The Odyssey is the powerful sequel to The Iliad. Much debate is over the topic of whether or not the same Homer wrote both books. This is in many respects completely irrelevant, but I side with Richmond Lattimore and David Grene and Miss Ames (My heroes) in that there was One Homer. The works seem too similar to be otherwise. Perhaps the author of the Odyssey was merely extremely well versed in the Iliad but as I said, futile to debate. It is like unto debating whether or not Achilleus and Patroklos were lovers. Not important.
In many ways, The Odyssey deals with the same question as The Iliad - What does it mean to be human? But in another way, it is vastly different. For The Iliad also asks, "How do we deal with death?" but The Odyssey asks, "How do we deal with death?". The two main characters, Achilleus and Odysseus, are also vastly different.
The Odyssey opens with men from Achaia and Ithaka living in Odysseus's house and eating his goods, violating the sacrosanct host-guest relationship, disrespecting his heir and his wife and lording it over his servants. Odysseus meanwhile is trying to get back to Ithaka. The poem details his journey from Troy to Kalypso's island and then to the Phaiakians and finally to Ithaka, where he at last avenges himself on the suitors.
The most important part of The Odyssey for me was Odysseus's reaction to Kalypso's offer of immortality. She loves Odysseus and wants him to stay on Oneigya forever with her. But by that time, Odysseus knows what immortality is like and refuses, prefering the short and vibrant life of the mortal to that of the god, or immortal.
But remember in The Iliad when no one wanted anything less than immortality? Everyone wants eternal, everlasting glory, and wants to "be like a god". Very different now, with a mortal actually refusing immortality.
Odysseus travels the world in The Odyssey and sees many peoples, cultures, and ways of life. He meets the Lotus Eaters, the Cyclopes, the Phaiakians, and even his own homecoming on Ithaka. He even changes during the poem - after blinding Cyclops, he bursts out and tells the injured beast who it was that hurt him, thus incurring Poseidon's wrath. He wants everyone to know what Odysseus did - he still wants glory.
Through the epic, however, this opinion is tempered. Seeing his disaster at the Cyclops, and the destruction of his men at Zeus' hands, he tempers and controls himself, restraining his servants from glorying in the 108 bodies he has slain. "For it is impeity to glory so over the slain". Has he learned something in his journey? I would like to think so.
There is so much to learn from this poem, almost as much as The Iliad. To be honest, I preferred the former, but there is no mistaking Homer's genius in this later work. Odysseus's journey and development, the cunning of Penelope and her faithfulness to her long lost husband, and especially the maturation of Telemachos, together with the spectacular rejection of immortality made by Odysseus make this book (translated preferably Lattimore) a must-read.
Onwards, then, to Aeschylus and the Orestia.
Friday, September 21, 2007
Friday, September 14, 2007
The Iliad Part III - Conclusion
Sing, goddess, the wrath of Achilleus, son of Peleus, the fierce anger that caused the death of countless Achaians...
And so the epic poem begins. It constantly surprises and shocks you. Homer is always one step ahead of us.
Many more questions are raised by the last six books of The Iliad. Is Homer pro-war? Does Achilleus ever change? Does he ever control his wrath?
Even questions regarding humankind: Do we desire immortality? Can we find glory on the battlefield? What is important in life?
The last books really plunge into deeper waters. Patroklos is dead, and Achilleus regrets feuding with Agammenon. He realizes now what awful consequences his wrath has had on the Achaians in general and himself in particular. He chooses a short glorious life and plunges back into battle clad in immortal armor forged by Hephaistos himself.
One hopes that his rage will have been tempered by his loss of Patroklos; indeed, in Book Eighteen, he mournfully cries, "O how I wish that wrath would vanish from the hearts of gods and men! For it is a poisonous food that turns sweeter than honey in a man's stomach...." We are led to hope, and believe that he will control his wrath.
Our hopes are dashed. Far from controling his anger, Achilleus unleashes it farther than he has ever done; not even with his bitter feud over Briseis was he this wrathful. He goes on a rampage and butchers countless Trojans like a lion among sheep, according to Homer. He mauls Hektor and disgraces his corpse. He executes twelve Trojan youths in cold blood over the funeral pyre of Patroklos and mourns obsessively. He continues to release his anger against the body of Hektor, raging against the gods, Hektor, the Trojans, and perhaps most important of all, himself.
