A blog for Willamette University's class CLAS 171 "Love and War, Gods and Heroes: Greek and Roman Epic Poetry." Used for discussions of the epics of Homer, Hesiod, Vergil, and Lucan.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Iliad, Books 20-24
What do you personally think you'll carry away
from having read the Iliad? (response & 2 comments on classmates' posts due Tues., 2/14/12, before class)
I think I will have a greater respect for the Greeks and their legends. I really enjoyed the Iliad and its method of story telling. While I think that Helen was a rather idiotic reason for a war, their sense of honor and courage makes for a great story. It is really cool to see how years of tales passed from mouth to mouth can be put to words in such a fashion that it has lived on till now. After reading the book, it's clear why with such a representation of the heroes of both sides.
I would have to agree that the Iliad really made me appreciate Greek mythology more. It really is a fascinating subject that I'd love to learn more about. The Iliad really changed my view of how the God's were portrayed in Greek culture, but it's still fascinating none the less.
I agree, it is amazing that this story was passed on from generations through word of mouth for so long. However, it makes me wonder what the original version of the story was like. Having it be transferred orally, each listener may interpret it differently and tell the story differently. I wonder if the original story depicted both sides as heroic.
I too enjoyed reading a story that focused on the Gods and the mortals together. Before beginning the Iliad, I had learned about the different Gods that came from the Greek culture, and what their powers were but I had never read something that discussed them in action. It made me feel like I was placed back in time, and could further understand why Greeks valued the Gods and how they perceived them.
I agree that it is amazing how a story so ancient can be translated and read so well today, so many years later. Having read the Iliad and seen Homer's writing techniques, it is clear why this story survived through time.
I enjoyed how the poem was centered about the conflict between Achilles and Hector. While we see that Achilles is the greater fighter of the two, I believe that an argument can be made in which Hector is the greater man. Shortly before his death, Hector tries to make an agreement with Achilles where they will both respect eachother's corpses. Achilles, however, refuses to agree with this arrangement. He attempts to disgrace Hector's body over the next 12 days, but ultimately the gods prevent his disgracing of the body. Ultimately, Zeus forces Achilles to return Hector's body to Priam. In this way, Hector is glorified as having superior morals to Achilles, and could be seen as the better moral man. Another example of Hector's great morality, is the fact that he charges Achilles soon after he learns the gods are against him. This act of heroism depicts the type of man a Greek audience would respect.
I feel like your right in thinking that the Iliad is centered around the conflict that Achilles faces in Hector. Why else would the story end so abruptly with a war continuing? I think its because Achilles has not only defeated Hector but also his own internal battle.
Although I agree that much of the book was in fact centered around Hector and Achilles, I thought the abrupt ending that wrapped up both their character progression was a bit odd because there was a leftover feeling that much about all the other thousands of soldiers needed to still be added on to.
I don't like the idea of Hector being the "better moral man." Zeus made Achilles give back the body out of pure decency and to help Achilles too mend his own heart. The interaction between Priam and him served as a mutual healing process I think. I think Hector was a huge coward, and he was so not better than Achiles.
I really enjoyed the Iliad, but was a bit disappointed with the ending. I really thought the war was going to come to an end. I guess I really didn't remember this novel as well as I thought I did. With that being said it truly helped me get back into the groove of reading an epic poem. The reading was much easier than I had expected, and the story better than I remembered. After 614 pages I think I can truly say that for the most part I have homers tendencies down, and when you start to pick up on all the little things it really makes for a more interesting read. Overall what I think I'll take away from the Iliad is a new/old vision of reading and story telling that I forgot was out there.
I think that the ambiguous ending might be perfect for the kind of story telling of that time. They could easily add to the story, different heroes and different battles.
I think an ending like in the movie may have been more of an...epic ending. It makes me wonder how the whole Trojan horse idea came about, and where was that told in the whole thing?
I was also rather dissapointed by the ending. I dislike how the novel centers so much on Achilles' character progression, even going so far as to forshadow his death, and yet we never reach this foreshadowing.It is a shame that the poem doesn't describe Achilles' death.
