Iliad

>>9059961
bump

Keep nothing in your mind, experience it as a human.

Throw away your modern day outlook.

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.

>>9060743
>and love

He says all of about once that he is pretty keen on his captured slave wife.

>>9060796
Achilles compares his relationship with Briseis explicitly to the relationship between Menelaus and Helen, which was, after all, what the war is about.

>>9060858

I did not notice that. It must have not been repeating as often as everything else.

>>9060743
An oversimplification, but one with truth to it.
Notably, the nihilistic undertones of Achilleus are ignored.
>>9060858
Even so, he's obviously more concerned by Agamemnon's tyranny than in getting back his Lyrnessan.
What was sex with Briseis like?

Haven't gotten any answers from two other threads so here goes:

Should I skip the introduction? I have the penguin Fagels one and the intro is 65 pages.

>>9061215
Why would you skip it?
Why wouldn't you?

>>9061229
In the starting with the greeks thread they save it until after they've read the iliad. It's long and might not actually be worthwhile. I might appreciate it more only after reading the iliad. I simply don't know and if someone has read it I would just like to know their opinion.

I read slowly so that introduction alone is about a 2 hour time investment that I might prefer to save until later.

>>9061215

The intro the the Fagel's is really fucking good. It basically says what all these other chaps said but well.

>>9061253
Thank you for the reply, I'll definitely read it now.

>>9061256
You could also read it after reading the poem so you have some context for it; if you want to understand the world of Iliad a bit better before reading the poem, read the introduction first. I am assuming, of course, that you more or less know the ‘plot’, if not the specific details.

>>9061725

I found it really nice coming across the bits the intro had banged on about now in context and better for not being isolated.

>>9061246
The intro is good. You don't have to read the whole thing though.
The first 2 pages are a summary, the next 20 are a history or the poem (how it was recorded through time, how homer likely wrote or memorized it and how, etc) then the rest is split into sections (the Trojan war, the Gods, the Trojans, etc.) that talk about the Greek culture, themes and such.
The last 40 pages help you understand the poem as you read it (their culture was quite different than ours). It will have spoilers though.

>>9061779
>>9061725
I'm not worried about spoilers so that's not an issue. It seems like it would be valuable to read it before getting started so I'll most likely end up reading it both before and after. Thanks for helping me with the decision.

>>9059961

Don't read it, yell it. It was written not to be read , but to be spoken.

>>9061033
>An oversimplification
Yes no doubt. It's just what I consider, if I had to pick one, the main theme.

>>9062205
IMO the "main theme' of the Iliad is force.

It's best read once, then read again after studying the background (and foreground) for a bit.

That is, it's cultural context, theorized origins, and its influence.

Many good translations have all of this condensed, which might justify just reading the entire book as it is set-up.
>>9061823
It was not written to be spoken, it was spoken to be spoken, and recorded so that it would live well beyond the poet.

I'm surprised I haven't heard of any attempts to reproduce the way these epics might have been originally told. That is, multi-day performances essentially structured like an opera performance.