I first read extracts of the Odyssey in junior high and high school and some years later purchased the highly acclaimed Fitzgerald translation. It is a masterpiece that brings out the strengths of this iconic story of the voyage of Ulysses from the fall of Troy back to his native Ithaca and his beloved and besieged Penelope. The story is highly readable and full of adventure and misadventure, monsters and heroes and ultimately a triumphant voyage home. Yes, it is very masculine in perspective so I cannot excuse that except to say that if you read James Joyce's version and the final chapter of Penelope, you can see a far more feminine viewpoint. Regardless, I found this book more entertaining pound for pound than the Iliad or the Aeneid and I hope you will too.

I honestly thought my feelings on this would change since reading it back in high school, but nope. Not enough time spent on the interesting parts of the story (Polyphemus, Circe), and far too much time farting around in Ithaca.

هر چقدر که اودیسه رو دوست داشتم، اودیسیوس رو‌ دوست نداشتم. اودیسیوس مظهر همون انسان‌هایه که من رو می‌ترسونند. آدم‌هایی با هوش بالا، اما هوشی که در خدمت خودشون و منافع خودشونه. آدم‌هایی که راحت دروغ میگن و داستان می‌بافند. آدم‌هایی که در داستان‌هاشون همه‌ی جهان مقصرند، اما اون‌ها بی‌گناهند. آدم‌هایی که دیگران کنارشون کمرنگ میشن. آدم‌هایی که از همه توقع دارند، اما خودشون شامل اصول اخلاقی خودشون نمیشن

اودیسیوس جایی که مجبور نیست دروغ میگه، هر وقت که همراهانش گندی بالا میارن «خوابه»، کنار سرسی یک سال تمام می‌خوره و می‌خوابه بدون اینکه به برگشت به ایتیکا و پنلوپه فکر کنه، بدون اجازه وارد غار پلی‌‌فیمس میشه و توقع داره ازش پذیرایی هم بشه و توقع داره وقتی بیست سال ازش خبری نبوده همه منتظرش نشسته باشند و چشمشون به در خشک شده باشه

و بهم نگین که اودیسیوس رو با استانداردهای مدرن مقایسه نکنم. که می‌تونم و می‌کنم چون من خواننده‌ی مدرنم. اینکه اودیسیوس رو با استانداردهای زمان خودش «هم» مقایسه نکنم کوتاهیه که من در حق اودیسیوس کوتاهی نکردم. در چهارچوب‌های زمان خودش درکش می‌کنم، اما قرار نیست دوسش داشتم باشم. اما انگار حتی اونجا هم بیشتر «جذابه» تا «درست». بیشتر «زرنگه» تا «عاقل». از جذابیت کاراکترهای این مدلی البته غافل نیستم. کاراکترهای سایکوپت خودمحور انگار در تمام تاریخ برای ما جذاب بودن. این کاراکترهای لب مرزی خوب با مرزهای اخلاق بازی می‌کنند و ما این جسارت، دیوانگی و زرنگیشون رو دوست داریم. ولی فقط از دور. خیلی دور

اما خود اودیسه پر از شگفتیه. پر از هیولاها، خدایان و سفرهای طولانی در دریا. اودیسه ترکیبی از جذاب‌ترین داستان‌های کودکیمه که حالا می‌دونم از این داستان چندهزارساله الهام گرفته شده بودند. این دقیقاً لذت خوندن ایلیاد و اودیسه‌ست‌. اینکه انگار به سرچشمه‌ی ادبیات برمی‌گردی

:لیستی از کتاب‌های کمکی که باهاش خوندم یا چکشون کردم
اگر خلاصه و تحلیل کوتاه می‌خواید
The Odyssey (Spark Notes)
اگر خلاصه و تحلیل کمی دقیق‌تر می‌خواید
Cliffs Notes on Homer's The Odyssey
اگر تحلیل درست و حسابی با فرمت لکچر می‌خواید
The Odyssey of Homer
اگر تحلیل جزئی و آکادمیکِ مقاله‌ای می‌خواید
Homer's The Odyssey
اگر نسخه‌ی ساده‌ شده‌ی کتاب رو می‌خواید
Tales from the Odyssey

کتاب ها رو می‌تونید از اینجا دانلود کنید
Maede's Books

۱۴۰۳/۴/۳

Between 3.5-4****

Really enjoyed this translation by Emily Wilson! It was easy to understand and didn’t refer to women as “bitch” , “whore” or “slut” like some other translations of this work! Making it a far more enjoyable read.