The ending did seem to be sort of lacking, having foreshadowed and built up to Achilles' battle and inevitable death, but never showing it. However, I feel Homer did a nice job with the ending, leaving room for another story to describe Achilles' death.
I think we, as human beings, particularly in western culture, have developed the art of storytelling quite a bit since the days of the ancient Greeks. Not to say that their particular way of telling stories is undeveloped or primitive, I simply mean that we have developed storytelling to reflect and reinforce our society's values. Perhaps the idea of 'climactic endings' was a more recent invention (within the last 1,200 years or so).
Yeah it did end super abruptly, without much closer. Well I guess there was closer but only for Hector. I was disappointed because this whole time I was waiting for the Trojan Horse episode, and I didn't realize that it was not going to happen. After the death of Hector, the book just kinda plummeted and got less and less interesting. But I suppose books with good sequels end in this sort of way.
For me, I enjoyed the story of the clash of two powerful societies and how the heroes of each, as well as the gods, had flaws that caused all of them trouble. It was interesting to see how Achilles, the greatest warrior ever, stubbornly refused to fight because he felt disrespected by the mighty Agamemnon who refused to apologize. Also, the gods had flaws, like Athena and Hera hated Paris because he chose to accept Aphrodite's gift. They used their opinions to try and persuade other gods to be on their side, and in the case of Hera with Zeus, even bewitch to get their way. It was very entertaining to me to see how Homer portrayed the heroes of the war as men who fought in a war and compared the gods to have human characteristics, instead of having the greeks and gods and immaculate beings.
I would have to say that I was a bit shocked at Achilles refusal to fight. He was made to be the highlight of the Iliad and he really wasn't in it a whole lot. But when he finally entered the battle it was worth the wait. It was safe to say Achilles didn't disappoint, and so Homer's build up was more than justified.
Having only heard of the Iliad I was really interested in the character flaws they showed. The gods had just as many flaws as men even though they are supposed to be the divine incarnations of perfection. It also gives you an strange view into their religion, these fickle beings were what the worshiped and believe controlled the fate of their lives.
I agree. It kind of seems like they were just more powerful incarnations of regular Greeks, but that may be for dramatic effect mostly to add deeper plot on Homers part?
I feel like the use of the gods was Homers way adding to the story and deepening it but also just a tool for lengthening the story. I also found it interesting that a lot of the god interactions are almost like an excuse for why something didn't happen.
I found the idea of the gods being controlled somewhat by their emotions to be very entertaining as well, since usually we would think of gods to be wise, rational, and giving.
Well the first and foremost thing Ill take away is definately that Achilles really was up to all the hype, I mean he killed so many people that Homer didnt even bother writing down a list of names like he did with everyone else. Thats a lot of people. But thats mostly because that was the most recent memory of the book. Outside of that I think I take away a whole new understanding of how deeply engrained Greek religion was into everyday life
I dont know what to think of Achilles' fighting prowess. So many of his battles were influenced very heavily by the gods, either through direct intervenation, or his magical armor, that I wonder how great a man he actually was. It is true that he lived up to the hype of destroying the Trojan army however.
Honestly, I don't really care all that much for Achilles. Not only does he have the help of the gods, like Jeremy mentioned, but he is also a huge whiner. He doesn't act like the prototypical warrior at all. He disrespects his greatest enemy by dragging his corpse around, refuses to fight because his woman was taken from him, and then he weeps like an infant when Patroclus dies. I even liked Teucer more than Achilles. Archers > Achilles
I agree, Achilles was shown to be one bad dude. I also agree with you saying how important religion was to the greeks. It was cool to see how the gods were seen by men and their actions with each other. It was as if they were just supernatural men, who had quarrels with each other just as men did.
I feel that what I will take away from the Iliad is a better understanding of the Greek culture at that time. The Iliad goes into much more detail about certain things such as battle scenes and family trees than any movie that could be made today but never had a true end as we would think of it now. I think it shows how the culture is much different from ours we live in today because I would assume that Greeks that would have read this would be content with the ending the way it is but we all (or at least I) wonder at the end of the book why Homer didn't truly "finish" the story. So, what I feel I have learned is more about Homer's attention to detail being the most important thing when he wrote.
