Having just finished up teaching another unit on Homer's Odyssey, the perennial questions arise as to what we as modern readers are supposed to make of Odysseus as a character and possible role model. No doubt Odysseus comes across as a noble, charismatic, larger-than-life individual, the one who is "never at a loss" and therefore "ready for any challenge" that Life may throw his way. Granted, he does carry with him his share of "baggage" when it comes to bad decisions and reckless deeds; these are somewhat mitigated by the fact that he finds himself in one extreme situation after another and always emerges with some priceless morsel of wisdom extracted at a high price. I maintain that Odysseus presents as a new kind of hero - vastly different in character from the traditional warrior heroes of which the two most famous examples were Achilles and Agamemnon. Whereas these two Greek alpha-males were "difficult" to say the least, not to mention: proud, brash, arrogant, stubborn, inflexible, vain, petty, demanding, snobbish, cruel and ruthlessly single-minded - their main focus being "victory on the battlefield" and "winning respect from their inferiors" - i.e. not the sort one would enjoy keeping company with - Odysseus, by contrast, is a kinder, gentler, more well-rounded individual - a survivor of many settings who overcomes adversity by using his wits (metis). Odysseus is concerned with homecoming (nostos) - return from a protracted struggle at Troy to a strife-filled domestic sphere; because of this, his adventures span the extremes of war and peace. Yet, while soldierly types like Achilles would prefer fighting-to-the-death to suffering any sort of slight or humiliation, and would shun manual exertions for their own sake as base and plebeian, Odysseus - like Hercules before him - is willing to undergo such "labors" for the sake of adventure, and endures all sorts of embarrassing situations. Where Achilles is a somewhat static character who never changes, never learns, never grows as a person, Odysseus is dynamic, innovative, and resourceful - someone who is always learning from his mistakes and adapting to new situations. Notwithstanding his appeal, charisma and larger-than-life status, Odysseus is nevertheless someone who has been known, on occasion, to lie, cheat, steal, pillage, maim, kill, offend, deceive, betray, threaten and exploit both men and gods alike. Comparing O's virtues with his vices (see below), the question remains as to whether and to what degree he measures up to our modern standards of heroism.
On the plus side for Odysseus, I have listed the following "good qualities":
+
"never-at-a-loss"
"always-ready-for-any-challenge"
brave/dauntless/courageous
curious/open-minded
receptive-to-change
open-to-new-experiences
flexible/adaptable
resilient
resourceful
smart/clever
charming
practical
patient
long-suffering
hard-working
willing-to-suffer-setbacks-and-humiliations
On the minus side, I list the following "bad qualities":
_
selfish
egotistical
arrogant
vain
over-confident
negligent
duplicitous
deceptive
dissembling
reckless
thieving
threatening
harassing
heartless (willing-to-kill-and-maim)
unfaithful
vengeful
vindictive
unforgiving
noxious
6 comments:
Most heroes wanna do something great.
Odysseus just wants to go home.
But no matter how simple your goal, obstacles can render it epic and noble, if only accidentally.
Odysseus is thus an accidental hero.
Well, hard to consider Odysseus a new kind of hero when he's close to 3000 years old. ;) I never considered Agamemnon a hero. Odysseus may be a "softer" kind of hero but Achilles at the end of The Illiad also displays his softer side. And Hector has that same soft side throughout The Illiad. I'm not sure Odysseus is radically different. What may be different is the story line.
Another thought, so of those minus qualities you list were probably nobler values in ancient pre-Golden age Greece. You may be projecting later values to an earlieer culture that didn't share them.
Oops, typo. I meant to say "some of those minus qualities..." Sorry about that.
I see what you mean. I failed to mention other (and perhaps more sympathetic) characters from Homer's Iliad such as Hector and Priam. I guess I was trying to show Agamemnon and Achilles as "foils" to Odysseus in that they did not seem as accessible or personable - did not have as much of an "interior" life - did not seem to learn from their experiences as much - were not as philosophical as Odysseus. In other words, Odysseus represents a different type of hero within that ancient Homeric time period. He's definitely on the spectrum with those earlier heroes, but I see him (or Homer rather) as moving in a Socratic direction - i.e. toward a higher form of self-awareness of the sort that Socrates represents. Granted - Odysseus is not Hamlet (not an over-thinker), but he's also not a brutish "fighting machine." Perhaps he represents a sort of happy medium between the two. I admit as I make these observations that it's hard not to judge Odysseus by modern notions of "morality" and "character." Thank you very much for your thought-provoking comments...
I see what you mean. I failed to mention other (and perhaps more sympathetic) characters from Homer's Iliad such as Hector and Priam. I guess I was trying to show Agamemnon and Achilles as "foils" to Odysseus in that they did not seem as accessible or personable - did not have as much of an "interior" life - did not seem to learn from their experiences as much - were not as philosophical as Odysseus. In other words, Odysseus represents a different type of hero within that ancient Homeric time period. He's definitely on the spectrum with those earlier heroes, but I see him (or Homer rather) as moving in a Socratic direction - i.e. toward a higher form of self-awareness of the sort that Socrates represents. Granted - Odysseus is not Hamlet (not an over-thinker), but he's also not a brutish "fighting machine." Perhaps he represents a sort of happy medium between the two. I admit as I make these observations that it's hard not to judge Odysseus by modern notions of "morality" and "character." Thank you very much for your thought-provoking comments...
You're welcome. I'm not sure how I came across your blog but I do have an interest in literature.
How many heroes are in the Homeric tradition? Achilles is sympathetic. What I think you have are different human types: Achilles/pride; Hector/family man; Paris/pretty boy; Agamemnon/honor; Odysseus/wit and brains. Homer was an incredible genius and head and shoulders above anyone as a story teller. I think you have to go all the way to Shakespeare to find someone who could put complex stories together better than Homer, and even Shakespeare never wrote an epic. The form of The Odyssey leads itself to look more into the inner nature of Odysseus. After all, Odysseus is a character in The Iliad, and he's no more developed as a complex character there than any of the others. An interesting question would be why did Homer decide to construct a second epic around Odysseus and not another character? If he had chosen Menelaus for instance, and it involved his relationship with Helen as they repaired their marriage coming home, would it have been just as introspective? I suspect it would have. By the way I don't think Homer has any relationship to Socrates. Though both Greek, the time span is substantial and really very different cultures.
Post a Comment