibble. This is a fine edition with lots of helpful notes and appendices, including the short bio from Diogenes Laertius.

[Márcio Ricardo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Gostei bastante! A obra traz o poema de Parmênides e explica sua importância para a humanidade.

Foi uma grata surpresa e a confirmação de que vale a pena explorar mais os pré-socráticos, especialmente quando temos um expert para nos ajudar a entender o sentido, contexto e importância tanto da obra como do autor, como é este caso e, com o plus de seu interesse e amor pela filosofia ser contagiante.

Que pena que este autor não fez um trabalho idêntico para os outros principais filósofos e sofistas pré-socráticos. Eu leria a coleção com satisfação.

[Leopold Benedict · Rating 4 out of 5]

Parmenides verdanken wir die Erkenntnis, dass das Seiende vom nicht-Seienden zu trennen ist und das Erste identisch mit dem Gedachten ist. Darüber hinaus gibt es die Substanz, das Erstarrte, was sich von der permanenten Veränderung Heraklits unterscheidet.

[Kai]

"And it is all one to me / Where I am to begin; for I shall return there again."

[Ⰰⱃⰿⰰⱀⰴ Ⱆⰾⰴⰵⱃⰻⰽⱁ Ⱅⰵⱄⰾⰰ · Rating 5 out of 5]

Beogradski izdavačko-grafički zavod
Beograd, 1984.
Preveo sa starogrčkog Slobodan Žunjić
Radi se o teorijsko-filozofskom djelu te o književnoumjetničkom djelu. Ukratko, ovo je filozofska poema napisana u heksametru. Prijevod na srpski nije struktuiran u heksametru, sam Žunjić navodi da bi se time (da je to učinjeno) tekst doimao kaotičnim i čudnim.
Da sve bude jasno ovo je napisano od strane samog Parmenida. Izvorni autorski Parmenidov tekst iz kraja šestog ili početka petog stoljeća prije naše ere. No, radi se o isključivo tri stranice. Žunjić navodi da se smatra kako je poema posjedovala dva dijela, prvom dijelu je sačuvana većina teksta (Žunjić navodi da je devet desetina teksta ostalo sačuvano), drugom dijelu je sačuvan mali dio teksta (Žunjić navodi da je gotovo u potpunosti nestao).
Djelo pročitah u sklopu korica "Fragmenti elejaca" u kojem se još nalaze tekstovi (njjihovi ili tekstovi koji o njihovim razmišljanjima govore ili s njihovim razmišljanjima raspravljaju, sve antički tekstovi) Zenona i Melisa.
Uskoro slijedi osvrt samog tog izdanja.
Sama poema je napisana u prvom licu, kao što već rekoh, u izvorniku je u heksametru. Posjeduje tematsko-motivske elemente orfičke mitološke tradicije. Parmenid je jedan od prvih grčkih filozofa uopće, njegovo doba je još duboko protkano usmenim mitološkim predajama. Žunjić ističe da se kod Parmenida ističe utjecaj starogrčkog "animizma". Žunjić ne definira "animizam", vjerojatno pod tim terminom smatra starogrčku pagansku religiju sinkretiziranu s helenističkim novokomponovanim duhovnostima poput orfizma. Guglajte o orfizmu, isplati se.
Parmenid pripada ekipi predsokratovca, heterogenoj začetnoj ekipi starogrčke filozofije; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Soc.... Inače nikad ne pišem o autoru nekog djela, ali Parmenid je old skul iznimka.
Radoslav Katičić bi našao zanimljivost u početnom dijelu poeme, u kojem autor u prvom licu navodi da ga kolibe nose putem boginje;
"Kolibe što me nose dokle god bi volja išla
vukoše me, kad me na glasovit dovezoše put...
...kočije mi napinjući, dok mi device put vođahu.
Svirale (zvuk) u glavčinama opušta os
plamteća (tako beše sa dva obrćuća gonjena
točka na oba kraja), kad požuriše hitro
sunčeve kćeri da napustivši boravište Noći
na svetlo me puste, razgrnuvši rukama koprene sa
glava."
Tekst je očito podosta zbunjujući. Citat kojeg bacih je sa samog početka djela. Kontekst nam je gotovo potpuno nepoznat. Nisam skužio kojoj božici autorsko ja putuje? Žunjić o tome šuti. Kasnije se u tekstu spominje Afrodita, no jer su dijelovi izgubljeni, ne znam je li to Afrodita kojoj putuje.
Samo prvo lice pripovjedača poeme je zbunjujuće. Čije je to "ja" u tekstu? Ako se povodimo da je ovaj test prije svega filozofski tekst koji progovara o ontologiji, o konceptu bivstvovanja, o tome da samo Jedno postoji onda bi "ja" u tekstu trebao biti sam Parmenid. No, s druge strane, gledajući ovaj tekst kao prvenstveno književnoumjetničku građu "ja" nije autorsko. Jer nije Parmenid Djed Mraz pa da putuje na letećoj kočiji.
Jezik srpskog prijevoda je zanimljiv u nekim epitetima; "okruglookog meseca", "okolohvatna nebesa" i dr.
Ne želim govoriti išta o ontološkoj filozofiji Parmenida, to bi bilo kao da govorim o radnji. Ja nikada u svojim osvrtima ne govorim o radnji. No, istaknut ću da se ne slažem s Parmenidom, ja sam stari dijalektičar i moj najbolji filozof je Heraklit iz Efeza. Žunjić navodi da se elejce ne može smatrati ni idealistima, ni materijalistima (idealizam i materijalizam u semantičkom kontekstu antičke filozofije, ako ne znate taj semantički kontekst ubijte se). Ja bih rekao da je Parmenidova filozofija idealistička, sam Žunjić tvrdi da ni filozofi ne mogu u potpunosti shvatiti Parmenida jer je ostalo tri obostrane stranice njegovog pisanja, ostalo su sve komentari (uglavnom Platonovim) o njegovom razmišljanju.
Žunjić daje detaljan i iscrpan komentar prijevoda, navodi druge načine prevođenja nekih dijelova ili riječi. Svaka čast Žunjiću!
Čitajte starogrčku filozofiju! Čitajte predsokratovce!
Filozofija bi trebala u općim, jezičnim i klasičnim gimnazijama trajati tri godine kao obavezan predmet (prva godina- logika). A ne da sam ja u Klasičnoj morao slušati četiri godine o jebenoj kemiji i jebenoj fizici, a filozofiju sam imao samo u četvrtom.