I too have come away with an appreciation for Homer's ability to use imagery and detail. Even with that many pages and so many battle scenes, he still seemed to find new ways of describing the same action of fighting/killing individuals. There was a wonderful balance of gruesome terminology mixed with beautiful, lyrical phrases.
After reading the Iliad, I have a new appreciation for epic poetry. Before this, the Iliad and books like it, had a negative connotation in my eyes. If it weren't for a friend of mine to have persuaded me to take this class, I probably would have never understood what these types of books were all about. I think the greatest thing that I will take away personally from reading the Iliad is that war and battle scenes can actually be quite beautiful. I had mentioned in a blog post before that Homer's ability to keep me intrigued from scene to scene with his beautiful and lyrical imagery added to my appreciation of this book. Another thing that I will take away is a more thorough understanding of what life was like back then. Maybe it is just because humans tend to romanticize previous historical periods, but I initially believed that the culture then was pretty carefree and peaceful, at least for the common man who wasn't part of the army. Homer's Iliad shows how dramatic and gruesome war was during that time and how it effected everyone in the town, causing them to live in constant fear.
I also walked into the class with some preconceived notions. I anticipated very arduous reading assignments due to what I figured would be very complex prose, but things turned out to be the opposite.
I agree. I expected to be just as bored as the first time I read it, and maybe even more because I thought it would be old news at this point. Thankfully I was wrong. I realize now that I missed about 90% of the really interesting stuff that gives the book depth when I read it by myself.
I think what I will take away from the Iliad is a better understanding of the Greek poetry structure and a better understanding of how the God's can be used as a tool to explain the actions of men, as well as show the extreme side of human emotions. The poetry was structured in such a way that it became predictable in a friendly, familiar way. The use of the Gods was also an example of this, and I always looked forward to reading the quick side stories about the gods and their overly dramatic emotions and actions and how they then were used to progress the story forward when it could have gotten stuck in a rut.
I am also have a better understanding about the role of the gods in epic poetry now. I never imagined that they were really only plot devices and alternative ways to express human reasoning/capriciousness. I think The Iliad also tells us about how ancient Greeks viewed relations amongst family, which is evidenced by the portrayal of the gods.
The first thing I have to get off of my chest is the fact that I found the duel between Achilles and Hector to be very anti-climactic. You have these two great warriors that could be seen as near equals and then, out of nowhere, Homer downplays the heroism of Hector. Initially, Hector runs away scared for his life. Then, only after being tricked by Athena, he turns around only to be killed without much of a fight. I was hoping for an epic duel to the death and I just didn't get it. What did I walk away with? A desire to read more epics, particularly Homeric ones. Personally, I'm betting that the Iliad will be my least favorite of the epics. I felt that it was very drawn out and explained very little about the nature of the Greek culture. I'm excited to read more about the gods and their mythic deeds. The same also goes for the heroes. Oh, and I liked how Ajax got screwed over in everyone of the contests. Does anyone honestly believe that Odysseus would stand a chance against Ajax in a wrestling match?
I feel the say way about the final battle. It was very anti-climatic and a huge let down for me personally. It's like this is the fight that we have been waiting for the whole book, Hector and Achilles have finally met on the battlefield. Then it ends so quickly without really even a fight, total let down.
Well with this being the second time that I have read the book, I feel like this time I have a better understanding of the Iliad and the way it was written. Especial with the writing style of Homer that I did not really pick up on the first time I read it in high school. Other than just understanding the text better, I really liked reading it a second time I found it just as interesting as the first time I read it, I love the story and how the Gods interact with Heroes through out to set up a dynamic story line. I guess I am just excited to read more epics
I think the most important thing I will take away from this book is a better understanding of the epic and of the epic form. I am currently in a medieval literature course and I have enjoyed Beowulf much more because I can recognize conventions from the Iliad. The importance of description and descriptors for instance is something I have not paid much attention to until now, but paying Quentin to it has been really useful.
