Rule #1: Every story has a good guy and a bad guy.
Rule #2: Good wins in the end.
Rule #3: The reader must follow a character on his journey of growth.
These things can be said of every story ever told...except for the Iliad. In this story the reader is left questioning who is good and who is bad. "Whose side should I be on?" We ask. "What should I think when the characters digress instead of progress? Where's the story line?" The Iliad seems to defy the stereotype of a good story. Or does it?
Imagine hearing the great epic of the Iliad from Homer's own lips. Imagine his voice as he begins with he opening line, "Sing, O goddess, the anger of Achilles son of Peleus, that brought countless ills upon the Achaeans." Imagine being enthralled by the drama as Homer recounts events such as the encounter between Achilles and Agamemnon and the banquet of the gods.
The Iliad, this great epic poem, is not an easy thing to read. The story doesn't follow one character, but many. Looking at it too closely, I find myself getting lost in imagining the language and the abrupt changes from scene to scene. Taking a step back, I see a larger-than-life representation of, well, life. The Iliad was meant to enthrall listeners and entertain the people of its time. Like all good stories, it was meant to teach. The key to good storytelling is showing morality so people may learn from it. Homer was a master of creating characters whose perceived ethical qualities were put to the test.
For one example, let me remind you of a scene from book one that illustrates the source of the tension between Agamemnon and Achilles: selfishness. Because of Agamemnon's selfishness and his unwillingness to let Chryseis go, Apollo brings down his wrath on Agamemnon's army.
Another example is exemplified later in the book where we see Agamemnon versus Achilles again. In his desperate need to regain the honor which was lost when he gave up Chryseis, Agamemnon claims Achilles' prize as his own. Achilles, in a rage, turns to the gods for revenge against Agamemnon. In this part of the story rage and revenge play a major role.
In the last part of book one, Achilles has appealed to his mother, Thetis, who has in turn appealed to Jove (Zeus). This turn of events causes great jealousy in Juno (Hera). Already she was jealous of Thetis, and Thetis' appeal to Jove only made it worse. Juno's jealousy cost the lives of many soldiers in the war and is yet another example of human morality.
Homer gives us complicated characters who face complicated issues. He illustrates humanity even at its darkest and he does so in a way that people's own moral character is challenged. Looking at the epic poem as a whole, taking view of the big picture, and throwing the old rules out the window, is how we can see that the Iliad isn't like any other story. This is how we can appreciate it for the story that it is.
Commented on Isabelle and Logan's posts.
Man, what a beautiful view of this epic. It really is wonderful we get to see this incredible detail of humanity yet to us it seems so... foreign. I mean you are absolutely right the emotion is there and so much of it is dwindling on the edge of collapse , I feel as though so much of our society is like that today. At the same time we really don't believe our mistakes and problems are caused by the gods. Viewing this epic as primarily accurate it almost seems like a child blaming his mistakes on an imaginary friend.
ReplyDelete"No mommy, I didn't eat all the cookies. George the neon walrus did."
I digress. It truly is an exciting tale and I find it very interesting to see a culture that seems to predate Jesus. I really wonder what the story would be if it were told accurately by either an atheist, agnostic or christian.
I love this description, you absolutely nailed it. It took me a minute to get used to jumping from scene to scene, but reading this as a narrative of life is incredible. The chaos caused by the way the story was told seems to almost flawlessly convey the chaos of everyday life.
ReplyDelete