An Absent Hero

A Response to Book 1 of the Odyssey, which is attributed to Homer

Odysseus’ absence in Book 1 of The Odyssey means that the reader’s first impression of this hero comes through the words and opinions of other characters, both mortals and immortals. We see that the gods admire this hero, especially Athena, who appreciates his cunning. We also see Odysseus’ wife and son remaining loyal to him after so many years after away from home by rejecting and condemning the suitors even while they continue to uphold guest-host relations by allowing the suitors to remain in their house. Due to Odysseus’ absence, there is a lot of tension and anxiety in his household. The epic raises the question of inheritance with Telemachus; at first, he is unable to step up and assume authority. However, Athena, who goes to Ithaca in disguise in order to motivate Telemachus, gives him advice: “You must not cling to your boyhood any longer—/it’s time you were a man” (1.340-1). Therefore, we come into the epic seeing Ithaca overrun by suitors and Telemachus on the verge on becoming a man. The opening book turns the epic’s focus to Odysseus’ home and his family, which gives the reader a picture of Odysseus’ end goal. We know what Odysseus must face upon his return.

Book 1 emphasizes this idea of the unwelcome hero returning home by telling the story of Agamemnon, who was killed upon his homecoming. The anxieties of the hearth are echoed and amplified by Agamemnon’s story. Clytemnestra’s adultery demonstrates the worst possible outcome for a hero returning home from war. This theme of adultery is paralleled not only by the presence of the suitors but also by Telemachus’ doubting his mother. When Athena comments on the “[u]ncanny[1] resemblance” Telemachus bears to his father (1.241), Telemachus says, “Mother has always told me I’m his son, it’s true,/but I am not so certain” (1.249-50). He expresses anxiety about his mother’s faithfulness; he questions the validity of his inheritance. The story of Agamemnon’s homecoming also introduces the idea of revenge that ‘fixes’ a home. Orestes murders his mother and Aegisthus, her lover, after he discovers they are responsible for his father’s death. In fact, Orestes’ actions effectively end the cycle of violence that has existed in his family for generations. Therefore, bloodshed and revenge become a part of the home, and then the problem becomes how and when to stop that violence. We do not yet see this violence occurring in Odysseus’ home in Book 1, but Agamemnon’s story introduces the idea to us; the story of the unwelcome hero within a scene taking place in Odysseus’ home evokes the same tension and anxiety in the reader that the characters feel. Our anxiety, which stays with us throughout the epic, is heightened due to this dramatic irony, because we know what awaits Odysseus although he does not.

 

---

[1] The word ‘uncanny’ is an interesting choice for the translator to make because it is so closely related to ‘home.’ It means both familiar and unfamiliar, known and unknown, like the home yet simultaneously off or not quite right. The word may apply to Telemachus’ resemblance to his father, but it applies to the state of their home as well.

The Power of Reproduction

A Response to Theogony by Hesiod

In his poem Theogony, Hesiod recounts the origins of the gods and the subsequent struggles between fathers and sons: Kronos against Ouranos and Zeus against Kronos. However, we see that each mother also plays a crucial role in the competition. When both Ouranos and Kronos try to restrict the birth of their offspring, Gaia and Rheia aid and empower their sons—Kronos and Zeus, respectively—to overthrow their fathers. Ironically, the two male immortals are acting based on the anxiety that one day their sons will conquer them and take over the position of ruler of the gods. Zeus’ solution to the prophecy that his son will conquer him is to remove the mother from the childbearing process entirely. Thus, unlike his predecessors, he does not restrict the birth of his child; rather, he takes over the role of delivering the child himself. By removing the mother instead of the child, Zeus successfully ends the male-female reproductive struggle that plagues Ouranos and Kronos. In these struggles, males use physical force to attempt to control reproduction while females regain control through trickery. Zeus ultimately combines these two methods—force and trickery—which means that he possesses both male and female characteristics. This allows him to successfully eliminate the female from reproduction and to end the cycle of son overthrowing father. In the end, it is this duality in Zeus’ nature that makes it possible for him to maintain his kingship over the Olympian gods.

Ouranos, the primordial sky god, is the first to contend with the fear that his child may one day conquer him. He tries to avoid this fate by physically preventing Gaia from giving birth: “Ouranos used to stuff all of his children/Back into a hollow of Earth soon as they were born” (156-7). In sexual reproduction the female naturally carries and births the child without physical interference from the male. Yet, Ouranos defies this and blocks his children from being born by repeatedly forcing himself on Gaia sexually. The father fears his son, but in his attempt to thwart the prophecy, Ouranos underestimates the female’s desire to her bear children:

Vast Earth groaned under the pressure inside,

And then she came up with a plan, a really wicked trick.

