The Concise Srimad Bhagavatam - by Swami Venkatesananda

Just picked this up in a local bookshop for $6. I've only read through the First Canto. Here's the details:

Title: The Concise Srimad Bhagavatam
Author: Swami Venkatesananda
Publisher: SUNY
Paperback
No introduction or appendix, and no index. Just a TOC & the text.

Impressions:
Well, its pretty much exactly what it purports to be, a concise translation of SB. The author is a member of the 'Divine Life Society', founded by Swami Sivananda. (and thats about as much as I know about them) The book pretty efficiently summarized the first canto, and only a few things stood out as what I'll term 'doctrinal issues'. On the whole, it looks like a good refresher of the 'when did that happen' type. if you need a fast reminder of the entire 6th Canto, and want to get it in about a 1/2 hr, I think this book would fit the bill.

It is most definately NOT a replacement for reading the SB. It would mostly benefit those like me who have read SB, but have a really bad memory.

I'm not upset I bought it for $6, but I don't think I'd invest the $30 SUNY has it listed for online.

Anyone else have it/can comment on it?

Yes, this is a fine, brief translation of the Bhagavata Purana with no bells and whistles attached. It is generally accurate and makes no or very little effort at hermeneutics. I have used this book several times for courses I have taught on Hinduism and World Religions at various institutions. Short of the five volume, complete, though ponderous, translation brought out by Motilal Banarsidass, this is the best thing out there that I know of. I highly recommend it, though not at the $30 price desired by SUNY. It should not be too hard to find a used copy of this for less than $10.

Any reports on Edwin Bryant's new translation of the 10th Canto? I have it but have not had a chance to read it yet.

ity alam

Would anyone care to recommend editions of the full Bhagavata? The Gita Press edition is out there, and I should probably get hold of that, but aside that, which other editions are there? Any comments on them?

Do you mean editions or translations? I think you may mean the latter. Well, Nitai mentioned the five volume complete translation published by Motilal Banarsidass in the AITM series. That one is good to have, although the English is not always the best.

Yes, I meant translations. How does the Motilal edition compare to the Gita Press edition?

I read both the Motilal and Gita Press translations. The former has some very good quotes from many commentators in the form of some quite elaborate foot notes. Some of the introductory matter is not to my taste, but I think the English is, largely, very good. Purusottama-Superman (?)
The Gita Press edition is very scant on foot notes, but they are are usually pertinant. The names of the Gopis are given in the Rasa Pancadhyay, which is excellent, moreover the Gita Press version is in two large volumes with the entire sanskrt text included. For that alone it is worth having. The main defect with this one is the very often translation of "Syama" as brown. All you need is a correction pen and a black biro and you can make any adjustments you like

One caution with the Motilal one is the translator critises the Gaudiyas a bit for identifying Radha in the text, but when you read what he says you can see he is just not able to grasp it himself. He often quotes the Gaudiya tikas though. The Motilal version also has alot of extra slokas from the edition of Vira Raghava, particularly the battle scenes from the Dvaraka Lila.

Also both versions contain the Srimad Bhagavat Mahatmya from the Padma Puran, which is jnatavya and is almost another canto in itself.

There is another edition translated by J M Sanyal in two volumes published by Munshiram manohar. It was done back in the early 20th Centuary.
One particular virtue of this edition is the style of English, using the honorific Thee and Thou mayest if thou canst etc. There are hardly any foot notes but the whole text flows in narrative form, reminding one that the original is an Epic poem beyond all epic poems.
If anyone knows of other English translations I'd be keen to procure them.
Or of any good anthologies, like BhagavatArka Marici mAlA.

I too have it, but have not cracked the cover of it. One disappointment is the quality of printing Penguin used. Very flimsy newsprint paper... its probably real trivial of me, but if I can not appreciate the look and feel of a book, I am much less likely to delve into it. I'm suprised this didn't get a higher quality printing...

This is a virtue? I find it tiresome and silly. I have the same problem with Ganguli's translation of the Mahabharata. What is wrong with plain old modern English?

I guess it's a matter of personal taste. I know I'm about the only person who likes it. I read alot of Shakespear and alot of 17th Century English poets and got a real liking for that kind of English.

Having thought on it some more, I think it's got something to do with the way we read. Perhaps the old style language is more suited to the aural tradition, where rather than just read to ourselves quietly, we would listen or indeed recite the text with dramatic intonation in the active voice and all that. But when we just read privately there's less need perhaps for embelishments of that sort.
It certainly conveys the sentiment in a way otherwise not achievable by plain old modern English. But we are not used to it. I think it is almost like our Sadhu bhasya as opposed to plain old cholti bhasa

What say you?

I personally like it, though I am not quite certain why. I would have to think about that for a moment.

What say ye?
Personally, I don't like it. I find it gives the translator a chance to hide behind old/outdated/misused english constructs. I also find that it lends a sense of awe and reverence that is misplaced in many texts. I am currently reading 'Life of Love' by O.B.L. Kapoor, and the first part of the book is full of this kind of construct. It tends to lend the text the traditional feeling of 'Indic mysticism'... lots of 'O My Child!.. ' and what not.

On the flipside, I find modern english renderings of Shakespeare to be abhorent... go figure [*]

[*] I think its important to note that knowledge of English is essential to reading and enjoying Shakespeare. In fact, most people miss out on Shakespeare because they do not read it aloud. The beauty and flow of the language is utterly destroyed when moved to modern english. Probably much of the same is true for sanskrit literature...

A thee and a thou dost not a Shakespeare make.
Forsooth, 'tis sad; it comes not up to Will'm Blake.

Yeah, that's the effect it helps create. I find it befitting for example in translation of an Upanishad or other such text, but as you point out, not necessarily in narration of lila.