Due to how these stories use to be told- orally- many things do repeat themselves. A large part of this book is about hospitality, food and an insane amount of wine (how Odysseus got anything done I don’t know- I’d be too drunk and pass out).

I enjoyed Odysseus’ adventure home but for some reason I thought the adventures would me more longer/be more of them?
A large part of this was actually about Telemachus (his son), the suitors and hospitality rather than adventure and action which I was expecting.

This was however a fantastic translation and I loved this version!

AHAHAHAHA I FINISHED THIS IN ABOUT NINE COLLECTIVE HOURS OF READING
WITH AN HOUR TO SPARE BEFORE MY ENGLISH FINAL


UPDATE: I FAILED THE FINAL BUT IT'S OKAY

It's funny how many people feel intimidated by this book. Sure, it's thousands of years old, and certainly Greek culture has some peculiarities, but the book is remarkably, sometimes surprisingly modern, and most translations show the straightforward simplicity of the story.

Perhaps like The Seventh Seal, The Odyssey has gotten a reputation for being difficult because it has been embraced by intellectuals and worse, wanna-be intellectuals. But like Bergman's classic film, The Odyssey is focused on action, low humor, and vivid characters, not complex symbolism and pretension.

It shouldn't really surprise us how modern the story seems, from it's fast-paced action to its non-linear story: authors have taken cues from it for thousands of years, and continue to take inspiration from it today. Any story of small people, everyday heroes, and domestic life we read today is only a few steps removed from Odysseus' tale.

Unlike the Iliad, this book is not focused on grand ideas or a grand stage. The characters do not base their actions on heroic ideals but on their emotions, their pains and joys, their grumbling bellies. It is less concerned with the fate of nations than the state of the family and friendship.

Since the story turns on whims instead of heroic ideals, it is much less focused than the Iliad, meandering from here to there in a series of unconnected vignettes drawn from the mythic tradition. Like The Bible, it is a combination of stories, but without a philosophical focus.

There are numerous recurring themes that while not concluded, are certainly explored. The most obvious of these may be the tradition of keeping guests in Greece. The most honorable provide their guests with feasts, festivals, and gifts. This seems mostly the effect of a noblesse oblige among the ruling class.

Like the codes of war or the class system, it is a social structure which benefits their rulership. Like the palace of Versailles of Louis XIV, keeping someone as a guest was a way to keep an eye on them and to provide camaraderie and mutual reliance amongst the fractitious ruling class.

The second theme is that of 'metis', represented by Odysseus himself. Metis is the Greek term for cunning. It is a quick-witted cleverness that is sometimes considered charming and other times deceitful. Achilles tells Odysseys in the Iliad that he resents the clever man's entreaties, and those of any man who says one thing but thinks another.

Odysseus later mimics this sentiment as part of an elaborate lie to gain the trust of another man. Such are the winding ways of our hero. He misleads his son, his wife, his servants, and his despondent father after his return, careful not to overplay his hand in a dangerous situation, arriving as a stranger.

Each of these prevarications can be seen sometimes as cruel, but each deception has a reasoning behind it. He uses his stories to carefully prepare his listeners for his return, instead of springing it upon them unwarned. He ensures that he will be received upon the most profitable terms, though he also enjoys the game of it all.

These acts of sudden, cruel cleverness are not uncommon in epics and adventure tales. One tale of Viking raiders tells of how, after sailing into the Mediterranean, their ship reached one of the cities of the Roman Empire. Though just a small outpost, the Viking chief thought it was Rome itself, since its stone buildings towered over the farms of his homeland.

He hid in a coffin with a wealth of swords and had his soldiers bear him into the town, telling the inhabitants they wished to make burial rights for their dead king. When they were let in, the coffin was opened, the swords passed around, and the city sacked. What is curious is that while warriors like the Greeks or Vikings maintained a strict sense of honor and honesty, this kind of trick was not only common in their stories, but admired.

The honor of the battlefield does not extend to the Trojan Horse (Odysseus' idea) or to the tale of Sinon in the Aeneid. The rule seems to be that if the tricks played are grand and clever enough, they are allowed, while small, mean pranks and betrayals are not. Not all the soldiers agree what is outsmarting and what is dishonorable (Achilles puts Odysseus in the latter camp), but there is a give and take there.