She created a new mineral, grey flint, and formed

A huge sickle from it and showed it to her dear boys. (160-4)

Gaia’s urge to bear her children becomes so strong that she devises a “wicked trick” (161), for which she employs the help of Kronos—one of her sons. She even creates the weapon (i.e. the sickle) with which Kronos castrates his father, which means that she not only encourages, but she also enables him to overthrow his father. The castration, of course, leaves Ouranos unable to push Gaia’s children back into her birth canal. She finally fulfills her maternal desire to bear the children inside her. These primordial beings initiate the theme of competition within families, establishing the male as the one who uses physical force to try to ensure his authority and the female as the one who cunningly tricks the male, thereby successfully regaining control of reproduction and passing the kingship onto her son.

We see this pattern repeat itself in a similar conflict over reproduction between the gods of the next generation, Rheia and Kronos. Although Kronos, having learned from his father’s mistake, allows Rheia to give birth to the children, he then immediately consumes them: “And Kronos swallowed them all down as soon as each/Issued from Rheia’s holy womb onto her knees” (463-4). This essentially reverses childbirth; by swallowing the children, he forces them back inside the body. His solution is more sophisticated than his father’s because he does not force them back into the mother’s body. However, this reversal of childbirth still upsets Rheia to the extent that her “grief [becomes] unbearable” (472), which consequently provokes her to act against the children’s father, to trick him. Upon giving birth to Zeus, Rheia hides him away—with Gaia’s assistance—and, “[t]hen she wrapped up a great stone in swaddling clothes/And gave it to Kronos” (488-9). Rheia’s shrewd deception of Kronos allows Zeus to grow up in secret while Kronos believes that he has consumed all of his children until Zeus returns to overthrow his father. The reaction that Rheia has to Kronos’ actions is much milder than Gaia’s reaction to Ouranos’, which parallels the fact that Kronos’ solution to the threat of his children was milder than that of Ouranos’. She does not have him castrated like Gaia does; she merely gives Zeus the opportunity to confront Kronos and free his siblings. Kronos does not force the children back into Rheia (i.e. his violation of her role as the bearer of children is less severe than his father’s), and, consequently, we see that she plays a smaller role in his dethroning. However, Rheia does still employ trickery to liberate her children from Kronos.

When Zeus becomes anxious about the prophecy that a child he has with Metis will defeat him, he creates the most effective solution yet. Zeus does not try to prevent the birth of this child; rather than swallowing his children—like his father does—Zeus swallows Metis, the mother:

But when she was about to deliver the owl-eyed goddess

Athena, Zeus tricked her, gulled her with crafty words,

And stuffed her into his stomach. (893-5).

In this passage, Zeus both “trick[s]” Metis (894) and “stuff[s] her into his stomach” (895); in other words, he utilizes both the female and male means of gaining power. Consequently, Zeus is able to give birth to Athena himself, which means that he has taken control of reproduction—unlike Ouranos and Kronos, who try to inhibit it. Therefore, he successfully circumvents the prophecy that a child “born from Metis” would be capable of overthrowing him (899). Metis also does not attempt to plot any type of revenge against the father of her child as Rheia and Gaia do. In fact, she works with Zeus as opposed to with her child against Zeus: “So she would devise with him good and evil both” (905). By swallowing Metis, he absorbs her cunning and problem-solving powers as well. He increases his own power and ensures that his kingship will be permanent due to this duality of gender that Zeus exhibits.

For three generations, male gods face the threat of competition and eventual defeat by their offspring. Two of those male gods inadvertently bring the prophecy into fruition after they try to hinder the females from producing children. In Ouranos’ case, he makes it physically impossible for Gaia to deliver the children while Kronos tries to reverse the delivery of his children by forcing them into his own body. The desire of the fathers to keep their own children out of the world becomes dangerous because it arouses a strong maternal instinct in Gaia and Rheia. These female immortals then trick the males in order to make it possible for their sons to stop their fathers. Zeus’ solution does not involve keeping his child out of the world; the fact that he combines cunning and physical force makes Zeus’ the most sophisticated solution of the three. He then takes on the role of the female in reproduction and delivers Athena from his own body. By employing both the traditionally female and male methods of gaining control in these familial struggles, Zeus is able to maintain his position among the gods without fear of dethroning.

 

 

WORKS CITED

Hesiod. Works & Days and Theogony. Trans. Stanley Lombardo. Ed. Robert Lamberton. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Co., 1993. 61-90. Print.

Justice for Man

A Response to The Oresteia by Aeschylus

 

In Aeschylus’ trilogy, The Oresteia, he tells the tale of the house of Atreus in which bloody vengeance prevails. The dialogue grapples throughout the trilogy with the roles that Fate and Justice play in their family drama. When the Chorus speaks of Justice—the personified goddess of justice—she is inextricably linked to Fate. However, when Athena gathers a group of men to judge Orestes in “The Eumenides,” justice becomes the choice of men rather than the decision of Fate.

In the first two parts especially (“Agamemnon” and “The Libation Bearers”), the Chorus explains that Fate and Justice work together—that one brings about the other. In lines 312 to 321 of “The Libation Bearers,” the Chorus says:

Powers of destiny, mighty queens of Fate!—

by the will of Zeus your will be done,

press on to the end now,

Justice turns the wheel.

