The Iliad is a remarkable epic that delves into the realm of violence and valor. It commences with the renowned "rage of Achilles," and the narrative is replete with vivid descriptions of stabbings, beheadings, and crushing blows on nearly every page. Despite this abundance of brutality, I was astonishingly captivated by the sheer beauty of its language. I found myself rereading the lines again and again, in a state of absolute awe. The imagery of an eye being gouged out by a spear or a severed head rolling in the dust was both overwhelming and strangely enchanting. It was as if I was under a spell, unable to tear myself away from the text. I truly wish I could commit every single word to memory, such was the profound impact it had on me.

“My dear comrade’s dead—
Patroclus—the man I loved beyond all other comrades,
loved as my own life—I’ve lost him…
[…]
My spirit rebels—I’ve lost the will to live,
to take my stand in the world of men—unless,
before all else, Hector’s battered down by my spear
and gasps away his life, the blood-price for Patroclus…”





Etching by Pietro Testa.

Hallelujah. It’s over. Well, at least The Iliad is, though the story continues in The Odyssey.

I had forgotten how much the beginning of this epic sounds like a giant group of toddlers fighting over toys. These toddlers just happen to command warships and armies, and the toys happen to be women they view as war prizes. Frankly, it’s disgusting.

If these idiotic “heroes” would just view women as actual people who can make their own decisions instead of pretty toys over which to wage war, every single event in this story could have been avoided. Had they just asked Helen who she wanted to be with and respected that decision, hundreds of lives would have been saved. The amount of bloodshed over the “taking” of this woman is just insanely wasteful, even if it’s fictional.

The gods are so incredibly petty. If Monopoly is the board game that ruins families, the gods of Olympus are playing something similar with cities and human lives. Men and women are literal pawns to them, game pieces and very little else. They claim to care about some of these people, but it’s a very shallow kind of care. Seriously, they’re terrible. And as 70% of Greek mythology is directly tied to Zeus’s inability to keep it in his toga and Hera’s rage over that fact, it can’t even be pretended that the gods cared about much outside of their own desires and fury.

Honestly, this is a cast completely comprised of hypocrites. All of these men deeply believe they commit a travesty against another person but is then surprised and horrified if something similar is done to themselves or someone close to them. For instance, if the whole war is occurring due to the theft of a woman (more on that above), then why on earth would you take the “prize” of your greatest warrior because you’re feeling slighted? How did you think that was going to work out for you? And if your heart is set on desecrating the dead body of said warrior’s bestie, who isn’t even fighting in the war because of the aforementioned lady theft, why on earth would you be shocked that he decides to not only finally engage in the war but that he’s out for your blood and intends to disrespect your corpse in the same ways? Seriously, people. What the heck?

These warriors are also insanely self-absorbed. To a man, every single one of them act as if their feelings are the only ones that matter. Their mourning is the only true mourning. Their rage is the only true rage. This is doubly true for the divine beings that populate the story, as stated earlier. I seriously cannot fathom being this level of selfish, and I sincerely pray that I never become this wrapped up in myself. If I do, some one please punch me in the throat and snap me out of it, will you?

Unrelated to anything, but I could also go the rest of my life without hearing anyone else referred to as “god-like” or their speech referred to as “winged words.” Those terms were exasperatingly overused. However, there are some truly beautiful lines mixed into the free verse, and those almost made up for the repetition mentioned. I know both of these observations are subject to change based on which translation you choose to read. I bounced between the Caroline Alexander translation and the Robert Fagles translation, both of which were lovely.

I respect The Iliad. I know it’s among the earliest literary pieces we have, and that it paved the way for countless stories that followed. But, as with the times I read this epic in the past, whether in part or entirety, I just can’t enjoy something that makes me roll my eyes this hard or groan this often. That opinion is incredibly subjective, and I know many people who disagree. But the abundance of wholly preventable violence, and the lack of anything else to break up said violence, just isn’t at all enjoyable for me. Thankfully, The Odyssey comes after this, and I know that it’s far and above more entertaining. I may not care for the tale of the Trojan War, but Odysseus’s return trip is wild and I’m eager to dive back into it.

Another buddy read with TS!

