I just started reading the Iliad for the first time ever. I remember

Listen to it told. The way it it was meant to be.

It sounds like you don't understand the context of the Trojan War nor understand the Greek culture.

>>8617455
Perhaps I don't. Any suggestions on how to rectify that?

>>8617464
Read a book on Greek Mythology, Ancient Greek Culture, and about the background of The Trojan War.

>>8617487
Such as?

Well, I mean, it gets a lot more interesting very quickly. You're like a book or two away from an important fight and then a whole bunch of interesting shit starts happening.

The beginning books are mostly just exposition and establishing the characters. It's no different from any other story, honestly.

>>8617428
It isn't dudes arguing if they should battle. Its great warrior Achilles and King Agamemnon having a power struggle that sets the scene for the losses to come. Also, this all takes place toward the end of the Trojan war. You need to be a more active reader.

>>8617428

Honestly man I'm not even trying to be one of those faggot trolls but it's great poetry from an ancient culture and it doesn't stand up in translation.

Homer is virtually a prehistoric poet. His world and his archaic language, and hence his mode of thinking, was completely alien to ours. I'll just say that Homer is like the Rig Veda of the west and like the Rig Veda it's way too distant to be translatable.

>>8617515
See, that's what I mean. They're both alien to me, in that I know a bit about their legend but it's the first time I'm actually "seeing" them in action.

"A power struggle", more like treating women like objects. I know, times have changed, but I still find it repulsive.

Yes, I know when it takes place. It could very well be at the beginning of the war, it doesn't change anything to me.

>>8617428

Well, have you ever woken up with the absolute knowledge that today you had to face your death on account of someone who sacrificed his own preteen daughter to get a nice crossing, while your enemy will kill you just to find a way to protect their wives and children from your rapin, pillagin horde?

>>8617524
I know man, but cut me some slack. I'm not going to learn ancient Greek just to understand the Iliad. Hell, I barely have time to read it translated, what with work and the wife. Still, even in translation I do find some passages quite beautiful.

>>8617536
I know what you're trying to say, but what I've read so far just doesn't convey that feeling. I can understand Achilles' frustration at some point (especially when he's like "We came all the way here because of you, and yet you steal shit from me?"), but it's nothing as passionate as you say.

>>8617524
This is definitely true, but unless you're a classics scholar I'd say you're not trying to read it for the beauty of the prose. I'd say thematically however the Iliad stands up very well today, better than the Odyssey imo

One of the great things about Homer, and the ancient Greeks in general, is that the humanity still shines through.

>>8617544
The Iliad and Odyssey exalt the nobility of Honor.
The very first word of the Iliad is “RAGE.” The “RAGE” of Achilles when his honor is violated and his rightful prize and love is taken from him by his very own commander.


Right here we see Man versus State, as Achilles is the superior warrior, and as he takes all the risks, he ought get the reward. That is the Natural Law of Zeus, for after Achilles Natural Rights are violated and Achilles quits, Zeus sees to it that the Greeks begin to lose, as Zeus’s will was done.


Long before Atlas Shrugged in Rand’s cheap novel, Achilles quit the Greek army.


Homer shows that women who honor their commitments, like Penelope, lead to happy endings. Women who disregard their commitments, like Helen, lead to War.


Achilles quits for the sake of Honor, refuses to return when offered millions times more prizes, arguing that once honor is taken away, mere money/prizes cannot buy it back. He also reasons that all the wealth in the world is not worth him losing his life in an arena where his honor was taken away. When offered honors and awards, Achilles states, “I receive my honor from Zeus, not from corrupt Kings."


And too Achilles returns to fight for Honor, so as to avenge the death of his friend Patroculus, knowing full well he will die.


Simply put, Achilles is a man who lives and dies not for mere prizes, nor perks, nor tenure, nor titles, nor money, but for honor, and honor alone.


A few hundred years later, Socrates would invoke Achilles while facing death at his own trial. Socrates was offered perks and prizes and life if he would only recant his teachings that “Virtue does not come from money, but money and every lasting good of man derives form virtue.”


