Mary R. Lefkowitz, "Cultural Conventions and the Persistence of Mistranslation,"
68.1 (October-November, 1972) 31-38 (at 31; footnote omitted):
No generation has been more aware than ours of the aesthetics of translation, because no generation has depended on translations more. Withdrawn
within ourselves, we seem to cope with existence best in our own language. We all
admit that much is lost in the process of transmission, yet the disinclination to learn
even the most accessible modern languages persists relentlessly. Isolation screens us
also from the past. We discern easily in history only what is not foreign to our
experience. So we regard the Classics, as through a set of filters, with the quality of
light successively altered by changing languages and customs.
Id. (at 36; footnote omitted):
I had worked on [Bacchylides'] Ode 5 for several months before I noticed
the discrepancy between Jebb's translation and the text. Was I thinking of Vergil? Or
(and this unfortunately seems much more likely) in my insecurity and ignorance had I
become a victim of what might conveniently be called the Loeb Library syndrome?