You can find this review and more at Novel Notions.

There are literary works, no matter how famous they are and no matter how much readers celebrate them, they still remain a puzzling mystery to me, and I always find a hidden barrier between me and them that prevents me from having a personal experience with them. Generally, I don't think about penetrating this barrier alone. Instead, I wait for someone to take my hand and encourage me to do so by sharing the experience. And this is what happened to me on this journey, with the Iliad.

At the beginning, there was another reason - besides the hidden barrier - that always made me postpone reading the Iliad, and that is that I never understood the classification of this work. Sometimes I find someone saying that the Iliad is a heroic Greek epic, sometimes I find someone criticizing it for being one of the most famous poetic works of Homer, and sometimes I read reviews from friends that mainly praise the wooden translation of Dereni that colored the work with a charming style that gave it a different and more beautiful flavor. And after I finished my journey with the world of the Iliad, I say: All of this is not important. What is more important than all of this is that you have your own experience with this work and see it as you like. Because in any case, no matter what your view of the work is, whether it is a poem or a novel or even a history book!, you will enjoy it and integrate with the story.

And when I was in the middle of my journey with the Iliad, I wrote here that I don't know the classification of what I'm reading, but what I know and am sure of is that I'm enjoying it. The feeling is similar to when one of my relatives invites me to a meal and I find a plate on the table that I don't know what's in it. So I taste it, I like it, and I keep eating it until I almost burst from fullness. Well, I know it's a strange kind of comparison, but it actually describes my experience with the Iliad accurately.

I'm not a fan of Greek mythology, so the story itself didn't dazzle me. Instead, what dazzled me was the great translation of Dereni, like most of those who read the Iliad in his translation. That translation gave the story a different spirit, and this wonderful harmony between the heroic story of Homer and the flowing poetic expressions of Dereni, along with the influence of the Holy Quran, this mixture was capable of creating another Iliad, an Iliad in which both the author and the translator are citizens of creativity and beauty.

It was an enjoyable experience, and a new puzzle that is no longer a puzzle for me now.

All thanks to the very dear friend / Rawiya Abdel Basset, who recommended the work for me to read, was the best partner for penetrating the hidden barrier between me and the Iliad, and was the reason for having this beautiful experience.

It's over.

How can I explain it, where should I start, mmm.

First of all, let me say this: what happens in this book, who dies, who survives, whose god is who... none of these matter and I'm not going to tell you anyway. It's very easy to access all of these in a summary form and I don't think anyone wants to listen to this as a comment related to the Iliad. Besides, the matter of the Iliad is not this either.

The matter of the Iliad is this: something written approximately three thousand years ago is ahead of everything written after it. The man (I called Homer a man, hfdkgjh) understood the essence of our existence in 800 BC, told it, and lived all the human emotions as much as there are. I couldn't believe it while reading. That is, he wrote about the excitement in a war scene, the grief experienced when learning the news of the death of a loved one, love, jealousy, regret... everything, EVERYTHING. Therefore, when we decide to read the Iliad, I think we should not take a photocopy of the Mythology 101 lecture notes from the stationery opposite our faculty, but rather from a much more emotional, human place, realizing that we are not really that different from the people three thousand years ago. And when you look at it from a certain perspective, we have added very little to this as humanity. My expectations from literature, art, everything increased when I read the Iliad. My balance was disrupted, but in a good way.

Another thing I need to mention is this: We cannot thank Azra Erhat and A. Kadir enough for their existence. Especially when we consider that we live in a geography that is disadvantaged in many ways, to love this work with such passion and to make such a translation for generations of readers, to leave such a work... I can't find the words to say, to praise, they deserve endless admiration. They have made it even more beautiful without taking away a particle of the beauty of the text. It remains as it is with its rhythmic poetry.

I read the book in a month, without hurrying at all, looking at two different mythology dictionaries, savoring it. And I often thought this: I need to visit all the ancient cities I have visited so far, all the European cities, the museums from the beginning. I didn't understand anything. Homer changed the way I perceive the world. Fortunately, fortunately, fortunately. (crying)

I have now read The Iliad for the first time since my college days. It's truly remarkable how much my perception has changed.

