ŷ������

I immensely enjoyed reading The Iliad, and since everyone said that The Odyssey is even better, I was expecting to love it. That didn't happen. I liked The Odyssey, but I found it to be a lot less compelling than The Iliad, both narratively and thematically. This is strange, I usually prefer adventure tales to war stories, but The Odyssey didn't have the grandeur, the atmosphere of despair, the philosophical undertones, or even the literary beauty of The Iliad.

The Odyssey reads almost like a long folk tale, not an epic. Every translation of the Odyssey that I consulted was considerably simpler and less eloquent than the same translator's edition of The Iliad. I had highlighted many similes and beautiful lines in The Iliad, but my highlights in the Odyssey weren't that many at all.

Of course, I enjoyed parts of it. The adventures are fun to read and they reverberate interesting details about ancient myths of the Bronze Age Greek-speaking world and its surrounding lands. The parts about Odysseus' adventures (which are, sadly, only a very short section of the poem from books IX to XII, told in a flashback by Odysseus himself) are full of wonder, whimsy, and excitement. I would've enjoyed The Odyssey a lot more if those parts weren't washed over and occupied a larger portion. Everyone praises the mythical creatures and whimsy and wonder in the book but they forget to mention that those interesting creatures are present only in a very short section of the book. The second half only focuses on how Odysseus plans to kill all 118 of his wife's suitors and regain his “masculine prowess��.

Misogyny, Slavery, and the Necessity of Taking Context into Account:
This brings me back to my usual problem with ancient texts: I have to shut my whole system of moral judgment (with modern standards) to engage with these stories. This was much easier to do in the Iliad because the setting was a battlefield, and war is never "nice and moral", but Odyssey's most violent parts happen in Odysseus' own home, in times of peace, and at least partly out of sheer lust for vengeance (in contrast with the sense of duty in warriors). In this regard, the Odyssey was harder to put up with for me. Every problem I had with the Iliad is present here too, just harder to look past.
There's a scene where Telemachus hangs twelve slave women (who'd slept with the suitors, thus "dishonoring" Odysseus and his family). He says he doesn't want to grant them an easy death by stabbing them, but make them suffer to death. To me, this abhorrent devilry sounds excessive even within the context. Misogyny in the Odyssey is expressed in different ways than the Iliad, but it's still very much present, and it's even more unsettling. Slavery is also a lot more visible and taken for granted in the Odyssey. Even so, I won't make a hassle out of it because of the obvious reason of context. The Odyssey begs to be read, enjoyed, and understood within its ancient, alien context, and I acknowledge that.

Intricate Details
Now, that doesn't mean that I won't give the book the credit it deserves. Many parts of it are interesting, i.e. the delicate attention to detail: Fingers of women weaving carpets are described as "quick rustling poplar leaves". The scene where Odysseus suddenly aims his bow at Antinous describes the latter as "mindlessly twirling the wine in his goblet", ignorant of what's about to happen. There are many examples of meticulous attention to detail that make the book astonishing.

The Gods Are Missing
The less serious downside of the Odyssey is that the gods, comic, irreverent, and hilarious as they are, don't get the well-deserved spotlight they had in The Iliad. Athena is present throughout and we see glimpses of Zeus, Poseidon, and Hermes, but there are none of the stupid bickerings on top of Olympus that gave the Iliad a comical edge. The absence of the dear old ox-eyed Lady Hera and her hilarious scheming is quite unfortunate.

The Unreliable Narrator
Interestingly, Odysseus is an unreliable narrator. Contrary to what is assumed about ancient heroes, he's not black or white, but a complicated man, "a man of many ways" that is capable of bravery, resilience, and love as well as deceit, vengeance and pure evil. His quick wits allow him to lie to everyone and conjure up interesting stories (which are totally false). It looks like most people take it for granted that he's truthful when recounting his adventures, They may as well be fabrications like the rest of his lies. The 'narrator' never testifies for his stories. He says he encountered the Sirens and sea monsters Charybdis and Scylla, but when have we ever seen Odysseus tell the truth?
I think this bit about the unreliability of Odysseus makes the whole story a lot more intriguing. The whole story is open to interpretation, you take from it what you will.