‘Word for word, curse for curse

be born now,’

Justice thunders,

hungry for retribution,

‘stroke for bloody stroke be paid.

The one who acts must suffer.’

Three generations strong the word resounds. (192)

In this passage, the acts of revenge done by Clytaemnestra and Orestes were both brought about by Fate and Justice. Clytaemnestra and Orestes were fated to murder Cassandra and Agamemnon and Aegisthus and Clytaemnestra respectively. Those murders were also considered just. Clytaemnestra sought “retribution” for the murder of Iphigeneia, and Orestes wanted to avenge the murder of his father, Agamemnon. The connection between Fate and Justice cannot be unraveled with regards to these murders (i.e. they were both fated and just).

However, in “The Eumenides” when the burden of doling out justice falls to men, instead of to Justice, the goddess, Fate does not seem to play a role in their decision. Athena declares in lines 484 to 487 of “The Eumenides,” “Too large a matter,/some may think, for mortal men to judge./But by all rights not even I should decide/a case of murder” (252). The goddess of wisdom believes that men—not the gods—ought to decide what they consider just in their society. In line 586 of “The Eumenides” Apollo adds, “You know the rules, now turn them into justice” (256). This means that the judgment of men must be made after deliberation and be based on set laws. They no longer depend upon the arbitrary rulings of the gods; instead, they create their own standards of justice according to reason and logic. The end of The Oresteia trilogy marks a jump from prior cases when they relied on the gods to determine their fates to a more human- and reason-based system. The council set up by Athena implements laws and uses those laws to determine Orestes’ culpability in the murder of Clytaemnestra.

The transformation in Aeschylus’ trilogy from a society reliant on Fate to dole out justice to a system created by men using reason is an essential point in the play. The self-sufficiency and reason in the human system marks a huge leap from their prior dependence on the gods. “Mortal men” (252), as Athena implies, are quite capable of making those kinds of decisions. While man is by no means always correct, the burden of deciding justice gives him more agency and responsibility in society. The decision to create a law-based system of justice was such a good one, in fact, that it—in some form—is still in practice today. Man is responsible for his actions, and when those actions have negative consequences he must be held accountable by other men. If those actions affect the society in which he lives, then, of course, the people who make up that society should decide how to proceed. This seems obvious to people living in a democratic state today, but the move is significant and even doubted in Aeschylus’ drama. It represents more than merely creating laws and governing based on those laws; this change removes some of the power that the gods had previously held and grants that power to man. While it may have been a controversial change in ancient Athens, the notion that men govern themselves based on laws and reason is an important—perhaps even crucial—element in today’s society.

Food for Thought

A Response to The Odyssey, attributed to Homer

Is the journey the reward? In Phaeacia, Odysseus explains the stomach’s influence. It represents the core of the body. The belly is the guiding force, the gut instinct behind a person. Odysseus chooses to follow his gut and consequently survives every obstacle.

The human form is perfectly functional when all of the constituent parts run in harmony. However, if someone neglects certain pieces the results can be fatal. The belly, hidden away, seems insignificant to a person.

The belly’s a shameless dog, there’s nothing worse. Always insisting, pressing, it never lets us forget- destroyed as I am, my heart racked with sadness, sick with anguish, still it keeps demanding, ‘Eat, drink!’ It blots out all the memory of my pain, commanding, ‘Fill me up!’ (186).

It can seize control of the mind if it is left unattended. If the head is the authority, the decision-maker, what does it mean that it can be so easily swayed by the stomach? The mind can temporarily suppress hunger, but inevitably the hunger will rage up and consume the mind. The head determines the fate of the body, but the stomach provides the foundation for it. If a card is pulled from the bottom of the structure, the carefully crafted house of cards collapses.

A sturdy base can hold up the rest of the framework. Odysseus’ most basic desire is to return home. This is his guiding force. The delectable temptation to journey home is too much for Odysseus to ignore. He yearns for the welcome of a familiar hearth that provides comfort. That is the bounty that he longs to devour. When Calypso holds him on the island, he is essentially useless, “weeping there as always” (155). However, after Odysseus “fortified himself” by restarting his pursuit of home he is able to tread water for days a time (155). Treading water implies keeping the head above the water level. He saves his head by following his gut instinct.

The other element of the stomach is, of course, physical. Food is a basic necessity for life. Therefore, when Odysseus does not eat for those days that he is stranded out at sea, he loses his strength. His mind must go into its unconscious state to escape from the pain of his empty belly. Athena sent “sleep in a swift wave delivering him from all his pains and labors” (167). However, she must wake, guide and hide him until he is nourished. “The awesome goddess poured an enchanted mist around him” (180). It requires external influence to overcome the nagging of an empty stomach.

A well-nourished body can endure strife. A neglected belly can become the Achilles’ heel of even the strongest man. It erases memory and reason, reverting man back to a savage state. Odysseus’ epic journey home proves trying. However, isn’t the sweet satisfaction of satiating that hunger rewarding enough to justify the trials? There is little that is more comforting than a full stomach. Odysseus’ ultimate feast is his homecoming.