Back then, I almost wonder if I truly read the entire book. Now, it appears so vastly different, encompassing a wide range of themes that are both universal and timeless.

It delves deep into the experiences of men at war, exploring issues of honor, the duties of leadership, the role of fate, and the complex relationship between individuals and the community.

Surprisingly, the gods seem more petty and childlike than I remembered. On this reading, The Iliad is both more brutal and more beautiful than I expected, much like real life.

Moreover, its themes of honor, fate, love/hate, loyalty, fealty, and the nature of good and bad leadership remain relevant even thousands of years later.

The human-seeming nature of the gods also struck me. Despite their power and immortality, they are petty, mean, and spiteful at times, playing games with human lives and destinies.

Although they may bring a semblance of order to human existence, there is no true nobility in their actions. I likely will read The Iliad again soon, perhaps comparing different translations.

I thoroughly enjoyed Fagles' translation, finding his descriptive writing beautiful and his war and battle scenes vividly clear.

All in all, I'm extremely glad to have finally returned to Homer's world.

My original rating was 2* based on my recollection of reading a different translation in college, but now, as a more "mature" adult, I look forward to experiencing a new version of The Iliad.

I was mentally engaged in the war between the Achaeans and the Trojans from August to December. At least, it didn't last as long as the real one (a total of ten years).

The Iliad is an extensive and arduous epic poem, full of descriptions of weapons and combats, but it compensates for each complaint with sublime passages and a naturalization of characters that surprises.

A brief summary of the plot: The Iliad focuses on the interminable anger of Achilles, the best warrior of the Achaeans, due to the theft of his spoils, which included Briseis. Of course, in the battle, his absence will be felt, although there are other good warriors among the Greeks. Meanwhile, the gods fight on Olympus because some protect the Achaeans (Hera, Athena, Poseidon) and others the Trojans (Apollo, Ares, Aphrodite). Zeus tilts the balance of victory because he has a plan that, obviously, I'm not going to reveal. One could say that the twenty-four cantos are thematic and the mortals and the immortals share the spotlight.

Due to its oral composition, there are verses that are repeated many times because they function as a "review", so I have no reason to deduct stars for that. There are also some incoherences (small, but incoherences after all) between action A and action B, something that would be unforgivable in a written text. However, the flaws do not make it any less perfect. I loved it just the same. There are very rich stories that are told in the middle of a fight (the opponents talked a lot to each other before killing each other...), recoveries of well-known and lesser-known myths, heroism, cruelty, despair. The only thing that slightly hinders the reading of the book are the descriptions of the weapons, the ships, the armies, and some hand-to-hand combats that provide material for spatial orientation, for example. And it is very good to stop at them because they point out cultural, historical, and social aspects. The problem is that they give the sensation of stand by, as if they would never end. Fortunately, they do. Once the action restarts, there is little to bother and much to mark. The final cantos are great, they were a kind of reward for my patience as a reader. From the nineteenth canto onwards, elements appear (and reappear) that make everything more dynamic.

The characters are not developed psychologically. There is no gradual evolution of them, but rather they act radically. Achilles, who broods over his anger far from the battle, can be as barbaric as pious, and Zeus also seems as omnipotent as friendly. Perhaps the nuances are not abundant, but it was impossible for me not to take the side of some of the characters and hope that their destiny (from early on, they themselves will take care of warning how and when they will die) does not come true. For some reason, one already feels that one knows them and they become natural, flesh and blood. And I learned that Zeus is implacable even when Hera distracts him. A female comment that I don't want to omit and that may be useful: in that era, women were nothing more than objects that in the "best" of cases were used as prizes and ensured descendants, and in the worst, they were annoying, needed a couple of shouts, and incited pathetic quarrels. That moment can no longer be changed, but it can be taken into account before deciding to throw the book out the window. And there is also Athena as a balance, whose interventions are fascinating and very important. The immortals have a slight advantage in all this.