But then Socrates asked, “Would Achilles back down from battle if bribed by physical wealth?” Socrates reasoned he would be dishonoring the Great Achilles if he ever recanted his teachings.

>>8617538

I don't know what to tell you, some of it is still beautiful in translation, but there's no sense in complaining that it's not all brilliant. Dante's not entirely brilliant in any translation, either. I've never read a translation of Milton but I bet he doesn't stand up so great, either.

It's grand as can be in the original. It's written in a meter that doesn't exist in modern European languages based on alterations of long and short syllables

>>8617561
Now, this is the kind of answer I was looking for. Yes, I guess I didn't see it like that. I was admittedly too baffled by how they treated women like objects to see a bit further from that and appreciate the theme.

>>8617576
Why did all of Greece under Agamemnon invade Troy for one girl? Why did the families of these men support them in doing so, even the women? Was this woman that beautiful? Yes, it is that in part. There is the saying of the woman who launched a thousand ships. But in going after this woman and the cowardly Paris who stole her, the men were going to reclaim society. It was not that the men were horny and all marveled the beauty of this woman. It was that these men upheld their values so much, that they wouldn’t even let this woman, who had beauty blessed by a “goddess” get away with doing something so heinous as breaking a wedding vow and running away with another man to another country.

And we see this again when Achilles refuses to fight. The Achaens had vows that a certain maiden, as a spoil of war would go to Achilles. But King Agamemnon broke this, and thus Achilles refused to bend to his will and retreated to his own tent. This is showing a people who held on to honor, respect, justice, even at the cost of defying the most beautiful woman in the world (and the mischievous deities that supported her) as well as kings. In both cases what was theirs was reclaimed.

>>8617561

>Right here we see Man versus State

The State didn't exist in Homer's day.

>Homer shows that women who honor their commitments, like Penelope

Yeah except for Andromache and all the other honorable Trojan women.

>>8617572
I don't know, I've read Shakespeare translated to Spanish and still find it beautiful. But I get what you're saying. Hearing it sung like it was meant to must've been mesmerizing.

>>8617580
Andromache and the other women never started a war either

>>8617576
you just want everything spoonfed to you, dont you?

>>8617579
>Why did all of Greece under Agamemnon invade Troy for one girl? Why did the families of these men support them in doing so, even the women?

Actually they were bound by sacred oath to Menelaus. When it was time for Helen to marry all of the kings and princes of Greece came for her hand and because of the fear for quarrel over her they had to swear an oath to defend the chosen husband in any quarell. The suitors swore their oaths and Helen married Menelaus.So when Paris took Helen, They invoked the oath and everybody had to come to Menelaus' aid

For anyone who is starting out reading the Iliad and has previously only read Harry Potter/Hunger Games books (or whatever shit kids read these days) I recommend listing to the Teaching Company's Great Courses Lecture alongside of it, maybe as something to do when you're playing Pokemon Go. It's pretty easy to find a torrent of and it's quite helpful in explaining a lot of the context of the poem. Alternately read the introduction/notes of whatever copy you've acquired.
In the end it is really very rewarding.

>>8617580
>The State didn't exist in Homer's day.

So silly to say when Agamemnon represents the State as commander of the army.

>>8617576
I hate you.

>>8617428
Dude, you haven't even read a single battle scene yet. Give it time. The first few chapters are laying the foundations for the drama of the absent Achilles and then his magnificent, bloody return.

>>8617497
You know, I bitch a lot about how often shitty "charts" threads get started, usually with the Greeks chart, but maybe those threads actually aren't being made often enough if you are here and have literally no idea where to begin with the Greeks.

Does nobody pay attention? Or are you willfully sabotaging your own attempt at the Greeks? Literally every one of the 3 Greek charts posted here every day answer your question.

>>8617524
The Rig Veda is a religious text consisting of hymns to the gods. Homer is a human drama. The fact that you're even comparing them means you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

War is universal. So is death. These are imminent human themes in the 21st century. How the fuck is the final chapter of the Iliad too distant to be translated? Have you even read the poem?

>>8617606
No, but I've seen way too many people making up deep interpretations of stuff that was really plain simple. I was a bit afraid this would be the case, too.