Personally, I think the main thing that I will carry away from having read the Iliad is a greater appreciation and understanding of Homer's writing techniques. Prior to this class, epic poetry seemed to me like a short stories told in a strange ancient way which were stretched and drawn out to thousands of lines, with extra unnecessary (in my mind) details added only for the sake of making them longer. Now, having discussed the Iliad and read through it carefully, I have a greater understanding of the reasoning behind why Homer tells the story this way. Techniques such as starting the story from the middle (in medias res) to the beginning and end, why many of the descriptions of characters are so detailed, and the extremely detailed imagery using similes and extended metaphors. Overall, I feel that having read the Iliad, I carry away a greater appreciation for epic poetry as a whole.
Essentially, what I have taken away from having The Iliad is a better understanding of ancient Greek culture and lifestyle. This text speaks volumes about how Greeks conceptualized the world around them, as well as the variety of relationships that they carried out with fellow Greeks. It tells us about what they thought to be important, such as lineage, what 'courage' was supposed to look like, how prayer was to be carried out, etc... If I had tried to read The Iliad on my own, without the guidance of Professor Knorr, I wouldn't have picked up on half of the intricacies of Greek culture that can be found in the text. Additionally, I have gained a new appreciation for epic poetry and the evolution of written story telling.
I think I'll carry away a greater understanding appreeciation of Greek culture and the Iliad itself. I had read this epic before, but there's a marked difference between just reading and actually study a piece of literature. I'm going to walk away having studied it, and with all the knowledge of Greek history and society that makes The Iliad more than just an interesting read.
The Iliad was my first experience with epic poetry. I definitely was surprised at how much I overall enjoyed reading it. It seemed like I wasn't reading it for a class; it seemed like leisure reading. I am excited to be able to understand allusions from the Iliad in different movies and shows. And I am also glad to be introduced to Greek Mythology. My interest in the Greek gods has always been present, but in reading the Iliad I got a better understanding of them and I hope to keep learning. I learned about epic style and Homer, and a great deal about Mycenine times, but that also had to do with the slide shows.
After reading the Iliad I have a much greater respect for the ancient Greeks and their culture. The Iliad is no simple story, it is a complex, multifaceted novel. It perfectly embodies the word "epic". The symbolism present in every single line is indicative of the complexity of their culture, religion and custom. I am also very curious about Homer, was he a real person? I think that their pagan religion is also fascinating. I would like to compare their religion to modern monotheistic religions on a deeper scale.
John Mackay Feb 14, 9:11 AM Original Response: I first read the story of the Iliad in 5th grade. The book was called, The Black Ships Before Troy, this was the same year that the movie Troy came out in theaters. The book told the story in a much more kid friendly order and started with Paris judging the goddesses and ended with the fall of Troy. I loved the book and was slightly apprehensive that the original story didn't follow the same structure. After having read the Iliad in its unabridged original form, I have gained an appreciation for the complexity of the Ancient Greek civilization. The story of the Iliad was more gripping and complex than many of the "important" texts I'm required to read today. Though the ark of the story lacks, the gods antics and the honor with which the ancients apparently fought was enough to be extremely engaging. I'll take away a renewed interest in Greek mythology and also an appreciation for Epic Literature
Response to Students: @Jeremy: I completely agree that Achilles was the weaker man. One can sympathize for him however as he lost his lover. I was fascinated by Hector's depiction as he was a Trojan. I imagine the Greeks would unquestionably cheer for Achilles, but they must have realized his compromised morals and felt some sympathy for Hector. I believe this is the true genius of the Iliad, the main character's (Achilles) ambiguity.
@Will R: I agree that the Gods had some of the most entertaining passages in the novel, even when Hephaestus or Zeus would go on a tangent it was either interesting or hilarious. I've thought that it's really disappointing that we don't still believe in the Greek Gods. I know I could not convince myself they exist, but with their human flaws, and incredible powers, it would be a highly entertaining religion. Unfortunately, I'm not religious.