What is most remarkable about Odysseus is not merely that he comes up with these tricks, but that he passes them off on proud, honorable men without incurring their wrath. Moreover, he does all this while having a famous reputation for being tricky. You'd think he'd get an intentional walk now and then.

Odysseus was not as strong a character as Achilles or Hector were in the Iliad, though this may be because he was a complex character who did not rely on the cliche characterizations of 'the noble warrior'. He is not a man with a bad temper, nor a good one. He is a competent and powerful warrior and leader, but those are not his defining characteristics, either.

Odysseus represents the Greek ideal of 'arete' as well as metis. Arete is the idea that a man who is truly great should excel in all things, not merely concentrate on one area of life. Even raging Achilles showed the depth of his arete in the Iliad when he served as host and master of the games. He was capable of nobility, sound judgment, and generosity, even if he didn't always put his best foot forward.

Odysseus is likewise skilled in both war and domesticity, in the sword and politics, and he's clever and wily to boot. In the end, there isn't much room left over for negative character traits, which is what makes him feel a bit flat. What makes people interesting as individuals is not their best traits, but their worst.

For Odysseus, this is his pride. After spending twenty years of his life away at war, leaving his wife and infant son behind, it's not surprising that he wants to return home with wealth and with his name on the lips of poets and minstrels.

Between his pride, his easy smile, and his quick wit, he is the model for the modern action hero. He is not merely some chivalric picture of goodness, nor simply mighty and overwhelming, but a conflicted man with a wry sense of humor and above all, a will to survive.

Don't read this book simply because it is old, influential, and considered great. Read it because it is exciting and approachable and thoughtful. Even without all the reputation, it can stand on its own.

I read the Fagles translation, which was enjoyable and often lovely, though some modern idioms did slip in here and there. The Knox intro rehashes a lot of the introduction to The Iliad, but it's still very useful.

Obradovao sam se kada sam video da je Karpos ponovo štampao zaboravljeni devetnaestovekovni prevod „Odiseje” u prozi Panajota Papakostopulosa. Znao sam da takav prevod postoji, ali je bilo teško doći do njega jer, nakon što je Đurić prepevao ep u heksametre, izgubila se potreba za prevodom u prozi. „Odiseja” preobučena u prozu srpskog jezika 19. veka lepo zvuči. Negde između ritmične proze sa otmenim imperfektom Daničićevog prevoda „Starog zaveta” i poletnih, živorazgovornih prevoda Milovana i Stanke Glišić sa ruskog i francuskog. Panajatov prevod sigurno nije sadržinski najprecizniji, a formalno je daleko od onoga što ep jeste. A opet, „Odiseja” u formi „romana” nije ništa manje savršena nego u formi stiha. Posebno meni, kome bi „Odiseja” bila omiljena knjiga da ne postoji „Ilijada”.

U kulturnoj svesti postoje dve „Odiseje”: jedna je o Odisejevim avanturima, druga je o domu ili, tačnije o domovima. U kulturi je prisutnija prva, ali sam ep peva više o drugome. I to ne mislim samo na to što je epsko težište na Odisejevom povratku u dom koji mu rasturaju prosci, već i na to što je, recimo, opisu gozbi i običaja na dvorovima Nestora i Menelaja u prvim pevanjima dato više prostora nego opisu susreta sa sirenama ili Scilom i Haridbom. Dok sam bio mlađi zanimljiviji su mi bila četiri retrospektivna avanturistička poglavlja, a sada su mi više legli opisi života u kućama Nestora, Meneleja, Alkinoja i na Itaci. Ne samo zato što na tim mestima Homerova poezija dostiže vrhove, već i zato što je predstavljeni svet i dalje simpatično domaćinski – dobro se jede i pije, oseća se širina zajednice, a plemstvo je i dalje tako dobro upoznato sa svakodnevnim delatnostima domaćinstva da se na staleške razlike pomalo i zaboravlja. Stoga kod Homera i kraljice i boginje uvek nešto pletu i tkaju, a vladari su vešti i u stočarskim i poljopivrednim poslovima. Ta domaća idila posebno dobija na vrednosti jer je krha, naposletku ugroženi dom jeste u središtu epa. Idila lako nestaje pritisnuta i natkriljena svetom olimpijskih bogova, koji su daleko strašniji od ovih nižih božanstava čudovišta razasutih po ostrvima - sa čudovištima barem znaš na čemu si, dok Olimpljani uglavnom ne znaju ni sami šta hoće, ali očekuju da ljudi znaju njihove želje.

