Tumgik
#and it goes that hard partly bc its enormous influence does mean that it operates on like what i understand to be the rules of narrative
it’s like, the iliad is the story of the rage of achilles, and what does achilles do with his rage? he gets his best friend killed by sitting on the sidelines out of spite; he kills the most decent man in the entire bajillion line poem, then desecrates his body while his father watches. that’s what the story is: sing to me of the rage of achilles, and every ugly thing that comes with it. and he’s a hero, of course he’s a hero in the eyes of the story, and i think it is actually much less valuable to say no, someone like this can’t be a hero, than it is to say, well maybe he is and maybe just maybe the person or people composing these lines and the people reciting them and listening to them three thousand years ago, maybe they had a view of heroism that understood the costs. bernard knox’s introduction to the fagles translation points out that in the century we believe the homeric epics to have been composed, athens - athens! not military cult sparta! athens! the fuckers that invented democracy! - spent more years at war than not. more years at war than not, in a century where the technology of war was not yet as it is now, where a country could go to war and leave much of its populace functionally untouched by violence. maybe it means something important, actually, that achilles is hero and monster both.
17 notes · View notes