I think I will have a greater respect for the Greeks and their legends. I really enjoyed the Iliad and its method of story telling. While I think that Helen was a rather idiotic reason for a war, their sense of honor and courage makes for a great story. It is really cool to see how years of tales passed from mouth to mouth can be put to words in such a fashion that it has lived on till now. After reading the book, it's clear why with such a representation of the heroes of both sides.
ReplyDeleteI would have to agree that the Iliad really made me appreciate Greek mythology more. It really is a fascinating subject that I'd love to learn more about. The Iliad really changed my view of how the God's were portrayed in Greek culture, but it's still fascinating none the less.
DeleteI agree, it is amazing that this story was passed on from generations through word of mouth for so long. However, it makes me wonder what the original version of the story was like. Having it be transferred orally, each listener may interpret it differently and tell the story differently. I wonder if the original story depicted both sides as heroic.
DeleteI too enjoyed reading a story that focused on the Gods and the mortals together. Before beginning the Iliad, I had learned about the different Gods that came from the Greek culture, and what their powers were but I had never read something that discussed them in action. It made me feel like I was placed back in time, and could further understand why Greeks valued the Gods and how they perceived them.
DeleteI agree that it is amazing how a story so ancient can be translated and read so well today, so many years later. Having read the Iliad and seen Homer's writing techniques, it is clear why this story survived through time.
DeleteI enjoyed how the poem was centered about the conflict between Achilles and Hector. While we see that Achilles is the greater fighter of the two, I believe that an argument can be made in which Hector is the greater man. Shortly before his death, Hector tries to make an agreement with Achilles where they will both respect eachother's corpses. Achilles, however, refuses to agree with this arrangement. He attempts to disgrace Hector's body over the next 12 days, but ultimately the gods prevent his disgracing of the body. Ultimately, Zeus forces Achilles to return Hector's body to Priam. In this way, Hector is glorified as having superior morals to Achilles, and could be seen as the better moral man. Another example of Hector's great morality, is the fact that he charges Achilles soon after he learns the gods are against him. This act of heroism depicts the type of man a Greek audience would respect.
ReplyDeleteI feel like your right in thinking that the Iliad is centered around the conflict that Achilles faces in Hector. Why else would the story end so abruptly with a war continuing? I think its because Achilles has not only defeated Hector but also his own internal battle.
DeleteAlthough I agree that much of the book was in fact centered around Hector and Achilles, I thought the abrupt ending that wrapped up both their character progression was a bit odd because there was a leftover feeling that much about all the other thousands of soldiers needed to still be added on to.
DeleteI don't like the idea of Hector being the "better moral man." Zeus made Achilles give back the body out of pure decency and to help Achilles too mend his own heart. The interaction between Priam and him served as a mutual healing process I think. I think Hector was a huge coward, and he was so not better than Achiles.
DeleteI really enjoyed the Iliad, but was a bit disappointed with the ending. I really thought the war was going to come to an end. I guess I really didn't remember this novel as well as I thought I did. With that being said it truly helped me get back into the groove of reading an epic poem. The reading was much easier than I had expected, and the story better than I remembered. After 614 pages I think I can truly say that for the most part I have homers tendencies down, and when you start to pick up on all the little things it really makes for a more interesting read. Overall what I think I'll take away from the Iliad is a new/old vision of reading and story telling that I forgot was out there.
ReplyDeleteI think that the ambiguous ending might be perfect for the kind of story telling of that time. They could easily add to the story, different heroes and different battles.
DeleteI think an ending like in the movie may have been more of an...epic ending. It makes me wonder how the whole Trojan horse idea came about, and where was that told in the whole thing?
DeleteI was also rather dissapointed by the ending. I dislike how the novel centers so much on Achilles' character progression, even going so far as to forshadow his death, and yet we never reach this foreshadowing.It is a shame that the poem doesn't describe Achilles' death.
DeleteThe ending did seem to be sort of lacking, having foreshadowed and built up to Achilles' battle and inevitable death, but never showing it. However, I feel Homer did a nice job with the ending, leaving room for another story to describe Achilles' death.
