MAXnotes for The Metamorphoses of Ovid (MAXnotes)

Rating:
Summary: Unexciting and pedestrian
Review: (Note that this is a review of the Max Notes - some of the reviews on this page seem to refer to the book itself)
I suppose these notes belong to an era when, for better or for worse, students studied the Latin classics for the sole purpose of passing examinations. They are unlikely to stimulate interest. The plot of each book is related in very simple language. There are banal test questions demanding brief factual answers. Sometimes these are inaccurate or assume that a partcular translation is being read. For example in book IV the attitude of Andromeda's parents "struck Perseus as pretty futile" which seems to be an attempt at "nec ferunt auxilium secum sed fletus digno tempore." Then at the end the student is asked to comment on the "casual colloquial speech." I think that only a very advanced classicist can tell whether a piece of Latin is casual and colloquial and this is not a book meant for advanced classicists. The introduction thinks it worth telling us that this is Ovid's only poem written in dactylic hexameters (which might be of interest to a VERY advanced classicist) but then does not explain what a dactyl is.
There is almost no reference to contemporary scholarship about what Romans of Ovid's day thought about the truth of these stories, or about such issues as human sacrifice. Robert Graves and Edith Hamilton are given as authorities.
The illustrations are as wooden as the text, badly drawn and totally unerotic (maybe meant for Catholic schools, or am I being prejudiced?) which seems a particular shame since so many of these stories have inspired unforgettable and sexy illustrations by the greatest artists of all time. I wonder what Max Notes would have made of the Ars Amatoria.

Rating:
Summary: Unexciting and pedestrian
Review: (Note that this is a review of the Max Notes - some of the reviews on this page seem to refer to the book itself)
I suppose these notes belong to an era when, for better or for worse, students studied the Latin classics for the sole purpose of passing examinations. They are unlikely to stimulate interest. The plot of each book is related in very simple language. There are banal test questions demanding brief factual answers. Sometimes these are inaccurate or assume that a partcular translation is being read. For example in book IV the attitude of Andromeda's parents "struck Perseus as pretty futile" which seems to be an attempt at "nec ferunt auxilium secum sed fletus digno tempore." Then at the end the student is asked to comment on the "casual colloquial speech." I think that only a very advanced classicist can tell whether a piece of Latin is casual and colloquial and this is not a book meant for advanced classicists. The introduction thinks it worth telling us that this is Ovid's only poem written in dactylic hexameters (which might be of interest to a VERY advanced classicist) but then does not explain what a dactyl is.
There is almost no reference to contemporary scholarship about what Romans of Ovid's day thought about the truth of these stories, or about such issues as human sacrifice. Robert Graves and Edith Hamilton are given as authorities.
The illustrations are as wooden as the text, badly drawn and totally unerotic (maybe meant for Catholic schools, or am I being prejudiced?) which seems a particular shame since so many of these stories have inspired unforgettable and sexy illustrations by the greatest artists of all time. I wonder what Max Notes would have made of the Ars Amatoria.