But - there is hope. For Priam, king of Ilion, comes to beg for the body of Hektor. He weeps before Achilleus and reminds him of his own father. And something new (or is it something old?) stirs in Achilleus: pity. He pities the old man who has lost his sons in war. He weeps for his own father, Peleus, who will never see him again. Priam's mourning cancels out Achilleus' rage. He becomes a gentlemen again, like he was before The Iliad began. In a way, he has been saved from himself.
With the return of Hektor, Achilleus is at peace with himself once again. The story of Troy is not over; the epic closes before the Wooden Horse, before the fall of Achilleus, before the brutal sack of Ilion. But it seem complete somehow. "Thus they buried Hektor, breaker of horses".
This might be a stretch, but horses are wild, strong, passionate creatures. Rage has similar qualities. Rage begins the book, a Horse-Tamer closes it. Is it possible we must all tame our inward rage, like unto a wild horse? Rage is, I think, the most powerful passion man has. Eros comes in close second but rage is the most transformative and destructive. We must tame our own rage, tame our own horse.
And so The Iliad closes. What an amazing poem. What a wonderful story.
Next up, The Odyssey.
And so the epic poem begins. It constantly surprises and shocks you. Homer is always one step ahead of us.
Many more questions are raised by the last six books of The Iliad. Is Homer pro-war? Does Achilleus ever change? Does he ever control his wrath?
Even questions regarding humankind: Do we desire immortality? Can we find glory on the battlefield? What is important in life?
The last books really plunge into deeper waters. Patroklos is dead, and Achilleus regrets feuding with Agammenon. He realizes now what awful consequences his wrath has had on the Achaians in general and himself in particular. He chooses a short glorious life and plunges back into battle clad in immortal armor forged by Hephaistos himself.
One hopes that his rage will have been tempered by his loss of Patroklos; indeed, in Book Eighteen, he mournfully cries, "O how I wish that wrath would vanish from the hearts of gods and men! For it is a poisonous food that turns sweeter than honey in a man's stomach...." We are led to hope, and believe that he will control his wrath.
Our hopes are dashed. Far from controling his anger, Achilleus unleashes it farther than he has ever done; not even with his bitter feud over Briseis was he this wrathful. He goes on a rampage and butchers countless Trojans like a lion among sheep, according to Homer. He mauls Hektor and disgraces his corpse. He executes twelve Trojan youths in cold blood over the funeral pyre of Patroklos and mourns obsessively. He continues to release his anger against the body of Hektor, raging against the gods, Hektor, the Trojans, and perhaps most important of all, himself.
But - there is hope. For Priam, king of Ilion, comes to beg for the body of Hektor. He weeps before Achilleus and reminds him of his own father. And something new (or is it something old?) stirs in Achilleus: pity. He pities the old man who has lost his sons in war. He weeps for his own father, Peleus, who will never see him again. Priam's mourning cancels out Achilleus' rage. He becomes a gentlemen again, like he was before The Iliad began. In a way, he has been saved from himself.
With the return of Hektor, Achilleus is at peace with himself once again. The story of Troy is not over; the epic closes before the Wooden Horse, before the fall of Achilleus, before the brutal sack of Ilion. But it seem complete somehow. "Thus they buried Hektor, breaker of horses".
This might be a stretch, but horses are wild, strong, passionate creatures. Rage has similar qualities. Rage begins the book, a Horse-Tamer closes it. Is it possible we must all tame our inward rage, like unto a wild horse? Rage is, I think, the most powerful passion man has. Eros comes in close second but rage is the most transformative and destructive. We must tame our own rage, tame our own horse.
And so The Iliad closes. What an amazing poem. What a wonderful story.
Next up, The Odyssey.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Iliad Part II
I was correct in my suspicion: The Iliad is a masterpiece. Why do we fight? What is honor? How important is honor? Can it be taken away from us? Do we have free will? Is everything predetermined? Do our choices matter?
Questions like these are posed by the Iliad ever since Book I. The lack of respect Achilles has for Agamemnon and the insecurity of the latter lead to the longstanding feud between them causing the deaths of countless Achaians.
I thought this poem, this epic, was a story about Troy. I thought the general purpose of the narrative was to relate the tale of Ilion. But no, it is much more....personal than that. In fact, the Iliad is a tragedy; the tragedy of Achilles and the tragedy of Hector. These two heroes, one Achaian and one Trojan, are both in the prime of life. They both lose everything on the battlefields of Troy. Achilles loses his honor, his friend, and his life. Hector loses his dignity, his pride, and his entire home. It is among the most tragic works ever written.