DeleteI think we, as human beings, particularly in western culture, have developed the art of storytelling quite a bit since the days of the ancient Greeks. Not to say that their particular way of telling stories is undeveloped or primitive, I simply mean that we have developed storytelling to reflect and reinforce our society's values. Perhaps the idea of 'climactic endings' was a more recent invention (within the last 1,200 years or so).
DeleteYeah it did end super abruptly, without much closer. Well I guess there was closer but only for Hector. I was disappointed because this whole time I was waiting for the Trojan Horse episode, and I didn't realize that it was not going to happen. After the death of Hector, the book just kinda plummeted and got less and less interesting. But I suppose books with good sequels end in this sort of way.
DeleteFor me, I enjoyed the story of the clash of two powerful societies and how the heroes of each, as well as the gods, had flaws that caused all of them trouble. It was interesting to see how Achilles, the greatest warrior ever, stubbornly refused to fight because he felt disrespected by the mighty Agamemnon who refused to apologize. Also, the gods had flaws, like Athena and Hera hated Paris because he chose to accept Aphrodite's gift. They used their opinions to try and persuade other gods to be on their side, and in the case of Hera with Zeus, even bewitch to get their way. It was very entertaining to me to see how Homer portrayed the heroes of the war as men who fought in a war and compared the gods to have human characteristics, instead of having the greeks and gods and immaculate beings.
ReplyDeleteI would have to say that I was a bit shocked at Achilles refusal to fight. He was made to be the highlight of the Iliad and he really wasn't in it a whole lot. But when he finally entered the battle it was worth the wait. It was safe to say Achilles didn't disappoint, and so Homer's build up was more than justified.
DeleteHaving only heard of the Iliad I was really interested in the character flaws they showed. The gods had just as many flaws as men even though they are supposed to be the divine incarnations of perfection. It also gives you an strange view into their religion, these fickle beings were what the worshiped and believe controlled the fate of their lives.
DeleteI agree. It kind of seems like they were just more powerful incarnations of regular Greeks, but that may be for dramatic effect mostly to add deeper plot on Homers part?
DeleteI feel like the use of the gods was Homers way adding to the story and deepening it but also just a tool for lengthening the story. I also found it interesting that a lot of the god interactions are almost like an excuse for why something didn't happen.
DeleteI found the idea of the gods being controlled somewhat by their emotions to be very entertaining as well, since usually we would think of gods to be wise, rational, and giving.
DeleteWell the first and foremost thing Ill take away is definately that Achilles really was up to all the hype, I mean he killed so many people that Homer didnt even bother writing down a list of names like he did with everyone else. Thats a lot of people. But thats mostly because that was the most recent memory of the book. Outside of that I think I take away a whole new understanding of how deeply engrained Greek religion was into everyday life
ReplyDeleteI dont know what to think of Achilles' fighting prowess. So many of his battles were influenced very heavily by the gods, either through direct intervenation, or his magical armor, that I wonder how great a man he actually was. It is true that he lived up to the hype of destroying the Trojan army however.
DeleteHonestly, I don't really care all that much for Achilles. Not only does he have the help of the gods, like Jeremy mentioned, but he is also a huge whiner. He doesn't act like the prototypical warrior at all. He disrespects his greatest enemy by dragging his corpse around, refuses to fight because his woman was taken from him, and then he weeps like an infant when Patroclus dies. I even liked Teucer more than Achilles. Archers > Achilles
DeleteI agree, Achilles was shown to be one bad dude. I also agree with you saying how important religion was to the greeks. It was cool to see how the gods were seen by men and their actions with each other. It was as if they were just supernatural men, who had quarrels with each other just as men did.
DeleteI feel that what I will take away from the Iliad is a better understanding of the Greek culture at that time. The Iliad goes into much more detail about certain things such as battle scenes and family trees than any movie that could be made today but never had a true end as we would think of it now. I think it shows how the culture is much different from ours we live in today because I would assume that Greeks that would have read this would be content with the ending the way it is but we all (or at least I) wonder at the end of the book why Homer didn't truly "finish" the story. So, what I feel I have learned is more about Homer's attention to detail being the most important thing when he wrote.