🔺🔻🔺 Notes on Translations
There are lots of other interesting themes and details in the Odyssey, but I want to focus on my persistent preoccupation: Translations. I have an obsessive dedication to comparing translations. I enjoyed reading everyone's introduction, translator's notes, and commentaries far more than I enjoyed the actual story.
Like what I did with the Iliad, I read the Odyssey from 5 different English translations: two from cover to cover (Fitzgerald & Emily Wilson), most of Lattimore, and consulted the other two only occasionally (Rieu and Fagles). I read everyone's Introductions in full.

Disclaimer: I am neither a translator nor a classicist; I don't know Greek, and I am by no means an expert here. I am well aware that "translation is the art of failure" and the only way to fully understand a work of literature is to read it in its original. However, I really like comparing translations, because each of them has its merits and shortcomings; I can get a better understanding of the whole book by reading the interpretations and insights of different translators.

First, I will quote the same lines from each of these translations so you can get a sense of what they're like. (IV. 561-67)

Emily Wilson:
“Gods will carry you
off to the world’s end, to Elysium.
Those fields are ruled by tawny Rhadamanthus
and life is there the easiest for humans.
There is no snow, no heavy storms or rain,
but Ocean always sends up gentle breezes
of Zephyr to refresh the people there.��

Fitzgerald:
“The gods intend you for Elysion
with golden Rhadamanthos at the world’s end,
where all existence is a dream of ease.
Snowfall is never known there, neither long
frost of winter, nor torrential rain,
but only mild and lulling airs from Ocean
bearing refreshment for the souls of men��
the West Wind always blowing.��

Lattimore:
“The immortals will convoy you to the Elysian Field, and the limits of the earth, where fair-haired Rhadamanthys
is, and where there is made the easiest life for mortals,
for there is no snow, nor much winter there, nor is there ever
rain, but always the stream of the Ocean sends up breezes
of the West Wind blowing briskly for the refreshment of mortals.��

Fagles:
“The deathless ones will sweep you off to the world’s end,
the Elysian Fields, where gold-haired Rhadamanthys waits,
where life glides on in immortal ease for mortal man;
no snow, no winter onslaught, never a downpour there
but night and day the Ocean River sends up breezes,
singing winds of the West refreshing all mankind.��

Rieu:
“The immortals will send you to the Elysian Fields at the world’s end, to join auburn-haired Rhadamanthus in the land where living is made easy for mankind, where no snow falls, no strong winds blow and there is never any rain, but day after day the West Wind’s tuneful breeze comes in from the Ocean to refresh its people.��

The Emily Wilson Translation
I will write more about this one because it's the most interesting. Wilson's new (2017) translation (first ever by a woman!) has a magnificent 90-page introduction in which she goes into detail about the history and context of the epic, the origin and making of it, the Homeric question (whether a single person called Homer ever existed or not), the qualities of Homeric verse and epics, its deep roots in traditions of oral performance, the influence of myths and beliefs from inside and outside Greece on these poems, the debates and studies that scholars have focused on, each major character in the story, themes, and the topic of translation itself. Her introduction is so informative and insightful that it deserves five stars on its own.
Her comments on translations of Homer throughout the centuries are very interesting. She says that each translation is closely connected with the translator's individual interpretation of the poem, and with the norms of the society in which it was produced. For example, Chapman (1615) presents Odysseus "as a true soldier and gentleman, a proto-Christian, and proto-Stoic whose greatest virtue is his ability to endure suffering and control his impulses." Alexander Pope's 18th-century translation "makes the Odyssey into a text about those essentially 18th-century preoccupations: proper manners and good government".
Wilson argues that each translation is as much a product of its own time as it is an ancient text. She continues that "elevated, grandiloquent" language used is many translations is not accurate: all translations are "modern" next to Homer. 18th century English is no closer to Homer than 21st century English is. Therefore, her translation is written in a modern language, which makes it a fast-paced and easy read but also (in my opinion) it takes away some of the charm from it. It reads almost like a 'simplified' synopsis.
She also says she's avoided importing contemporary types of sexism into the text. Other translators have used derogatory language (such as calling the slave women "sluts") and that this labeling isn't present in the original Greek. Since I can't check the original, I'll take her word for it.
She claims to look at the Odyssey through a female lens and she tries hard to make a case for the female characters (specially Penelope). While I appreciate her effort, I still fail to think of the Odyssey as anything but misogynistic. Penelope does not have the agency and assertiveness that Wilson and many others would like to think she has. Trying to force assertiveness on female characters that really are just victimized in a patriarchal context is a bit counterproductive. I'd rather just accept that fact and move on.
Overall, I highly recommend this wonderful edition (with emphasis on the amazing intro). Her translation is readable and simple but I would suggest you also take a quick look at one of those more "elevated" translations if you enjoy some lyricism and eloquent phrases.

