Can you help me to understand The Iliad?

[mo2]

I can read it. But I'm not sure I *understand* it. I even found a study guide online, but all it does is tell me in simplified terms what happened in each section. Is there something I can read (book, article, web page?) that will explain to me not just what happened but the *significance* of what happened? I don't mean to sound dense, but I haven't had too much exposure to the classics.

[regentrude]

I can read it. But I'm not sure I *understand* it. I even found a study guide online, but all it does is tell me in simplified terms what happened in each section. Is there something I can read (book, article, web page?) that will explain to me not just what happened but the *significance* of what happened? I don't mean to sound dense, but I haven't had too much exposure to the classics.

 

The best resource I can recommend is Dr. Elizabeth Vandiver's course on the Iliad from the Teaching Company. She does an excellent job putting the Iliad in cultural and historical context and explaining to a modern audience all the things that seem incongruous and strange for somebody coming from a modern perspective shaped by a Judeo-Christian value system.

The lectures are very pleasant to listen to and not too difficult; I enjoyed them with my 13 y/o.

[mo2]

The best resource I can recommend is Dr. Elizabeth Vandiver's course on the Iliad from the Teaching Company. She does an excellent job putting the Iliad in cultural and historical context and explaining to a modern audience all the things that seem incongruous and strange for somebody coming from a modern perspective shaped by a Judeo-Christian value system.

The lectures are very pleasant to listen to and not too difficult; I enjoyed them with my 13 y/o.

 

Thank you. Should I finish The Iliad completely before I listen to the lectures, or is it okay to listen as I go?

[regentrude]

Thank you. Should I finish The Iliad completely before I listen to the lectures, or is it okay to listen as I go?

 

Listen as you go is fine. She also summarizes the portions she discusses.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I can read it. But I'm not sure I *understand* it. I even found a study guide online, but all it does is tell me in simplified terms what happened in each section. Is there something I can read (book, article, web page?) that will explain to me not just what happened but the *significance* of what happened? I don't mean to sound dense, but I haven't had too much exposure to the classics.

 

Find a copy of Who Killed Homer? by Hanson and Heath. It has a wonderful chapter covering the Illiad (and another one on The Odyssey).

 

In a nutshell it is about rage, ego, selfishness and selflessness. A contrast between the hero of the Greeks - Achilles, who would rather sit on his shield than go out and fight with his brothers in arms. Achilles is pouting because the woman he took as war booty has in turn been taken from him by Agammemnon. (The movie version has some large amounts of nudity and violence, but I think casting Brad Pitt as Achilles was INSPIRED.)

 

Meanwhile the hero of the Trojans leaves his wife and son to go out and fight day after day in a war of his brother's making, even while said brother hides out within the walls of the city.

 

There is lesson after lesson of what constitutes noble manliness and what is craven selfishness.

 

Hope this helps

[regentrude]

Find a copy of Who Killed Homer? by Hanson and Heath. It has a wonderful chapter covering the Illiad (and another one on The Odyssey).

 

In a nutshell it is about rage, ego, selfishness and selflessness. A contrast between the hero of the Greeks - Achilles, who would rather sit on his shield than go out and fight with his brothers in arms. Achilles is pouting because the woman he took as war booty has in turn been taken from him by Agammemnon. (The movie version has some large amounts of nudity and violence, but I think casting Brad Pitt as Achilles was INSPIRED.)

 

Meanwhile the hero of the Trojans leaves his wife and son to go out and fight day after day in a war of his brother's making, even while said brother hides out within the walls of the city.

 

There is lesson after lesson of what constitutes noble manliness and what is craven selfishness.

 

Hope this helps

 

No, I think this is exactly the way one should not look at it - because you are viewing this through the lens of the JudeoChristian value system. Achilles is not "pouting" - the loss of the woman is an unspeakable offense in a culture that has a value system based on Kleos and Time. It is his honor that has been lost by losing the reward for his bravery (the girl). It is his reputation that has been tainted.

 

Vandiver explains this much better than I can. But we can NOT judge the heros' actions in the light of our value system, because it is fundamentally different from that of the time. I mean, sure, we can twist the interpretation to fit our Christian values - but that is not true to Homer.

[mo2]

Find a copy of Who Killed Homer? by Hanson and Heath. It has a wonderful chapter covering the Illiad (and another one on The Odyssey).

