From the
beginning of the Odyssey, Odysseus is set up to be a legendary hero, who uses
his immense strength and cunning to overcome twenty years of obstacles and
return home to Ithaca. His renown is so widespread that the audience is
expected to have heard rumors of him, and 3,000 years later his story is still
remembered as one of the greatest hero’s journey stories of all time. Does he
really deserve such a great reputation though? I’m not sure. I think if I had
read the Odyssey without any western cultural influence telling me Odysseus is
a hero, I would think very differently of him. I would probably see him as a
reasonably intelligent man who is good at weaseling out of trouble, but who
still has some fundamental character flaws, and so is certainly not worthy of
the heroic reputation he achieved.
The
build-up of this reputation starts with the invocation of the Muse, on the very
first page of the epic. “Many pains he suffered,” Homer says, “heartsick on the
open sea, fighting to save his life and bring his comrades home. But he could
not save them from disaster, hard as he strove – the recklessness of their own
ways destroyed them all, the blind fools” (1.5-9). Ironically, this single paragraph, meant as
praise for Odysseus, describes everything that I think he should have done
better on his way home.
Let’s
start with the most frustrating phrase in the invocation, which in my opinion
is the assertion that Odysseus is “heartsick on the open sea.” Sure, he misses
Penelope and stuff, but he literally sleeps with Circe for a year before even remembering that he is supposed
to go home (note also that in this case we don’t see Odysseus trying “bring his
comrades home,” but rather those “blind fools” reminding him that they need to
leave Circe’s island). Then, after washing up on Calypso’s island, he sleeps
with her for ten years before
leaving. Again, sure, he cried about it every morning, but the fact that he
still chose to sleep with Calypso is evidence enough that he isn’t really that
heartsick. Finally, when he gets back to Ithaca, he still doesn’t reunite with
Penelope immediately, but instead plots with Athena and comes up with some
overblown scheme to massacre all of the suitors, when just revealing himself to
them would probably have been enough to get most of them to leave anyway.
Homer
follows this in the invocation by saying that Odysseus “could not save [his men]
from disaster, hard as he strove – the recklessness of their own ways destroyed
them all, the blind fools.” This once again suggests something completely false
– that Odysseus, the leader of the men, is completely blameless in their demise.
It was he who lead them to Polyphemus’s lair in the ridiculous hope that a
cyclops would show them hospitality, it was he who didn’t tell them to watch
out for Scylla, and he who didn’t tell them about the bag of winds from Aeolus,
which led indirectly to them being blown away from Ithaca.
All
in all, Odysseus doesn’t seem like a guy I would trust with my men (if I had
men). Although he is good at getting himself out of trouble, much of that is
luck, and he takes a lot of unnecessary risks that get him into trouble in the
first place. He doesn’t at all live up to his description in the invocation of
the Muse, and this leads him to take twenty years to return home alone, all of
his men having died along the way.
I agree with your thoughts SO much! I personally think that Odysseus is an interesting an adventurous character. But, these traits don't necessarily make him a hero. I totally agree when you say you wouldn't trust your theoretical men with Odysseus; I wouldn't either. And for me, this creates a problem. If a character in a leadership role is being labeled a hero, I would want to be able to view them as someone that I could see as being great enough for me to put my trust in them. And if I had the choice in real life whether to follow and trust him or not, I would choose not too. And if I can't even have enough trust in him to be seen in a position of leadership, it's very hard to think of him as a hero.
ReplyDeleteI think what you brought up about his blatantly not being "heartsick on the open sea" is what convinced me. In my opinion, this assertion as compared to what happens in the story is enough to prove the narrator as biased very heavily in Odysseus' favor, since, as you said, he was by no means getting home as fast as he was able. As for my theoretical men... I would trust Odysseus to win a battle or war with them, but I wouldn't trust him to bring any of them back alive.
ReplyDeleteIt's probably splitting hairs, and we can debate about what forms of persuasion might be at work, and whether or not Odysseus can be expected to resist them (coming from an immortal nymph), but we're told that Odysseus has "no choice" but to share Calypso's bed. He's her prisoner, she's an immortal, and she wants him for a husband.
ReplyDeleteHe does refuse her offer of immortality in exchange for marrying her, because his heart belongs to Penelope. That should count for something?
I agree with your argument that Odysseus is not shown in a very good light in this book, but we must also remember that many more of his men would have died at Troy if he had not been there to lead them. His schemes such as the trojan horse helped to end the war faster and save lives, not endanger them.
ReplyDeleteI thought the same thing while reading this. I didn't really know that Odysseus would be so complex before I read the Odyssey. But I think that Odysseus's ability to hold back his emotional reunion with Penelope is supposed to show a mental strength that we admire, although his bloodthirsty plan to kill all the suitors sort of discredits his morals.
ReplyDeleteI feel like without all these twists and turns the Odyssey just wouldn't be as exciting to read. I mean, Odysseus IS pretty ballsy but I feel like that's what makes him so respected. He takes risks and suffers some drawbacks, but at the end he always comes out victorious. I think Homer intentionally made Odysseus kind of over-adventurous and made his actions way more dramatic or violent then they needed to be just for entertainment. I think as an explorer/hero/adventurer, he's a legend. But as a leader?? Not so much.
ReplyDelete