zlacker

>But these translations are, generally speaking, poor.

I think that's an unfair characterization - Benjamin Jowett's translations of Plato's dialogues are decent and readable (these are readily available online). I also liked H.G. Dakyn's translations of Xenophon's The Memorabilia and The Symposium:

https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1177/pg1177-images.html

https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1181/pg1181-images.html

>>ttonky+(OP)
And Jowett's translations are explicitly not recommended for anyone trying to study Plato's thought, which is what most people read Plato for (the same goes for all public domain translations of philosophy). At least with outdated translations of literature you can argue for some kind of added value: people don't read Chapman's or Pope's Homer for their accuracy. But philosophy is another matter.

>>megmog+4h
Why? Jowett's translation of Plato are highly readable and clear. He was a highly regarded academic in his time.

>>megmog+4h
I'm sure there are better, more recent translations, but I've read Plato: Complete Works (John Cooper) and a reasonable bit of Jowett's translations, and in my (layman's) opinion, if newer translations aren't available, Jowett's will do just fine.

>>billfr+im
A lot's happened in our understanding of Plato since Jowett's day

>>ttonky+8n
I'm not saying they're awful, just that you're better off getting a reputable 20th century translation. Even a lot of the translations in the Complete Works you mention are getting on in years but it is the best complete edition...