 

In a nutshell it is about rage, ego, selfishness and selflessness. A contrast between the hero of the Greeks - Achilles, who would rather sit on his shield than go out and fight with his brothers in arms. Achilles is pouting because the woman he took as war booty has in turn been taken from him by Agammemnon. (The movie version has some large amounts of nudity and violence, but I think casting Brad Pitt as Achilles was INSPIRED.)

 

Meanwhile the hero of the Trojans leaves his wife and son to go out and fight day after day in a war of his brother's making, even while said brother hides out within the walls of the city.

 

There is lesson after lesson of what constitutes noble manliness and what is craven selfishness.

 

Hope this helps

 

No, I think this is exactly the way one should not look at it - because you are viewing this through the lens of the JudeoChristian value system. Achilles is not "pouting" - the loss of the woman is an unspeakable offense in a culture that has a value system based on Kleos and Time. It is his honor that has been lost by losing the reward for his bravery (the girl). It is his reputation that has been tainted.

 

Vandiver explains this much better than I can. But we can NOT judge the heros' actions in the light of our value system, because it is fundamentally different from that of the time. I mean, sure, we can twist the interpretation to fit our Christian values - but that is not true to Homer.

 

This is fascinating.

[regentrude]

This is fascinating.

You might also want to search the archives on these boards. Ester Maria has frequently addressed these issues.

[Bluegoat]

There is a lot going on in the Illiad. I tend to think of it in terms of the sort of questions we might ask about it: Is Agamemnon a good king? Is Priam a good king? What makes Achilles a hero? Why did Paris choose Aphrodite (outside the text), and why did she go with him? How does their association with Aphrodite exemplified in the text? Why are the Gods at war? Why are particular Gods associated with particular sides of the conflict or individuals?

 

I think the biggest question might be, why does fate decree that Troy, the beloved city of Zeus, must fall? Why is it beloved of Zeus, and what do the Greeks have, or not have, that makes them successful?

[mo2]

(The movie version has some large amounts of nudity and violence, but I think casting Brad Pitt as Achilles was INSPIRED.)

 

 

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I'm making a note to watch it when I finish the book.

[Bluegoat]

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I'm making a note to watch it when I finish the book.

 

FWIW, I thought the movie stunk - it ripped the heart out of the story.

[RobinL in Canada]

The best resource I can recommend is Dr. Elizabeth Vandiver's course on the Iliad from the Teaching Company. She does an excellent job putting the Iliad in cultural and historical context and explaining to a modern audience all the things that seem incongruous and strange for somebody coming from a modern perspective shaped by a Judeo-Christian value system.

The lectures are very pleasant to listen to and not too difficult; I enjoyed them with my 13 y/o.

 

I completely agree with the value of the Vandiver lectures. I also loved her more recent Mythology course. Unfortunately, they are not on sale right now,but they are worth waiting for (Teaching Co puts all of its products on deep discount sale at various times throughout the year; sign up for their email list and you'll know when to buy.)

[mo2]

FWIW, I thought the movie stunk - it ripped the heart out of the story.

 

I'll still watch it. If I like it, great; if not, well, it will just reinforce my "the book is always better than the movie" stance. :lol:

 

I completely agree with the value of the Vandiver lectures. I also loved her more recent Mythology course. Unfortunately, they are not on sale right now,but they are worth waiting for (Teaching Co puts all of its products on deep discount sale at various times throughout the year; sign up for their email list and you'll know when to buy.)

 

Yes, I'll definitely be waiting for the sale! It seems like it's been awhile since I've seen one advertised...Maybe that means I won't have to wait very long.

[RobinL in Canada]

No, I think this is exactly the way one should not look at it - because you are viewing this through the lens of the JudeoChristian value system. Achilles is not "pouting" - the loss of the woman is an unspeakable offense in a culture that has a value system based on Kleos and Time. It is his honor that has been lost by losing the reward for his bravery (the girl). It is his reputation that has been tainted.

 

Vandiver explains this much better than I can. But we can NOT judge the heros' actions in the light of our value system, because it is fundamentally different from that of the time. I mean, sure, we can twist the interpretation to fit our Christian values - but that is not true to Homer.

