This is a combination of two reviews, one on the Iliad and the other on the Odyssey.(Warning: Spoilers Throughout) “When they got together in one place shield clashed with shield in the rage of battle. The bossed shields beat one upon another, and there was a tramp as of a great multitude – death-cry and shout of triumph of slain and slayers, and the earth ran red with blood…. even such was the toil and uproar of the hosts as they joined in battle.”This book compiles the epic Greek mythological story of the Trojan War that pits men and gods against each other. Briefly put, the plot is all about the war between the Achaeans and Trojans that ensues after the kidnapping of Menelaus’ (brother of King Agamemnon of Achaea) wife, Helen, by King Priam of Troy’s immature son Paris (also called Alexandrus).With that said, a very striking thing about this book is its graphic depiction of war. The violence is definitely not glossed over; honestly, if it were, over half the book would be missing. The raw realism of human war mixed with the mythic interference of the gods is quite an interesting look at the philosophies of ancient Greece. The fact that almost nothing in the war happens by chance is revealing of their beliefs that the gods are a constant influence in the world. Several times the war sways to one side, for instance, when Zeus heals Hector (King Priam’s wise and mighty son) of a wound, and gives him strength, Troy begins conquering to the point of despair for the Greeks. And frequently, the gods will come down from Mount Olympus to participate in some way to change the course of the war. Fate and prophesy are also main themes in this story. Achilles, the hero of the story, knows he will either die in battle and go down in history as a great warrior, or will die of old age in obscurity. Reading about the sheer vivid brutality of these people was quite shocking at first. It was so much so, I came to realize that there really weren’t any “good guys” in this book. Even Achilles is a vicious warrior who cares nothing for anyone other than himself and his servant. This brings me to speak about these characters.Both war leaders in this story are immoral, although Hector tends to be one of the only characters I actually found to have some good character traits. He cares for his city, his wife, and his infant child. Yet meanwhile we have the Greek, Agamemnon. If I was going to name you a few villains for this story, I would say that he’s one of them. The Greeks fail in their fighting in the battles mostly because king Agamemnon, early in the story, steals Achilles wife (who Achilles actually stole in a raid on a city) which causes Achilles to stay aloof from battle back at the ships because of his anger at Agamemnon. Although, after realizing his idiocy in doing this, he offers to give her back to Achilles. Yet, Achilles, who I would describe as a giant angry baby for the most part, doesn’t accept this offer, and instead sends out his best friend, his servant, Patroclus, to fight in his stead. Patroclus turns the tide yet perishes by the hand of Hector. I remember thinking to myself, “Hector… you’re a dead man.” Achilles finally accepts responsibility and heads out to battle and kills Hector. Each make powerful speeches before dueling. This is definitely an amazing climax for this story.Ending with Hector’s death is honestly quite powerful, in that, it causes you to see just what happens to the families of those who lose a husband, father, or son in the brutalities of war. The speech by Hector’s wife, Hecuba after seeing his body, is touching and very moving: “… our city will be razed and overthrown, for you who watched it are no more – you who were its savior, the guardian of our wives and children.” She goes on about women and children carried off or killed by the Achaeans, and the sorrow she and her family feel.With that said, there’s surprisingly no Trojan Horse or death of Achilles in this book. Instead, it ends on a numb note with Hector’s funeral. I found this a fitting end for a book about war, however. This was a world run by wicked gods and evil men. What else is expected? This tale is a stunning look into the life and times of the pagan Greek world and its mythology.
Together these two works attributed to Homer are considered among the oldest surviving works of Western literature, dating to probably the eighth century BCE, and are certainly among the most influential. I can't believe I once found Homer boring. In my defense, I was a callow teen, and having a book assigned in school often tends to perversely make you hate it. But then I had a "Keats conversion experience." Keats famously wrote a poem in tribute to a translation of Homer by Chapman who, Keats wrote, opened to him "realms of gold." My Chapman was Fitzgerald, although on a reread of The Odyssey I tried the Fagles translation and really enjoyed it. Obviously, the translation is key if you're not reading in the original Greek, and I recommend looking at several side by side to see which one best suits.A friend of mine who is a classicist says she prefers The Illiad--that she thinks it the more mature book. The Illiad deals with just a few weeks in the last year of the decade-long Trojan War. As the opening lines state, it deals with how the quarrel between the Greek's great hero Achilles and their leader Agamemnon "caused the Akhaians loss on bitter loss and crowded brave souls into the undergloom." So, essentially, The Illiad is a war story. One close to three thousand years old with a mindset very alien to ours. One where unending glory was seen as a great good over personal survival or family. One where all felt that their ends were fated. And one with curiously human, or at least petty, gods. Some see the work as jingoistic, even pro-war, and I suppose it can be read that way, but what struck me was the compassion with which Homer wrote of both sides. We certainly care for the Trojan Hector as much as or more (in my case much more) than for the sulky and explosive Achilles. For the Trojan King Priam as much or more (in my case much more) than King Agamemnon. Homer certainly doesn't obscure the pity, the waste, and the grief war brings. And there are plenty of scenes in the work that I found unforgettable: The humorous scene where Aphrodite is wounded and driven from the field. The moving scene between Hector and his wife and child. The grief Helen feels in losing a friend. The confrontation between Priam and Achilles.I do love The Illiad, but I'd give The Odyssey a slight edge. Even just reading general Greek mythology, Odysseus was always a favorite, because unlike figures such as Achilles or Heracles he succeeded on his wits, not muscle. It's true, on this reread, especially in contrast to say The Illiad's Hector, I do see Odysseus' dark side. The man is a pirate and at times rash, hot-tempered, even vicious. But I do feel for his pining for home and The Odyssey is filled with such a wealth of incident--the Cyclops, Circe, Scylla and Charybdis, the Sirens--and especially Hades, the forerunner of Dante's Hell. And though my friend is right that the misogynist ancient Greek culture isn't where you go for strong heroines, I love Penelope; described as the "matchless queen of cunning," she's a worthy match for the crafty Odysseus. The series of recognition scenes on Ithaca are especially moving and memorable--I think my favorite and the most poignant being that of Odysseus' dog Argos. Epic poems about 2,700 years old, in the right translation both works can nevertheless speak to me more eloquently than many a contemporary novel.
