Surely, some people may say that the Iliad is one of the greatest poems of all times, but everyone with a more unbiased attitude may come to a different conclusion:
Homer is unable to develop a logical plot.
Just one example to prove this statement for the entire poem: I remember well when I read the Iliad for the first time. In the sixth lay Hektor ushers his mother to invoke Athena that she may crack Diomedes’ spear, who was slaying then inumerable Troyans, while at the same time Diomedes meets his enemy and colleague Glaukos with whom he exchanges spears. Now every decent person would expect that malignamous Athena would “grant” Hektor’s wish and thus wreck a deadly fate on Glaukos, but not on Diomedes. Homer dreamt, let this opportunity pass and spoilt everything.
Homer fails to give his audience what it wants.
Ask anyone you like, whether he or she knows the Iliad. If so, the answer will undoubtedly be: Yes, isn’t that the story with the wooden horse. Indeed, it is, it is and it is. But where, Homer, is that horse in your poem that everyone knows to be belonging to the story? That was another bitter disappointment when I read your poem that I will not forget.
The Iliad teaches iloyality and has a bad influence on the youth.
For I want to see only one youth, he may be as romantic minded as you like, who would on account of this poem happily risk limb and life for the good cause. And that 's though he is constantly talking about winning fame, becoming immortal a.s.o. through martial deeds. Yet what the “heroes” actually do is weeping and bickering (take only the undignified argument during the chariots race in the 23rd book about who is in the lead and then who won the race). If any, only cut-throats like Odysseus or dunces like Aias could be impressed by this, but such guys are luckily not easy to be found.
Homer was extraordinarily single-minded.
Otherwise I fail to understand why someone should compose a poem of over 16000 (Did you ever try to count that far?!) lines without the least variation of meter or style. Either this or the Iliad is the product of a pupil who was caught chatting in class for the third time and thereupon punished by this lyrics teacher to write down 16000 lines of hexameter. What will come next? The story of John Lennon and Yoko Ono written on a type-writer that lacks the letters “n” and “o”?
No, he simply couldn’t do better.
I am spending far too much of my precious time on this stuff.
Is there someone willing to back me in my attempt to get over this poem?
Being one of the first recorded poems of all time, it deserves this place as one of the best, just as Archimedes deserves the place as one of the greatest mathematicians of all time, though his discoveries are less “complex” that ones in more recent history. Homer was, if you will, a trail-blazer in literature.
Homer is unable to develop a logical plot.
Just one example to prove this statement for the entire poem: I remember well when I read the Iliad for the first time. In the sixth lay Hektor ushers his mother to invoke Athena that she may crack Diomedes’ spear, who was slaying then inumerable Troyans, while at the same time Diomedes meets his enemy and colleague Glaukos with whom he exchanges spears. Now every decent person would expect that malignamous Athena would “grant” Hektor’s wish and thus wreck a deadly fate on Glaukos, but not on Diomedes. Homer dreamt, let this opportunity pass and spoilt everything.
I don’t see that- when Diomedes and Glaukos exchanged spears, they gave them to eachother. And from then on the one was Diomedes’ and the other Glaukos’. Also, you have to remember the part fate plays in the Iliad. Fate, as far as I can tell, isn’t logical.
Homer fails to give his audience what it wants.
Ask anyone you like, whether he or she knows the Iliad. If so, the answer will undoubtedly be: Yes, isn’t that the story with the wooden horse. Indeed, it is, it is and it is. But where, Homer, is that horse in your poem that everyone knows to be belonging to the story? That was another bitter disappointment when I read your poem that I will not forget.
Homer didn’t write for the modern audience, he wrote for the Ancient Greeks. I believe the wooden horse is brought up in the Odyessy (though I haven’t got that far yet- I’m in book 2 (I just finished the Iliad)).
The Iliad teaches iloyality and has a bad influence on the youth.
For I want to see only one youth, he may be as romantic minded as you like, who would on account of this poem happily risk limb and life for the good cause. And that 's though he is constantly talking about winning fame, becoming immortal a.s.o. through martial deeds. Yet what the “heroes” actually do is weeping and bickering (take only the undignified argument during the chariots race in the 23rd book about who is in the lead and then who won the race). If any, only cut-throats like Odysseus or dunces like Aias could be impressed by this, but such guys are luckily not easy to be found.
I didn’t find this to be a bad moral influence- look at the several fates of the “heros”. The one case that stands out the most is that of Agammennon and Achilles’ bitter argument and division. Both came to rue this bitterly by the end of the poem.
Homer was extraordinarily single-minded.
Otherwise I fail to understand why someone should compose a poem of over 16000 (Did you ever try to count that far?!) lines without the least variation of meter or style. Either this or the Iliad is the product of a pupil who was caught chatting in class for the third time and thereupon punished by this lyrics teacher to write down 16000 lines of hexameter. What will come next? The story of John Lennon and Yoko Ono written on a type-writer that lacks the letters “n” and “o”?
No, he simply couldn’t do better.
Dactylic Hexameter is extremely difficult to write anything of length in, and I personally think his two poems can be considered amazing solely for being written in this form. Remember the time the poems were composed in- literature was just beginning. Not that I consider Homer as primative, though- I’d like to see anyone nowadays write anything approaching the works of Homer!