[Anna Calleeuw · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read for university 📖
Denken is zijn ✨

[Joseph Knecht · Rating 3 out of 5]

The biggest irony of this book is that it contains a hundred pages of interpretations of a twenty-page poem. And at it the end it still loses to grasp what has been said.

Although fragments of Parmenides's work have been preserved, we can never gain the awareness that he had. He wanted to express his awareness of Truth through words, but words are always subject to personal interpretation. In the translation and interpretation, all meaning of Truth is lost.

Somehow people that were alive millennia ago had more awareness of Truth than people in the present. Thus Truth has to exist opposite to the will to power, and those who have power don't know the Truth. Those who know the Truth, don't seek power.

Some parts I enjoyed:
-For the narrower [rings] are filled with unmingled fire, And those next upon them with night, and a portion of flame is sent forth; In the midst of these is the goddess who steers all things; For she rules over hateful birth and union of all things, 5 Sending female to mingle with male, and again conversely Male with female...

-Where I am to begin; for I shall return there again.

-What routes oí inquiry alone there are for thinking: The one – that [ it] is , and that [it] cannot not be ,

[Antony Monir · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s hard to rate or review such a fragmented work. The rating here isn’t for the philosophy of Parmenides because it is evidently flawed. It wouldn’t be fair to give this book a low rating due to the flaws of an ancient philosopher. I read this out of historical interest in the ideas of philosophy. The edition I read included commentary by Gallop who made the Fragments much clearer to understand. I appreciated the various comments throughout the text as well as the elaborate introduction to the work. Also, the extensive bibliography helped me find more books to read about this topic. I highly recommend this edition of the Fragments for those with an interest in presocratic philosophy. 4/5.

[Reinhard Gobrecht · Rating 5 out of 5]

Die Fragmente des Parmenides sind genial: Z.B. "Denn dasselbe kann gedacht werden und sein".
Hierin wird schon der Unterschied zwischen Denken und Erkennen (Wirklichkeit) deutlich.
"Entweder ist es, oder es ist nicht!" verdeutlicht schon das Prinzip vom ausgeschlossenen Widerspruch, dass nicht beides zugleich sein kann und das Prinzip vom ausgeschlossenen Dritten, dass es nichts Mittleres gibt. "Richtig ist, das zu sagen und zu denken, daß Seiendes ist; [...]" verdeutlicht schon die Rechtheit von Wahrheit, die sinnvolle Beziehung zwischen Ontologie und Logik. u. v. a.

[Oya Özgün Özder · Rating 3 out of 5]

zira var olmayan zorlanmaz var olmaya;
sense bu irdeleme yolundan esirge düşünceni;
ne alışkanlık bu kanıksanmış yola mecbur bıraksın seni,
ne de bel bağla bulanık göze, uğuldayan kulağa, dile;
ayıkla "logos" ile muğlak kanıtı
benim söylediklerimden.

[Karl Hallbjörnsson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'd read Parmenides before but I'm writing an essay on his metaphysics right now so I'm revisiting his poem and all its interpretations and implications. Insanely difficult and abstruse. Is Parmenides the first modal logician? Is he an epistemologist? Is he a simple monist? My head is spinning...

[Atticus · Rating 5 out of 5]

It is, and far be it from me to say otherwise!

Pleasantries aside, though complex (especially given its brevity) it's a worthy read for anyone exhausted of reading about "becoming" and wishing to peruse the ontology of simply "being", or for anyone in general interested in philosophy.

[Juan Carlos Santillán · Rating 1 out of 5]

Es un libro tan anodino y gratuito que es como si no lo hubiese leído.

[Joaquín · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very good philological work but such a pitiful introduction (NB I am speaking about the French version by Barbara Cassin in Éditions du Seuil)

[Peter J. · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was mostly lost with this poem and intend to reread it later to see if it makes more sense.

[Truls Ljungström · Rating 3 out of 5]

Översättning av Burnet. Intressant.