 

There's a difference between judging an ancient literary work from one's own cultural/ worldview perspective and comparing the value systems of the two different worldviews. Yes, Homer should be read, understood, interpreted in light of the values and mores of his culture, not ours; however, one can still legitimately ask how that value system differs from, for eg, the Judeo-Christian worldview, and why.

[regentrude]

Yes, I'll definitely be waiting for the sale! It seems like it's been awhile since I've seen one advertised...Maybe that means I won't have to wait very long.

 

Or get them used. Go to amazon and search for "Vandiver Iliad".

[mjbucks1]

We love the Vandiver lectures as well!!! And yes, you can COMPARE the diffeerent values systems (we use TOG and do this frequently with all cultures), but you can not JUDGE Achilles behavior by our standards. One must look at the values of the Greeks in order to interpret Achilles behavior. The Vandiver lectures explain this quite well :).

[MtnTeaching]

Or get them used. Go to amazon and search for "Vandiver Iliad".

 

My ds also LOVED the Vandiver Iliad. Of course, I bought it before I realized that my local library had the entire set on DVD.

 

Check your library!

[Julie in MN]

No, I think this is exactly the way one should not look at it - because you are viewing this through the lens of the JudeoChristian value system. Achilles is not "pouting" - the loss of the woman is an unspeakable offense in a culture that has a value system based on Kleos and Time. It is his honor that has been lost by losing the reward for his bravery (the girl). It is his reputation that has been tainted.

 

Vandiver explains this much better than I can. But we can NOT judge the heros' actions in the light of our value system, because it is fundamentally different from that of the time. I mean, sure, we can twist the interpretation to fit our Christian values - but that is not true to Homer.

I agree that Vandiver talks about this. But I don't totally agree that she's saying all of Achilles actions are justified, even to an ancient Greek. That's just not the way I heard what she was saying. Despite her explaining the concept of Kleos, *I* felt Vandiver clearly would agree that Paris was portrayed very warmly with family that the listener could identify with, in contrast to Achilles filling the river with blood. Interesting that folks have heard the same lectures differently.

 

one can still legitimately ask how that value system differs from, for eg, the Judeo-Christian worldview, and why.

:iagree:

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I understand what you mean about putting our value systems onto the story. At the same time I would argue that Agamemnon thought he was protecting his own honor by taking the girl. Achilles loses his best friend who goes out in his armor. The Funeral Games give more examples of honor above all leading to conflict and death.

 

I'll confess to never reading is from start to finish but I'm not sure Achilles is held up as the height of virtue.

 

Pout was probably too strong a word.

[mumto2]

I think the lectures sound fascinating. I will look for them.

 

I also found a series of e mails from about.com titled introduction to Troy. Really helpful for learning about the main characters in The Iliad. The have a series for the Oddessy too.

[Candid]

Thank you. Should I finish The Iliad completely before I listen to the lectures, or is it okay to listen as I go?

 

I would almost suggest that you listen first and then read. Since you've already started this work you can't do that, but if you decide to buy other courses (and audio downloads of vandiver get pretty cheap when they are on sale) I'd go with listen first then read.

[Finnella]

As far as trying to understand the book, steer clear of the movie. It's a fine movie just so long as you don't think of it as The Iliad. It's not. It totally removes the gods from the story, leading to some stupid plot twists. Sure, Paris might fall in love with the wrong woman, but would his older brother and father really go to war over it so Paris could be happy? Totally unbelievable. And it makes Achilles overly sympathetic in a modern heroic kind of way. And he's simply not. It was kind of cute that they threw in Aeneas at the end, but he's not in the poem.

 

What made a man or an action heroic was completely different from our standards. But it does raise interesting issues. What is heroic? What is honorable? I do think of Achilles as pouting in his tent, but it was completely understandable from his perspective. How much control do we have over our fates? Certainly in The Iliad, the gods are constantly manipulating things. How much free will did each hero have? Was Achilles acting as a Greek hero should when he was dragging Hector's body around behind his chariot? There's not necessarily a right answer to each question, but I do think it's important to first ask the questions from the perspective of the ancient Greek value system before trying to impose modern values.

 

It's late, so I hope at least some of that made sense.