More than that, it is intensely personal. I can sympathize with Achilles and Hector throughout the poem. Through their struggles and battles I am right there beside them. I can see how important honor was to the ancient Greeks - honor kept them fighting at Troy for ten years. Honor kept the Trojans from returning Helen. For honor Zeus granted Thetis's request for Trojan victory and slaughtered the Achaians. For honor Achilles takes up the sword again. Everything about the poem revolves around honor.
However, I am at a loss to explain it. What is honor? How can we understand it? How does it relate to my faith? I have no idea what honor is. I can describe honorable people, but I don't know anything about it. Can it be taken away? Does it depend on what people think of us? How does it differ from fame? From integrity? From pride?
However, from a Christian perspective, the poem is lacking. True Heroism is never described. The selfless giving of oneself is not present, for the simple reason that the Achaian world was a pagan, dark world. Christ had not yet arrived. For this reason, the 'heroes' think only of themselves, only how to better themselves and bring themselves personal glory on the field. Moreover, there is no virtue exibited by either side. Not even the gods are a source of virtue; oftentimes they conduct themselves worse than their mortal subjects. Virtue was a long time in coming yet; not for another thousand years would Virtue truly be understood.
The one possible exception could be the occaisional behavior of Achilleus and Hektor. Both are quite gentlemen, respecting the old, being courteous to guests, and coming the closest of any characters in the Iliad to exhibiting the quality we call 'honor'. If they lack the "chivalry" of Roland, Lancelot, or Beowulf, it must be remembered that the courtesy these latter heroes exhibited was one heavily influenced by Catholic Christian morality and humility. Homer was ignorant of all this for obvious reasons, so it therefore should not come as a surprise that these heroes act in the selfish way in which they do.
Never have I thought this deeply about a poem. Epic poetry takes on a whole new meaning for me now. I am eager, very eager, to finish the Iliad, read the Odyssey, and move on with the progam. Reading these books in seminar has been the most revealing and the most intellectually stimulating experience I have ever had. I am exited for Thursday.
Questions like these are posed by the Iliad ever since Book I. The lack of respect Achilles has for Agamemnon and the insecurity of the latter lead to the longstanding feud between them causing the deaths of countless Achaians.
I thought this poem, this epic, was a story about Troy. I thought the general purpose of the narrative was to relate the tale of Ilion. But no, it is much more....personal than that. In fact, the Iliad is a tragedy; the tragedy of Achilles and the tragedy of Hector. These two heroes, one Achaian and one Trojan, are both in the prime of life. They both lose everything on the battlefields of Troy. Achilles loses his honor, his friend, and his life. Hector loses his dignity, his pride, and his entire home. It is among the most tragic works ever written.
More than that, it is intensely personal. I can sympathize with Achilles and Hector throughout the poem. Through their struggles and battles I am right there beside them. I can see how important honor was to the ancient Greeks - honor kept them fighting at Troy for ten years. Honor kept the Trojans from returning Helen. For honor Zeus granted Thetis's request for Trojan victory and slaughtered the Achaians. For honor Achilles takes up the sword again. Everything about the poem revolves around honor.
However, I am at a loss to explain it. What is honor? How can we understand it? How does it relate to my faith? I have no idea what honor is. I can describe honorable people, but I don't know anything about it. Can it be taken away? Does it depend on what people think of us? How does it differ from fame? From integrity? From pride?
However, from a Christian perspective, the poem is lacking. True Heroism is never described. The selfless giving of oneself is not present, for the simple reason that the Achaian world was a pagan, dark world. Christ had not yet arrived. For this reason, the 'heroes' think only of themselves, only how to better themselves and bring themselves personal glory on the field. Moreover, there is no virtue exibited by either side. Not even the gods are a source of virtue; oftentimes they conduct themselves worse than their mortal subjects. Virtue was a long time in coming yet; not for another thousand years would Virtue truly be understood.
The one possible exception could be the occaisional behavior of Achilleus and Hektor. Both are quite gentlemen, respecting the old, being courteous to guests, and coming the closest of any characters in the Iliad to exhibiting the quality we call 'honor'. If they lack the "chivalry" of Roland, Lancelot, or Beowulf, it must be remembered that the courtesy these latter heroes exhibited was one heavily influenced by Catholic Christian morality and humility. Homer was ignorant of all this for obvious reasons, so it therefore should not come as a surprise that these heroes act in the selfish way in which they do.
Never have I thought this deeply about a poem. Epic poetry takes on a whole new meaning for me now. I am eager, very eager, to finish the Iliad, read the Odyssey, and move on with the progam. Reading these books in seminar has been the most revealing and the most intellectually stimulating experience I have ever had. I am exited for Thursday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)