The Iliad requires time and attention, two things necessary to not abandon it and that currently books forget to ask the reader for. One learns much more on its pages than in the scattered search for some myths and the repetitions of Homer allow one to rest at some points to concentrate on others. The history, the philosophy, the way of seeing the world that the Greeks had is material for a rereading (if it is not required at the university, as is my case), but the first reading can be done calmly. The really "bad" thing about this book is that it leads to reading more ancient texts to complete the picture and my to read list is suffering. And I'm already in the process of recovery to continue with the Odyssey.

There is something that I must address right from the start.

My decision to give the Iliad 4 stars instead of 5 is not intended to minimize or detract from its status as a classic of Western literature. I wholeheartedly recognize it as a classic and an important work that has made a significant contribution to Western civilization. However, when it comes to its overall content, I cannot in good conscience give it a top rating. Let me explain why.

This work glorifies violence, death, and destruction on almost every page. Homer does not shy away from providing graphic and excessive details when describing death. Of course, I understand that he was a poet of his time, and in that era, glory in battle, bravery, honor, and such were highly valued. But simply acknowledging this does not make the content any less disturbing or any more beautiful.

It should also be noted that this was originally considered a religious work. In all likelihood, the violence was regarded as glorious and an acceptable spectacle for the deities of ancient Greece, such as blood offerings or human sacrifices. The Achaeans and the Trojans are not even the main actors, really; they are merely the pawns in a divine game of chess. From Paris' stealing of Helen to Agamemnon's stealing of Briseis from Achilles, to Achilles' resentment and refusal to fight, to Hector's bloodlust, vainglory, and eventual death, all are attributed to the will of the Greek deities.

The Greek deities are incredibly capricious and egomaniacal. One can understand why some Greek philosophers thought that Homer was guilty of blasphemy. They are suspicious of one another and secretly jealous of Zeus. They often conspire against Zeus when they favor a certain side in the war. Zeus is neither omniscient nor omnipresent; he can be tricked by other deities and does not always have full control over events. At first, one might believe that Zeus favors the Trojans, but as I hinted earlier, he capriciously turns against them in the end.

One notices a theme in two notable epics of polytheistic religion: like the Mahabharata, the Iliad is a kind of mytho-theological work set against the backdrop of a war. Like the gods of the Iliad, Krishna is also notably capricious. There must be some lesson in futility that polytheistic religions intended to convey by using death and destruction as the springboard for theology. It could also be that fate or karma is best illustrated through human suffering and death. This is just a guess; as a Christian, I reject such things as fatalism.

I couldn't find anyone in the Iliad that I could identify with. I didn't like Hector or Achilles. I certainly didn't like Agamemnon or Menelaus. I also found the Greek deities rather repugnant. I was left with the impression that the whole story is more like a tragedy. People are fighting over things that seem rather trivial. They are being influenced by a group of numinous beings with their own agendas, and the best interests of the human players are not their top concerns. I suppose I am biased as a Christian, but I am extremely glad that works like this have lost their religious significance.

This translation was done in the 19th century. The translator chose the Latin equivalents of Greek divine names, such as Jove instead of Zeus, Minerva instead of Athena, and so on. As far as I could tell, the translation was good, so I have no criticisms in that regard. As I said, I recognize that this work is a classic. I could only read it as a work of tragedy to truly appreciate it. Life and religion in ancient Greece were tragic.

Let me not then die ingloriously and without a struggle, but first, let me do some great thing that shall be told among men hereafter.

Hektor of Troy, his words echo through the ages, filled with courage and a thirst for glory.

Imagine a cold winter evening, a glass of wine in hand, and the voice of the renowned Shakespearean actor Derek Jacobi. He is reading from Robert Fagles's exquisitely crafted translation of the Iliad aloud in your living room. For over half an hour each night, you can forget about the concerns of the modern world, like the omicron variant, and escape into the captivating poetry of this grand epic.

It has been more than ten years since I last read the Iliad in its original form. However, this time, I found myself enjoying it even more. Although my husband and I followed along, with books in our hands, we soon realized that Homer's work was meant to be heard. The Iliad is an oral performance, and at times, I would close my eyes and simply listen. A lecture series that we took simultaneously further enhanced our enjoyment.

The Iliad is an epic classic, a masterpiece that defies simple summary or critique. What I found, though, was that listening to an outstanding performance of it was profoundly moving. The poetry, the characters, and the conflicts all possess a timeless quality that strikes at the very heart of what it means to be human. It is a work that continues to resonate with us, even after thousands of years.