[HodgesSchool]

One of the issues I really love in the Iliad is the conflict between responsibility and revenge--or honor and passion--or however one looks at it. Achilles comes to the war because it is his job to be a great soldier. He pulls out because he is not being respected. He reenters because his beloved friend Patroclus is killed. It is love and anger that pulls him in. Emotions trump duty here. And that plays with what we think of as traditional Greek ideas.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

It looks like the Vandiver Illiad and Odyssey sets are on sale at TC. I'm seeing $19.90 each or $39.90 for two.

 

ETA: I'm not sure if it's good more than once, but the coupon code WB43 was good for 15% off the purchase of two or more courses.

Edited April 28, 2012 by Sebastian (a lady)

[mo2]

It looks like the Vandiver Illiad and Odyssey sets are on sale at TC. I'm seeing $19.90 each or $39.90 for two.

 

ETA: I'm not sure if it's good more than once, but the coupon code WB43 was good for 15% off the purchase of two or more courses.

 

Hey, thanks! This was totally not on sale when I checked 2 days ago. Is there any reason I should spring for the DVD, or will audio suffice?

[regentrude]

Hey, thanks! This was totally not on sale when I checked 2 days ago. Is there any reason I should spring for the DVD, or will audio suffice?

 

we listened to audio and that worked just fine. We don't have time and patience to sit and watch video lectures; we prefer to be able to listen in the car.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

we listened to audio and that worked just fine. We don't have time and patience to sit and watch video lectures; we prefer to be able to listen in the car.

 

I'm with you on the audio preference. Unless the course has some fantastic visual component (like the art courses), I get so distracted trying to focus on the talking professor. I find myself staring at the brick wall "outside" the window and wondering if anyone ever walks by "between classes".

 

Unless the course is DVD only, CD is a much better option for us. (And I like CD over download, because it gives me something to pass along or sell or donate to the library.)

[Julie in MN]

I listen to a lot of TTC audios in the car, but as for "teaching" materials, I far prefer DVD. My son just tunes out too much on audio, and we don't have time to listen 3-4 times like I do in the car. Even though TTC lecturers aren't usually "doing" much, he's more prone to feel like he's in the classroom and should look at the speaker and listen to what they are saying :)

Julie

[Miss Marple]

No, I think this is exactly the way one should not look at it - because you are viewing this through the lens of the JudeoChristian value system. Achilles is not "pouting" - the loss of the woman is an unspeakable offense in a culture that has a value system based on Kleos and Time. It is his honor that has been lost by losing the reward for his bravery (the girl). It is his reputation that has been tainted.

 

Vandiver explains this much better than I can. But we can NOT judge the heros' actions in the light of our value system, because it is fundamentally different from that of the time. I mean, sure, we can twist the interpretation to fit our Christian values - but that is not true to Homer.

 

:iagree: When I heard Vandiver's explanation of the Greek idea of "honor" I came away with a whole new appreciation for Achille's behavior. It also made me realize that there are so many things we think we understand but probably do not because we don't understand the historical contexts. I'm reading the Holy Scriptures with a whole new outlook.

[mo2]

Thanks everyone. I'm looking forward to the lectures!

[Nan in Mass]

No, I think this is exactly the way one should not look at it - because you are viewing this through the lens of the JudeoChristian value system. Achilles is not "pouting" - the loss of the woman is an unspeakable offense in a culture that has a value system based on Kleos and Time. It is his honor that has been lost by losing the reward for his bravery (the girl). It is his reputation that has been tainted.

 

Vandiver explains this much better than I can. But we can NOT judge the heros' actions in the light of our value system, because it is fundamentally different from that of the time. I mean, sure, we can twist the interpretation to fit our Christian values - but that is not true to Homer.

 

I think you need to understand this in order for The Odyssey to make sense. Otherwise, you won't enjoy the story because at the very beginning you will write Odysseus off as just being stereotypically and stupid-male when he gives in to his men's pleadings to take an enormous detour on the way home to do some pillaging and collect some booty, because they haven't manage to hang on to anything they had "aquired" during the war.

 

I wearied of the to-modern-eyes pirate mentality of some of the characters in The Iliad (when in doubt, rape and pillage and get drunk), but I did understand that the book was about honour. As a mother and wife, my priorities are a bit different. To me, it seemed a man's book, a guide to what behavior is acceptable (in other words, honourable), what is not, and why, exploring some of the messy real-life consequences of trying to be good and honourable in a world where your honour and other people's desires and honour (including the gods) collide. As such, I thought it was important for my sons to read. And reread. As a woman in a traditional woman's role, I look at things a bit differently, but I got the feeling that the women in The Iliad did, too. That doesn't mean that I (and they) did not understand the men's perspective.

