The present translation of Aristotle's Poetics by D. is the revised version of the one first published in the Œuvres complètes (P. Pellegrin [dir.] [2014]). Following the editorial line of the collection ‘Garnier-Flammarion’, the translation is now preceded by a substantial introduction, accompanied by numerous endnotes, and comprises a selective bibliography and an index, which makes this edition a fine device for graduate students. The endnotes explain at length the difficulties encountered (although one may regret the absence of bibliographical references to existing interpretations in these notes) and propose reasonable solutions to textual difficulties, without seeking to close interpretative debates. The introduction presents in a synthetic way the critical fate of the Poetics and explains some of its main concepts. D.'s interpretation is singled out by the importance given to the theatrical performance against an overly ‘literary’ reading (pp. 19–20), the singular effect of the performance on the spectators against an ‘intellectual’ and ‘moralizing’ interpretation (pp. 22–5, then pp. 66ff.), and offers finally a fresh interpretation of the problem of catharsis, according to which theatre is a tolerated place for an ‘expression’ of the passions of fear and pity: catharsis is translated by ‘exutoire’ (p. 76). It is also worth noting the special place that D. devotes to comedy, whose implicit presence is emphasised throughout the treatise (pp. 77–83), and allows, if necessary, to justify interpretative choices (especially that of catharsis).

A word about the translation. In his introduction, D. promises a translation as readable as possible (as he explains on pp. 85–6), following R. Kassel's edition (the divergences are recalled on pp. 249–51). Indeed, the translation develops the syntax of the Greek sentence if necessary, avoids an impression of technical treatise and makes explicit some interpretative choices (by assuming, e.g., a missing verb in 49a29 or by following, one may say surprisingly, a textual proposition from A. Dacier to explain an elliptical sentence in 55a27). Thus, D. admits that he had to translate mimesis mostly by ‘représentation’ but also sometimes by ‘imitation’ (for instance, in 48b9 mimema is even developed by both terms: ‘ils prennent naturellement plaisir aux imitations et aux représentations’; similarly, D. renders spoudaios by ‘sérieux’ and ‘grave’, 49b25). The polysemy of a term is often made explicit (pathos is sometimes explained in the translation by ‘expériences subies’ [47a26] or by a questionable ‘fait de violence’ [52b10, 56a1, 54a13] and ‘violence’ [53b18], or ‘emotion’ [55a31, 56a38], rather than the more common ‘affections’ or ‘souffrances’). If it is sometimes difficult to recognise the Greek sentence, the translation is undeniably fluid and never accidental: the translations, whose meaning is specified in the additional notes, will certainly be able to fuel the discussion on the interpretation that is defended. For French readers this accessible translation will offer useful points of comparison with the commented translation by J. Lallot and R. Dupont-Roc (1980) on several key concepts of the Poetics and will provide the necessary literary and Aristotelian background of the treatise.