Reread before I jump into the new translation by Emily Wilson. This is an important step for me as I am preparing for my upcoming novel about the messenger goddess, Iris.

The Iliad is a classic work of literature that has inspired countless writers and artists throughout the ages. Wilson's new translation offers a fresh perspective on this ancient epic, and I am eager to explore it.

By rereading the Iliad, I hope to gain a deeper understanding of the characters, themes, and motifs that are relevant to my novel. I also want to study Wilson's translation techniques and how she brings the text to life for a modern audience.

This research will help me to create a more accurate and engaging portrayal of Iris in my novel. I am excited to see where this rereading takes me and how it will influence my writing.

This was an extremely difficult read for me.

I really had to put in a lot of effort and struggle in order to finish it.

The content seemed so complex and convoluted that it made it a real challenge for my comprehension.

However, despite all the difficulties, I was determined to persevere and I did manage to get to the end.

It was a sense of accomplishment, but at the same time, I couldn't help but feel a bit relieved that it was over.

Achilles - He is a sexually ambiguous figure, prone to fits of rage, and has a famously sensitive tendon. His complex nature makes him a captivating character in Greek mythology.

Patroclus - Known as the 'best friend' of Achilles, he ended up ruining everything for everyone. His actions had far-reaching consequences that changed the course of the story.

Odysseus - This cunning hero outsmarted the Trojans, but also had his share of adventures with a witch and a nymph. His journey home is filled with challenges and trials.

Agamemnon - Considered the worst husband, father, Greek, and human, he is a despised figure. His actions and decisions led to much suffering and conflict.

Menelaus - Literally lost his wife, which set off a chain of events that led to the Trojan War. His story is one of heartbreak and loss.

Helen - The face that launched a thousand memes, she has the worst taste in men. Her beauty and actions made her a central figure in the Trojan War.

Paris - Dubbed the biggest fuckboy in Greek mythology, it's no wonder his parents wanted to kill him as a baby. His actions and choices had a significant impact on the lives of many.

Hector - The perfect son, husband, father, brother, and prince, he tames horses in his spare time. He is a noble and heroic figure, but ultimately meets a tragic end.

Andromache - The perfect wife, mother, and princess, she is often compared to Kate Middleton. Her story is one of love and loss in the face of war.

King Priam - With a hundred children, he was lucky child support didn't exist in ancient times. His large family and the events of the Trojan War make his story a complex one.

Queen Hecuba - Having nineteen children and a horny husband, she had her hands full. Her story is one of survival and tragedy in the midst of war.

Briseis - In need of therapy, she was caught up in the conflict between Achilles and Agamemnon. Her story highlights the plight of women in war.

Ajax the great - The OG alpha male macho man dude-bro, he was a powerful warrior. However, his pride and hubris led to his downfall.

Ajax the lesser - Was he a beta male? His role in the story is less prominent than that of his namesake.

Hera - To quote Lizzo, it's bad bitch o'clock. She is a powerful and influential goddess, but also has a reputation for being vengeful.

Athena - It's okay to be a virgin, especially when you're a virgin goddess of wisdom, warfare, and handicraft. I support her war crimes.

Ares - Cute but psycho, he is the god of war. His violent and unpredictable nature makes him a dangerous figure.

Aphrodite - The OG Regina George, she is the goddess of love and beauty. Her beauty and charm have led many astray.

The Myrmidons - The Greek mythology equivalent of Navy Seals, they were fierce and loyal warriors.

Aeneas - Just kind of there, his role in the story is somewhat secondary compared to other characters.

Thetis - Achilles' sea nymph mommy, she played an important role in his life and destiny.

Poseidon - Petty, vengeful, and likes to play with dolphins in his free time (this has never been scientifically proven, it's just a theory). He is the god of the sea and has a powerful presence.

Hephaestus - Got cheated on by Aphrodite and tried to assault Athena, and for that, he will forever be on my shit list. His story is one of betrayal and revenge.