>>8617800
It's a bit rude to assume all I've ever read is kiddy stuff. I have not.

>>8617827
Why?

>>8617840
Indeed you're right, but I thought those were meant for people who somehow had no idea at all of what Greeks were about. Like, not knowing who Zeus is.

>>8617576
kill yourself

>>8619432
Do you know who Zeus is? Who is his father? His childs? His endgame?

>>8619491
Why?

>>8619500
Yes to all. Also, it's "children", not "childs".

>>8617428
Remember that it is poetry, and so a translation will not be able to translate every aspect of the poem at once. Literal translations may lack poetic beauty, poetic translations may lack accuracy.

I'd suggest buying a 2-3 different versions (Lattimore, Fagles, Fitzgerald to name a few) and reading the introductory material to get a better understanding. The introduction in the Fagles translation written by Bernard Knox really helped me to appreciate the work. It is nearly 100 pages itself. I have a Lattimore translation, and he wrote his own introduction and notes which are quite good and offer different points.

>>8619432
>but I thought those were meant for people who somehow had no idea at all of what Greeks were about.

I mean, they are, but they also go deeper than that. Hamilton's mythology isn't just a list of who's in the pantheon, and Strauss' Trojan War isn't a wiki article on the Iliad. If you want to "get" the greeks, at least read some more in depth mythology, and just spend some more time in the era getting a grasp on their values. That may be more effort than some want to put in, but that's the choice for you to make.

>>8617428
there's some hilarious shit in the Illiad.
don't overlook the humour.

>>8617428
Have you considered a study guide?

>>8617497
Get the Teaching Company's lectures by Elizabeth Vandiver. Don't let yourself get more than one lecture ahead of your reading.

How does Samuel Butler's translation of the Iliad and Odyssey hold up?

>>8619565
>>8620069
These all sound like great suggestions, will look into them. Thanks guys!

>>8621197
From the samples I've read, it isn't the worst and it isn't the best. I'd happily read it if I had it already but I'd buy a different one if I didn't.

>>8621197
Decent technical accuracy.

But fails for being a prose translation of poetic works.

>>8617428
The best bit is the long list of boats. If you get to that and still don't like it, perhaps it's not for you.

Women are property. That is the natural state of things, and how they have been dealt with throughout most of history. Only in times of great abundance and prolonged civilization are women given property rights, voting rights and stuff like that. For 90% of the past women were property. They will be property again as soon as things get tough again.

>>8624024
Jokes on you. Get a map and adopt a maximalist mindset and the list of ships actually is the best part.

>>8617428
Start with the Greeks

>>8624051
Maybe if I get round to reading Lattimore and Fitzgerald.

I liked the book (Fagles), but that was slow part for me.

>>8617576
>I was admittedly too baffled by how they treated women like objects
Kill yourself, insufferable faggot.

>>8624047
This is true, especially in the context of war.

I mean, have none of you people ever read the Bible? The Bible is FULL of rape and abduction of enemy women; conquering armies would take the non-virgins as sex slaves and the virgins as wives, whether the women wanted it or not. Throughout history this has been a common practice, and until very recently nobody ever questioned the ethics of this; it was considered the rights of the victor.

Yes, it's horrible and brutal and slightly arousing, but I think that's just the nature of men. The Y chromosome is why we have laws.

>>8617572
>written in a meter that doesn't exist in modern European languages
You are stupid.

>>8617576
>baffled
Wut. I can understand you finding it shitty, but why would it baffle you? Men treating women as objects has been the default position of most civilisations.

>>8617428
>>8617464
Stop being a women is your best bet Paris.

File: 1457125436821.jpg (462KB, 1050x1080px) Image search: [Google]

462KB, 1050x1080px

>>8617576
kill thyself

>>8617428
nigga you're literally two books in. read the whole thing first

>>8617576
Why don't you go back to plebbit? You can't see past the modern brainwashing, you have 0 ability to understand historical context, just stop reading.

>>8617803

He does not "represent the state". He's one king among many, the richest and commanding king, but not an Emperor or what have you. What would happen to a British captain if he obeyed a general? He'd be shot after a court martial. Not so for Homer's heroes They are each of them a basileus.