After having read and enjoyed Fagles' translation not too long ago, I decided to join with a group reading a new translation by Emily Wilson, the first woman to take on this task in English. This has proved to be an excellent decision. While I have always had respect for those who translate literature, I now realize even more fully how seemingly small, insignificant details can radically alter one’s perception of a classic or at least cause you to reconsider long-held beliefs about characters or events (be they historic or mythical). Wilson’s translation has done that for me by its lean style which, for me, serves to emphasize more of the humanity of the humans and the human-like behavior of the gods who influence the action.

There is so much here but I believe my response largely stems from Wilson’s chosen style and word choice. While I love Fagles’ translation for its poetry and imagery, I love Wilson’s for where it has led me and my thoughts. For that credit must also go to our wonderful group.

...to be continued

Podríamos darlo por leído.
Quizás.
Hay que admitir que la última parte la leí en diagonal porque estaba agotada. No era el momento para ponerme con ella, he pasado un mes difícil y lo menos que me apetecía era ponerme con una lectura de este talante.
En ningún momento me enganchó aunque tiene algo especial, las historias en sí me parecieron fascinantes pero no logré conectar en ningún momento por como estaban escritas. Se me hizo largo, monótono y repetitivo.
Eso sí, me he quedado con unas ganas enormes de leer 'Circe' y 'The Penelopiad' así que no ha caído todo en saco roto :)

The salt-encrusted reader has completed his voyage.

He has met many mythical men and gods, some women also. The scheming killer Aegisthus, divine Calypso, the Sun God, the savage Cyclops who filled his belly with human meat; the enchantress Circe with her braided hair; the prophet Tiresias; Scylla, barking and howling, and Charybdis, who sucks black water down; Owl-eyed Athena; silver-bowed Apollo; Artemis, Aphrodite, the Harpies.

He has seen vernal dawn touch the sky with flowers; seen her fingers bloom; heard the sounding purple sea rush round the stern and pure Zephyr whistling on wine-dark sea. He has sailed over the watery waves; he has seen darkness drench the eyes of a suitor in desperate pain, an arrow piercing his liver; he has beheld a sky of bronze.

He has wondered at Odysseus, a complicated man – the man who can adapt to anything; the man who, alive, visited Hades; the master of plots and plans; lying Odysseus, the ruiner of his wife's suitors; the wanderer, come home after the War years and years later. Long-suffering Odysseus, crafty Odysseus; unflappable Odysseus; the strategist Odysseus, the master of deception, the trickster, the master liar, he who can smile in scornful rage. Lord Odysseus, weathered Odysseus. Warlike Odysseus.

He has marveled at Penelope, who speaks shrewdly, who speaks to test her husband, who melts the reader's heart.

He has read of much weeping. SO MUCH weeping. By MEN! Greece a land of weepers.

He, like Odysseus, has come home.







He wishes to thank Kris for the invitation to this perfectly paced group read; to thank the other readers who contributed such useful comments; and to thank especially Emily Wilson for her wonderful translation, her great summaries of the books, her informative notes, and her outstanding Introduction to The Odyssey.

If I review "2018 on Goodreads", this will certainly be a highlight.




. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Previous review: The Waning of the Middle Ages
Next review: JRZDVLS
Older review: Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man

Previous library review: The Suppliants Aeschylus
Next library review: The Odyssey: A Modern Sequel

percy jackson did it better

ادیسه چندین سال پس از جنگ تروا رو روایت می‌کنه. بعد از جنگ تروا و پیروزی یونانیان، نفرین خدایان باعث میشه اونها در راه برگشت سختی‌های زیادی تحمل کنند و این کتاب به طور خاص به اولیس پرداخته. سالها پس از اینکه اولیس هنوز به خانه برنگشته، مردان ایتاک به صرافت ازدواج با پنه‌لوپ همسر اولیس افتادند و با گستاخی باعث رنج و عذاب اون و پسرش تلماک شدند. میشه گفت در مجموع کتاب سه بخش کلی داره. قسمتی مربوط به خواستگاران، تلماک و تلاش برای یافتن پدر، قسمتی شرح سفر اولیس و قسمت سوم برگشتن اولیس به خانه. این کتاب رو بیشتر از ایلیاد دوست داشتم چون اتفاقات و جریانهای خیلی بیشتر و جذابتری داشت.ه