Hermes - In charge of Mount Olympus' post office, he is the messenger of the gods. His quick wit and agility make him an important figure in Greek mythology.

Artemis - A cool virgin who likes to hunt, she is the goddess of the hunt and the moon. Her independence and strength make her a popular figure.

Apollo - Doesn't know the meaning of consent, he is the god of the sun, music, and poetry. His beauty and charm have led many to fall for him.

Zeus - Doesn't know the meaning of consent either, he is the king of the gods. His power and influence are vast, but his actions are often questionable.

Should I review the Odyssey? Was Odysseus the victim of a curse, or did he just not want to go home to his wife? 'Lost at sea' is the Greek mythology equivalent of 'going out for cigarettes.' Greek mythology is unhinged, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I have a confession to make: I love the movie Troy. Critics make fun of it. Historians treat it like a redheaded stepchild. I don't care. I love it. My opinion has nothing to do with a skirt-clad Brad Pitt. It's the story, the characters, and the epic battles that draw me in. I can't get enough of it.

The development of human beings, especially as happy little beings, is based on what is perceived from the surrounding environment, in a process of interlocking that, starting with vision, transmutes and works it to shape pieces of conduct. In this industrial era, a mechanized animal thus lives by associations and models, in a constant attempt to improve the final product. In this way, the first gestures are merely attempts to reproduce those apprehended, and the first words are those most frequently heard. In this return to the age of packaging, it becomes clear that parents are considered the first heroes, this title so proclaimed by the canons of literature and massified by the stories of those who, not limiting themselves to the mere earthly realm, add an unassailable "super" to it.

This model has been chiseled by benevolent artificers since the beginnings of history, as well exemplified by the tragic epics of Homer. In the "Iliad", the strife undertaken by the Achaeans against the Trojans is sung in a huge ode, the result of the emotions that always command the, little reflected upon, human reactions - the fiery passion, the thirsty greed, the blind pride. In the center of the battle, casting aside any white veil that might cover it, lies Helen, who, with all her objectified beauty, is disputed by these adversaries, personified in the two protagonists, Achilles and Hector. Heroes in name, they are at opposite poles, not only in battle but also in their essence - if the first is a demigod by inheritance (son of a goddess and a mortal), but gives in to vices and human emotions; the second, being human, is divinized by his attitudes, placed on the glorified pulpit by his fellows. They share the fundamental characteristics of heroes - the sense of justice, the fierce courage and the spirit of sacrifice - and this brings them closer. To the point that, when they roar at each other, the weapons create a sound that remains as an echo through all ages, reaching the present.

Homer's mastery is unassailable, no matter how many swords try to wound it, for his greaves are as dense as bronze. With a meticulous writing, worthy of a movie plot, instead of inviting the reader to a merely contemplative experience, the author sucks him in, dresses him in the best possible armor, adapted to each one, and delivers him to the combat. Thus, he goes fencing against the different characters mentioned, in an almost Herculean task, but facilitated by the good airs emanated by Homer - he plants true genealogical trees in his descriptions, creating dense forests that can be tamed. There are also repetitions that, although they could be criticized, function as a cyclic link manufactured by the smith Hephaestus, studded with the best shining stones. Moreover, he caresses our faces, dirty in the combat, with beautiful comparisons between men and the most diverse elements of Nature, relativizing the vile rage sung - something as natural as the search for food. In the same way, he makes the Olympic gods descend from the high heavens, who prove to be as human as those who tread the earth furrowed with the dead.

No matter how ironclad the protective layer is, fear remains because, in this battle, the bodies are intertwined and the blood flows into the source of a scarlet river, in a palpable mortality. The mouth? Perhaps the mind of the one who reads these words equipped with wings that, between the final retaliation, are deceived by some body, to place them in another - ours, the literary winged one, that is carried away in the enchantment. The status of hero is thus generalized, touching men, even those who have defects - they too inspire earthly combats. Victory or defeat are relative. We are indeed faced with a cathartic process that requires, of a lover of Greek mythology, to enunciate these words, to give a worthy funeral to a portentous challenge as it deserves.

"When two set out on the road, one discerns before the other what is more advantageous; while when there is only one to discern, the thought is short and the cunning tenuous."