>>8627163
He's someone exerting his power unjustly

>>8627163
>>8627391
Agamemnon represents a state in formation, not a full one.
As a king over many peoples, we see that he fails by overusing the power he rightfully holds.
Priam, on the other hand, fails as a king by being too lenient and weak, allowing Paris and his enriched party to remain secure and maintain the war- when, as Hector the tragically dutiful man notes, by all rights he should be stoned.

>>8627981
>>8627391
Like the other anon said "state" is a completely anachronistic term when applied to Archaic Greece.

Agamemnon only has "power" over the other heroes insofar as all the suitors of Helen swore of their own volition to defend the right of the winning suitor. Nothing is stopping any of the heroes going home if they want, save their honour.

Yes, there is some general military command, but that's no more a "state" than a football team is.

>Agamemnon represents the state

what the fuck am I reading?

is this truly what /lit/ has become?

That big Ayn Rand rant is the worst post in the history of /lit/, good grief.

>>8628631
There was one sentence about Rand. It was more of a jab than a rant.

>>8628055
Agamemnon explicitly expresses his rank and reinforces that there is a hierarchy of which he is at the top in his bout with Achilles. It's not just this vow regarding Hellen that compels the Argives to fight.

>>8617428
>So far I've made it up to the part where Agamemnon and his men decide to march against Troy for the first time (having being deceived by Zeus).
Stopped reading there. The war is 9 years in, in the Iliad. You clearly understand nothing.

>>8625366
>Yes, it's horrible and brutal and slightly arousing,
I lol'd

>>8617428
Iliad ultimately is about free will. Achilleus chooses between a short life and glory or a long life and family. Many believe that Briseis and Patrokles are plot devices but we cant be sure how much emphasis to put on Achilleus
saying he loves them and it is his grief for them that motivates his choice. Also movement from Shame, an external motivator to guilt. self determinism basically. However Iliad only focuses on last year of 10 yr war. U gotta read up o that shit to fully appreciate

>>8628601
>literally reapportions the wealth of and conscripts heroes

>>8628973
i swear achilles doesnt even die in the illiad.

>>8629268
He doesn't

File: 38048460_p0.png (730KB, 834x1201px) Image search: [Google]

730KB, 834x1201px

>>8629268
That's kind of the point.

The very format of the story mirrors the actual substance of the plot, as in the beginning and the end of your life are inevitable and largely irrelevant, what matters is how you choose to live knowing this, in the significant middle.

>>8629448
Similarly, the subject matter of the first words and last words of the book are significant, and those chapters mirror one another too.

Bravo Homer.

>>8629468
And if you pay attention during the story you'll notice this sort of thing is done a lot. For example, the response of Achilles upon hearing of the death of Patroklus mirrors the death of Euphorbus who essentially killed him before Hector KS-ed him. There's a staggering amount of commentary in Homer's epic, which is why OP is truly a faggot.

>>8629448

That's not the point. What are you, 14?

File: 5fea6d88gw1f18jefbt6oj20om0s7tc3.jpg (59KB, 440x504px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 440x504px

>>8629509
What do you mean? Explain yourself.

>>8617428
Which translation are you reading?

>>8629268
The death and funeral of Hector is symbolically Achilles. He says this himself.

>>8628863
What? Agamemnon expresses his rank to justify his taking of Achilles' loot. That has nothing to do with compelling anyone to fight. Achilles is a king in his own right and when he says he wants to go home no-one tries to compel him, the Argives send an embassy to *convince* him to stay.

>>8629963
>. Achilles is a king in his own right and when he says he wants to go home no-one tries to compel him, the Argives send an embassy to *convince* him to stay.
Do you think if anyone else tried this it'd swing so easily?

Of course Agamemmnon let him quit the war effort, for the same reason he didn't personally take Berseis but instead sent 2 lackeys. No-one will actually fuck with Achilles.

>>8631334
>Do you think if anyone else tried this it'd swing so easily?

Yes. They are under no compulsion to stay. If they were, someone would have mentioned this to Achilles.