However, you will appreciate different forms of literature more if you take them in a historical context.
Have you read the poem? This is actually one of the greatest virtues of Homer’s work: his theme is not the fall of Troy, but what he clearly states in the first line, which is slowly and expertly unfolded. Whether this kind focused theme is original with Homer we can not be sure. The Iliad and the Odyssey are certainly only a small sample of what was produced. Maybe there was even an entire poem about horse.
Homer fails to give his audience what it wants.
His audience was the Greek speaking peoples who loved it so much that it pervaded all aspects of their culture.
The Iliad teaches iloyality and has a bad influence on the youth.
You would prefer Plato.
I fail to understand why someone should compose a poem of over 16000 (Did you ever try to count that far?!) lines without the least variation of meter or style
Actually, the greek hexameter shows quite a bit of variety which keeps it from becoming too regular and boring (ie. the exchange of spondees for dactyls, the variation in caesurae). As for style, you should read about oral poetry, and if you still don’t appreciate epic style, then you probably don’t want to bother with it anymore.
oh you can make a HUGE list with things you don’t like about Homer
Like i.e. how it’s amazing that Greeks love(d) it since they come off as complete oiks while, with the exception of Paris, the Trojans come off as the good guys (I mean the REAL hero is Hector, let’s face it and what about noble Priamos i.e.)or how impossible it is some times to remember the beginning of a simile by the time it finishes
Your list I don’t like though can’t you think of sth better?
Why, I read it in translation first (by Hampe, a German as you might have guessed) then I felt I should learn Greek so that I might read it “myself”. Oh, I also know Schadewaldt’s.
So your disappointment with the Iliad came when you read it in Greek? Because if the translation was already a letdown, then I don’t understand why you would go through the trouble of learning Greek, just to be able to read it in the original language.
I haven’t read it yet, but this is interesting…you’re not the only one to have great problems with Homer…a good friend of mine did too, to a great disadvantage…
Hciebel would you consider helping me with my dog german please
I want to apologize for being rude Hciebel, there was no reason for it, and I don’t want to fertilize any loathing in your personal garden.
My comment about Plato was sarcastic. I won’t argue with you about whether or not he encourages immorality; perhaps he really does.
But I still think you are wrong on your other points. My question about having read the poem wasn’t entirely dispassionate, I admit, but I was somewhat serious, because I think the unity of the poem displays itself even in translation. This is not to say that every scene is essential to the plot movement, and some of the improbable battlefield speeches can be difficult to overcome esp for modern readers. I am not suggesting he was a supernatural genius beyond criticism, and I certainly don’t expect everyone to like it, so I’m not sure what help you need to “get over” the poem.
This was genuine advice:
Many objections to Homer’s style are really objections to the epic tradition and oral poetry. It’s not really fair to judge him outside of those contexts, like judging the tragedies based on modern expecations of what drama should be. So if you read some general stuff about Greek oral poetry, and you still think the Iliad is poorly crafted, then you certainly don’t want to waste your precious minutes reading it: there is so much else to read!
My apologies again; not too many weeds/hardfeelings I hope.
To me the phrase “get over this poem” can imply trying to be open-minded and learning about it and perhaps seeing it in a new, unannoying light; accepting that you don’t like it and that other people do; or simply forgetting about it and putting it out of your mind. Therefore some of the replies (including mine). I thought that perhaps reasons explaning why some things in the Iliad are the way they are would ease your mind. But clearly, I was wrong.
I have only read 4 books of the Iliad so I am not the one from whom to expect words of wisdom concerning the presence or absence of a plot.
I do know that I enjoyed reading them. I don’t try to come away with anything from it that would improve my morals or loyalty but I read it for the enjoyment of it. Maybe that is a Superficial attitude but it works for me.
Bert don’t tell me you even read the list of the ships in the second Rhapsody?
Hciebel do you have to read it? Honest question. If you don’t just skip it; if you do we’ll see what we can do. You can i.e. break it down to smaller pieces, see what info you get about the period (there are many good books out there that will help you with the anachronisms), you can even compile a list as you go along with examples backing your arguments on why Illiad is no good (bar the one with the horse; that was a wrong one; not Homer’s fault that people get confused about Illiad’s context. The others are open to discussion)
Perhaps Bert will not tell you that he read the Catalogue of the Ships, but I read the Catalogue. It’s interesting in it’s non-gripping way. Of course I had maps of where archeologists think all of those cities/landmarks are, in addition to other comments on how much this catalgoue corresponds (or does not correspond) to archeological evidence, which made the difference for me.
Ah! perhaps then my total loathing of the part has to do with having learnt that info before reading the Catalogue (although that reminds me of the amount of papers I had to read later, about which island is ancient Ithaca (sp?); and being cocky enough at 19 to consider one of the suggestions absurd -still do btw- which nearly caused an apoplexy to my professor)
Anyway, I do believe that it’s a part of Iliad one can very well read from a translation
(In school we even skip the translation -not enough time to do everything- and just give/get the information it gives plus how it has helped in archaeological excavations etc)