ReplyDeleteI too have come away with an appreciation for Homer's ability to use imagery and detail. Even with that many pages and so many battle scenes, he still seemed to find new ways of describing the same action of fighting/killing individuals. There was a wonderful balance of gruesome terminology mixed with beautiful, lyrical phrases.
DeleteAfter reading the Iliad, I have a new appreciation for epic poetry. Before this, the Iliad and books like it, had a negative connotation in my eyes. If it weren't for a friend of mine to have persuaded me to take this class, I probably would have never understood what these types of books were all about. I think the greatest thing that I will take away personally from reading the Iliad is that war and battle scenes can actually be quite beautiful. I had mentioned in a blog post before that Homer's ability to keep me intrigued from scene to scene with his beautiful and lyrical imagery added to my appreciation of this book.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing that I will take away is a more thorough understanding of what life was like back then. Maybe it is just because humans tend to romanticize previous historical periods, but I initially believed that the culture then was pretty carefree and peaceful, at least for the common man who wasn't part of the army. Homer's Iliad shows how dramatic and gruesome war was during that time and how it effected everyone in the town, causing them to live in constant fear.
I also walked into the class with some preconceived notions. I anticipated very arduous reading assignments due to what I figured would be very complex prose, but things turned out to be the opposite.
DeleteI agree. I expected to be just as bored as the first time I read it, and maybe even more because I thought it would be old news at this point. Thankfully I was wrong. I realize now that I missed about 90% of the really interesting stuff that gives the book depth when I read it by myself.
DeleteI think what I will take away from the Iliad is a better understanding of the Greek poetry structure and a better understanding of how the God's can be used as a tool to explain the actions of men, as well as show the extreme side of human emotions. The poetry was structured in such a way that it became predictable in a friendly, familiar way. The use of the Gods was also an example of this, and I always looked forward to reading the quick side stories about the gods and their overly dramatic emotions and actions and how they then were used to progress the story forward when it could have gotten stuck in a rut.
ReplyDeleteI am also have a better understanding about the role of the gods in epic poetry now. I never imagined that they were really only plot devices and alternative ways to express human reasoning/capriciousness. I think The Iliad also tells us about how ancient Greeks viewed relations amongst family, which is evidenced by the portrayal of the gods.
DeleteThe first thing I have to get off of my chest is the fact that I found the duel between Achilles and Hector to be very anti-climactic. You have these two great warriors that could be seen as near equals and then, out of nowhere, Homer downplays the heroism of Hector. Initially, Hector runs away scared for his life. Then, only after being tricked by Athena, he turns around only to be killed without much of a fight. I was hoping for an epic duel to the death and I just didn't get it. What did I walk away with? A desire to read more epics, particularly Homeric ones. Personally, I'm betting that the Iliad will be my least favorite of the epics. I felt that it was very drawn out and explained very little about the nature of the Greek culture. I'm excited to read more about the gods and their mythic deeds. The same also goes for the heroes. Oh, and I liked how Ajax got screwed over in everyone of the contests. Does anyone honestly believe that Odysseus would stand a chance against Ajax in a wrestling match?
ReplyDeleteI feel the say way about the final battle. It was very anti-climatic and a huge let down for me personally. It's like this is the fight that we have been waiting for the whole book, Hector and Achilles have finally met on the battlefield. Then it ends so quickly without really even a fight, total let down.
DeleteWell with this being the second time that I have read the book, I feel like this time I have a better understanding of the Iliad and the way it was written. Especial with the writing style of Homer that I did not really pick up on the first time I read it in high school. Other than just understanding the text better, I really liked reading it a second time I found it just as interesting as the first time I read it, I love the story and how the Gods interact with Heroes through out to set up a dynamic story line. I guess I am just excited to read more epics
ReplyDeleteI think the most important thing I will take away from this book is a better understanding of the epic and of the epic form. I am currently in a medieval literature course and I have enjoyed Beowulf much more because I can recognize conventions from the Iliad. The importance of description and descriptors for instance is something I have not paid much attention to until now, but paying Quentin to it has been really useful.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I'm glad we studied the technicalities of epic verse- that was something I didn't know before this class.