>>8631560
The point is Achilles cannot be compelled by force so it's pointless to try. I imagine had any other king tried to give Agamemnon that sort of rot he'd have them taught a lesson. He was the commander of the unified host after all.

>>8631665
This is circular reasoning.

>>8617524
This is a solid answer. I want to complement it though.

We often think of the Illad and Odyssey as they are in book form. We read a translation and enjoy it as a glimpse of what it was. We assume that it was written by some great author.

But this is the wrong perspective. It started as an oral tradition, in which it grew and evolved as the great story which everyone knew. In oral traditions, you know the general story but every single time it is told, it is slightly different from the last time. This is why the greeks and romans could often talk about the same content in numerous plays, but present it in entirely different ways which told the story from an entirely different perspective. It is completely lost on us today because of the written nature of our traditions.

>>8629268
The point isn't that he died. Achilles, in his god-like giftedness and excellence was a force of nature. Michael Chapman often uses the analogy of a flood or deluge to describe him. He is almost a metaphor for divine intervention at the same time. He is superior as a divine being to what is the natural being of Hector.

But I personally think his importance is highlighted by Hector. Hector is the apex of what manhood is. He isn't a god, nor a force of nature. He is strong, proud, resourceful, cunning, intelligence and the apex of nobility. The small section in book 6 where he speaks to Andromache (her name literally translates to "Man fighter", but in context it is what he is fighting for and what gives him courage) who carries his son Astyanax (literally translates to "Protector of the City", in that he will one day be like his father and protect his city) gives all the meaning to what masculinity and fatherhood is. Priam was once like Hector, and represents what men should be like in old age, as guides and judges who support their sons. It gives meaning and purpose to men in all ages of their lives.

That is why the death of Achilles is irrelevant, but the death of Hector is vital to the plot. To quote Julius Evola, Myth is the means by which the traditional world expressed the ultimate significance of being.

>>8617524
This is a solid answer. I want to complement it though.

We often think of the Illad and Odyssey as they are in book form. We read a translation and enjoy it as a glimpse of what it was. We assume that it was written by some great author.

But this is the wrong perspective. It started as an oral tradition, in which it grew and evolved as the great story which everyone knew. In oral traditions, you know the general story but every single time it is told, it is slightly different from the last time. This is why the greeks and romans could often talk about the same content in numerous plays, but present it in entirely different ways which told the story from an entirely different perspective. It is completely lost on us today because of the written nature of our traditions.

>>8629268
The point isn't that he died. Achilles in his god-like giftedness and excellence was a force of nature. Michael Chapman often uses the analogy of a flood or deluge to describe him. He is almost a metaphor for divine intervention at the same time. He is superior as a divine being to what is the natural being of Hector.

But I personally think his importance is highlighted by Hector. Hector is the apex of what manhood is. He isn't a god, nor a force of nature. He is strong, proud, resourceful, cunning, intelligent and the apex of nobility. The small section in book 6 where he speaks to Andromache (her name literally translates to "Man fighter", but in context it is what he is fighting for and what gives him courage) who carries his son Astyanax (literally translates to "Protector of the City", in that he will one day be like his father and protect his city) gives all the meaning to what masculinity and fatherhood is. Priam was once like Hector, and represents what men should be like in old age, as guides and judges who support their sons. It gives meaning and purpose to men in all ages of their lives.

That is why the death of Achilles is irrelevant, but the death of Hector is vital to the plot. To quote Julius Evola, Myth is the means by which the traditional world expressed the ultimate significance of being.

Accidental grammatical/spelling mistakes, tired as fuck.

>>8632328
>We often think of the Illad and Odyssey as they are in book form. We read a translation and enjoy it as a glimpse of what it was. We assume that it was written by some great author.
>But this is the wrong perspective. It started as an oral tradition, in which it grew and evolved as the great story which everyone knew.

I'm sure anyone who has read the Iliad knows this.

>>8617535

>treating women as objects
You've already lost

>>8632343
STOP GIVING AWAY PLOT DETAILS FAG

SPOLERS EXIST FOR A REASON

If anyone finds a decent torrent or better yet direct download of those Great Courses on the Iliad, I'd be incredibly grateful.