What do You think about The Iliad/The Odyssey (1999)?
I knooooow I am supposed to love this. Its like a badge that smart people wear. Ohhh look, I've read it and I loooooved it. Well I'm smart, read it in college, and really couldn't stand it. Perhaps it was because, at the time, I was sick to death of reading books like this. Classics from dead white males that the collegiate collective said, "yes...I bequeath thee mandatory reading for the smartie society"...but I just never got into these. Shrug...Its just not my thing. No offense Homer...I just don't like you.
—Jennuineglass
@مجدي كامل المنياوي صاحب هذا الكتاب نصاب رسمي... ينسخ عن النت والمنتديات وويكيبيديا بالحرف...طبعا خلال 5 سنوات طبع في دار النصب العربي-القاهرة...وأعني ما يسمى دار الكتاب العربي ما يقارب الملئة كتاب...بحسبة بسيطة فإنه يؤلف كتاب كل 18 يوم و 6 ساعات....طبعا هذا لا يعقل ولا يمر إلا على الأغبياء...فهو وفريقه مجرد مرتزقة لا يقرأون حتى ما ينسخون من ويكيبيديا والمنتديات..فتجدها بنفس الأخطاء المطبعية....في معرض الكتاب في الشارقة 2013 وجدت لهم قسم كبير...من الواضح أنهم يحسنون صنعا من ناحية البزنيس....وتعرفت على الشخص الموجود وقال أنه ابن صاحب الدار....وأفرغت له ما في جعبتي من أنهم مجرد نصابين مرتزقة يستغفلون القراء...وقلت له أن مجدي كامل لا يسوى 5 قروش في عالم التأليف...فقال لي أن هذا غريب ﻷن الكتب تدقق مرتين قبل الطباعة...وانه يدفع فلوس جيدا لمجدي كامل ﻷن "سعره غالي"....قلت له هذا هراء وأنتم تعلمون ما تفعلون....وستنكشفون يقينا....فقط اقرأوا ماذا يقول عنكم القراء في موقع goodreads...أنتم مجرد زبالة طباعين....ووعدته أن أحضر له كتاب "سقوط دولة الفيزا كارد" للص المدعو مجدي كامل حتى يرى بنفسه الكوبي بيست لصفحات بالعشرات من ويكيبيديا ومنتديات ومواقع إخبارية مع تكرارات مخزية لصفحات كاملة فهم لا يكلفون نفسهم قراءة ما ينسخون.....لكل زمان مرتزقته وتجاره وهؤلاء هم مرتزقة هذا الزمان....
—Maha_a7mad
Leídas la Ilíada y la Odisea, diría que me ha hecho disfrutar un poco más la segunda, quizá por los seres fantásticos (inolvidable el duelo entre Odiseo y el cíclope Polifemo, a quien aquel deja ciego) que hacen peligrar el periplo de Odiseo (prefiero el nombre griego, por mucho que la inmensa mayoría de las traducciones en español lo llamen por el nombre latino, Ulises) de Troya a Ítaca. Los dos poemas homéricos son cantos escritos a mayor gloria del héroe griego (Aquiles en la Ilíada, Odiseo en la Odisea). Ambos son trepidantes y cruentos, pero es más bestia la Ilíada. Homero no da tregua a nadie: ni al lector, ni a los dioses ni a los mortales que lidian entre sí para obtener los favores de Zeus. Si algo merece resaltarse de estas dos obras maestras de la literatura griega es el uso retórico de epítetos sonoros y descriptivos que, al repetirse sin cesar, imprimen la cadencia de un canto: Zeus, que acumula las nubes; la ojizarca Atenea; Aquiles, de pies ligeros; la Aurora, de dedos rosados; Odiseo, fecundo en ardides; los aqueos, de hermosas grebas; el ponto, rico en peces; y un largo etcétera, pues el catálogo de dioses y mortales que pueblan estos poemas es inabarcable. De la Odisea, me emocionó hasta las lágrimas el reencuentro, al cabo de veinte años, de Odiseo y su perro. Pese al disfraz de mendigo que camufla a su amo, el viejo Argo lo reconoce y, acto seguido, muere en paz. Una escena acongojante. No se puede describir mejor la fidelidad inconmovible de un perro hacia su amo. A Homero solo se le puede achacar algún que otro error en forma de anacronismo: el más llamativo es que la acción se ubica en la Edad del Bronce, y en varios versos se alude al hierro, un metal que no se conocía en esa época. (Siento desmentir a un helenista de la talla de Carlos García Gual, que sostiene en la Introducción que en la Ilíada no se hace mención alguna al hierro: tengo la lectura de este poema muy fresca y recuerdo perfectamente, al menos, tres menciones a dicho metal, dos de ellas en referencia a armas y otra en alusión a sentimientos). Pero estos deslices no empañan la gozosa lectura de la epopeya que se narra con profusión de detalles en estas páginas.Escogí la edición de la BLU por ser la canónica y la única versión bilingüe griego-español de la obra de Homero. La Introducción es de Carlos García Gual y la traducción, impecable, de Emilio Crespo y José Manuel Pabón. Mi siguiente objetivo, como no podía ser de otro modo, es la Eneida, de Virgilio, la obra maestra de la literatura latina.
—Bastet