The Lattimore Translation
Is the most literary eloquent by far (wich Wilson considers a negative) but I enjoyed reading it a lot because his writing is simply beautiful. It also relatively stays clear of unnecessary sexist or charged language.
- It has an introduction in which Lattimore explores main themes, the narrative, and characters, and also compares the Odyssey with the Iliad.
- It provides line numbers (from the original) and doesn't miss any details.
- It uses the Greek form of the names (i.e. Kirke not Circe).
I loved this translation and I definitely recommend it.

The Fitzgerald Translation
This is the one I enjoyed reading the most. Its language is not as elevated as Lattimore; it's still very eloquent and poetic, but in a very readable and fluid way. It doesn't make the poem too difficult or incomprehensive, but I still like the beauty and lyricism that it provides. Its rhythm is more noticeable than Wilson's attempted iambic pentameter, and on a few occasions (whenever Hermes is speaking and the song of the Sirens), it actually rhymes. This one is my preferred edition for reading the actual poem.
- It has an afterword in which poetic qualities of the original poem are explored and he tries his best to show how he's tried to stay true to the meaning while also paying a lot of attention to rhythm and lyricism. He provides many lines in Greek (which I couldn't read) and elaborates on his examples.
- It uses Greek versions of the names.
- Provides a list of further reading and critical texts about Homer, and has a glossary.
- The only problem with it is that it doesn't provide line numbers. (not a problem for a casual read, but if you're trying to compare translation, the lack of line numbers gets frustrating.)
Still, I definitely recommend it.

The Fagles Translation
This one is easy to read, it's pretty straightforward, but it uses some modern slangs and language that feel a bit out of place. I didn't connect with it that much and it didn't stand out, so I only consulted it on certain interesting phrases.
- It has an introduction by Bernard Knox which is almost a repetition of his introduction to the Iliad but it's still interesting.
- It uses the more familiar Romanized names (i.e. Telemachus and not Telemakhos)
On the plus side:
- It provides line numbers, offers maps, genealogy charts, suggestions on further reading, and a pronunciation glossary which are great.

The Rieu Translation
The only prose version that I consulted. It's fine if you like prose. It's easy to understand and straightforward (but I only consulted it occasionally). It uses what Wilson called unnecessary sexist language.
- It has a nice and long 40-page introduction in which he explores the history of Homeric poems, reading Homer, problems with the Odyssey, themes and individual characters, and also problems and limitations of translation itself. It has a note on its previous 1964 edition, too.
- It uses Romanized names.
- Provides original line numbers within the prose (sometimes mid-sentence).
- Has maps, many endnotes, and a list of suggestions for further reading (similar to Fagles' suggestions).


Final Rating
Five stars for everyone's introductions (especially Wilson's), three stars for the story (compared to Iliad whose rating I upgraded to 5), and 3.5 stars as my final rating. I might come back and round it down in the future.
In the end, I feel like I enjoyed the introductions and commentary more than the story itself. Even though I still like the Iliad more, I certainly loved immersing myself in the world of the Odyssey and learning a lot from it.