 

Nan

Edited April 30, 2012 by Nan in Mass

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I really wasn't trying to put a Christian spin onto the book. I wasn't expecting Achilles to turn the other cheek.

 

But I am intrigued by the idea of what is honorable and what are the limits that honor puts onto a warrior.

 

I think that Homer was playing with this a bit too. Agamemnon (in going to war, in slaying Iphegenia, in taking the girl from Achilles) was following his sense of honor. Achilles was following his in refusing to fight until Briseis was returned to him.

 

And I think Patrocles was making a comment on honor when he took up Achilles' armor and went to fight (honor toward brothers in arms is higher than honor over war prizes perhaps? Is this too much of a stretch?). I don't see that Achilles' actions after the death of Patrocles show that he thought Patrocles had been without honor.

 

And then you have Paris vs Ajax and Ajax vs Achilles. Are both sides acting within the bounds of honor all of the time? Did the audience understand these pairings as simply the clash that happens when two people's sense of honor clash? Or is one in each pair being held up as behaving more nobly.

 

I haven't listened to Vandiver yet (though you've all convinced me to order it for summer fun). But I can't help wonder if another theme word is obligation rather than honor. I think perhaps Odysseus felt obliged to go to war, and Ajax felt obliged to fight for Troy (in a war of his brother's making). And perhaps Priam felt obliged to fight because of a sense of guilt and obligation to the son he'd tried to dispose of.

 

I can't help wonder what the effect of public performance would have had on the sense conveyed. Would the tone or expressions or gestures of the bard have undermined the words that he was speaking? (Think of the song Master of the House in Les Miz; much is said that is taken back through tone and glance.)

 

Perhaps part of it is that the listeners would have likely gone into battle themselves. They would have had the experience of feeling victorious, defeated, fearful and bloodlusting. Maybe the different characters help personify the different emotions and responses to the war experience.

[Nan in Mass]

But doesn't one feel obliged to do things for one's honour? I'm not sure I understand the distinction?

[Sebastian (a lady)]

But doesn't one feel obliged to do things for one's honour? I'm not sure I understand the distinction?

 

I have an idea in my head, but let me mull on it while I teach spelling and diagraming. My 4th grader has been waiting so patiently. . .

[Nan in Mass]

I have an idea in my head, but let me mull on it while I teach spelling and diagraming. My 4th grader has been waiting so patiently. . .

 

I've been mulling this over while I was doing Spanish. So... when you say obligation, do you mean something one does for somebody else's sake? Honour would be involved, one's own (it is dishonourable not to help one's friends and family) and the other person's (defending the honour of one's friends and family).Your idea about different characters representing different situations is intriguing, but I'm not sure I agree. I feel that might be a bit simplistic. Or over-complicated. Or something. I think I like the describing different situations one might find oneself in idea better, a sort of forewarned-is-forearmed so if this happens to one in the heat of battle, one will have a better idea of the ramifications of various actions. I think it gets confusing, too, because there is the reason the story was written (even if this was done over time) and the reason it endured and is relevant now, in the modern era. My boys did find it relevent (relevant?) to their lives. I concluded that it was impossible for me to raise them without the idea of honour. Our idea of honourable differs a bit, but enough is the same that they had no trouble identifying with some of the situations and struggles. My gut feeling is that this is rather like LoTR in that it could be read as a moral tale or serve other purposes but that it was really meant as something different, something much simpler. Or complex. I don't know. I probably don't know enough about the definition of "epic" to discuss this. It isn't as though I have any education in this subject, so I probably am not making sense. I guess I am trying to say that I think The Iliad, like LoTR, was meant to entertain and comfort in an other-people-face-this-too way and sustain. If you reduce it to a moral tale of different examples of characters, you sort of reduce it to something more obvious instead of leaving it as entertainment that speaks deeply to its audience? But as I said, I'm so ignorant about this sort of thing that I probably shouldn't even be *trying* to discuss this. It isn't as though I am doing a good job of explaining myself.-Nan