DeletePersonally, I think the main thing that I will carry away from having read the Iliad is a greater appreciation and understanding of Homer's writing techniques. Prior to this class, epic poetry seemed to me like a short stories told in a strange ancient way which were stretched and drawn out to thousands of lines, with extra unnecessary (in my mind) details added only for the sake of making them longer. Now, having discussed the Iliad and read through it carefully, I have a greater understanding of the reasoning behind why Homer tells the story this way. Techniques such as starting the story from the middle (in medias res) to the beginning and end, why many of the descriptions of characters are so detailed, and the extremely detailed imagery using similes and extended metaphors. Overall, I feel that having read the Iliad, I carry away a greater appreciation for epic poetry as a whole.
ReplyDeleteEssentially, what I have taken away from having The Iliad is a better understanding of ancient Greek culture and lifestyle. This text speaks volumes about how Greeks conceptualized the world around them, as well as the variety of relationships that they carried out with fellow Greeks. It tells us about what they thought to be important, such as lineage, what 'courage' was supposed to look like, how prayer was to be carried out, etc... If I had tried to read The Iliad on my own, without the guidance of Professor Knorr, I wouldn't have picked up on half of the intricacies of Greek culture that can be found in the text. Additionally, I have gained a new appreciation for epic poetry and the evolution of written story telling.
ReplyDeleteI think I'll carry away a greater understanding appreeciation of Greek culture and the Iliad itself. I had read this epic before, but there's a marked difference between just reading and actually study a piece of literature. I'm going to walk away having studied it, and with all the knowledge of Greek history and society that makes The Iliad more than just an interesting read.
ReplyDeleteThe Iliad was my first experience with epic poetry. I definitely was surprised at how much I overall enjoyed reading it. It seemed like I wasn't reading it for a class; it seemed like leisure reading. I am excited to be able to understand allusions from the Iliad in different movies and shows. And I am also glad to be introduced to Greek Mythology. My interest in the Greek gods has always been present, but in reading the Iliad I got a better understanding of them and I hope to keep learning. I learned about epic style and Homer, and a great deal about Mycenine times, but that also had to do with the slide shows.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the Iliad I have a much greater respect for the ancient Greeks and their culture. The Iliad is no simple story, it is a complex, multifaceted novel. It perfectly embodies the word "epic". The symbolism present in every single line is indicative of the complexity of their culture, religion and custom. I am also very curious about Homer, was he a real person? I think that their pagan religion is also fascinating. I would like to compare their religion to modern monotheistic religions on a deeper scale.
ReplyDeleteJohn Mackay Feb 14, 9:11 AM
ReplyDeleteOriginal Response:
I first read the story of the Iliad in 5th grade. The book was called, The Black Ships Before Troy, this was the same year that the movie Troy came out in theaters. The book told the story in a much more kid friendly order and started with Paris judging the goddesses and ended with the fall of Troy. I loved the book and was slightly apprehensive that the original story didn't follow the same structure. After having read the Iliad in its unabridged original form, I have gained an appreciation for the complexity of the Ancient Greek civilization. The story of the Iliad was more gripping and complex than many of the "important" texts I'm required to read today. Though the ark of the story lacks, the gods antics and the honor with which the ancients apparently fought was enough to be extremely engaging. I'll take away a renewed interest in Greek mythology and also an appreciation for Epic Literature
Response to Students:
@Jeremy: I completely agree that Achilles was the weaker man. One can sympathize for him however as he lost his lover. I was fascinated by Hector's depiction as he was a Trojan. I imagine the Greeks would unquestionably cheer for Achilles, but they must have realized his compromised morals and felt some sympathy for Hector. I believe this is the true genius of the Iliad, the main character's (Achilles) ambiguity.
@Will R: I agree that the Gods had some of the most entertaining passages in the novel, even when Hephaestus or Zeus would go on a tangent it was either interesting or hilarious. I've thought that it's really disappointing that we don't still believe in the Greek Gods. I know I could not convince myself they exist, but with their human flaws, and incredible powers, it would be a highly entertaining religion. Unfortunately, I'm not religious.