The Iliad   by Homer (translation by Samuel Butler)

June 2004     A Christmas gift from my loving, book-addict Mother.

I found this book... let's see... Academic. It was dry... and lengthy in places. I know that it would have been a totally different experience if I had read it in the original verse. (I imagine it might have had a similar effect as that of Endymion by John Keats; This was a very long history, all in verse, with some lengthy descriptions, which are only very enjoyable because they are put in verse so nicely.)

As it is, it's a little dull. There are still fine points, but I don't think I ever Had to keep reading this book, just to find out what happens next. So... what Did I read it for? And what Are the good points, far me?

I enjoy Anthropology, so this was a great look at life, of 2800 or so years ago. And it is interesting to see the same basic Life going on for them... as life goes now. It's just in a different setting. But all the Human feelings and motivations are still there. (The only difference, perhaps, is that there is much less nobility in people's behaviour at the present.) The book is about human nature though; The bitterness of Achilles, and the strong will of Agamemnon, the wrath, and the blind fury once Patroclus dies. And, I suppose, there is a theme about the necessity for people to overcome their reactions, and their feelings, and to do the Noble thing. This is accentuated by the gods in this book. They too, are less than perfect, and have arguments, and harbour old grudges, and have petty disagreements. Even so, the people try... they eventually must, follow their fate, and live the way they must. I'm not really being clear though, am I? Oh... Bother.

I guess that I like it for the way that it shows human nature. And the gods are included, for they are no better than the humans, only more powerful. I think... I would still like to read the Odysey, but not at the moment: I've had enough of the style for a few months. I value the experience, because there are archetypes in it; There are definitive situations of anger, revenge, mourning, and so on. And this story is a part of culture. I feel more, (hmmmm...) connected with society, and better able to understand it.

I was surprised by the ending though: The whole thing, in a literal sense, is about a war, and there is this huge foreshadowing through most of it, because the main character has been told that it's his fate to die at the walls of this city. Well, naturally enough, that made me think that the book would end, with the ending of this character's life. Perhaps a little bit more, about how the war ended, and who "won", and got Helen (Who the war was all about, in a way. Of course, not if you look at it through the "War and Peace" viewpoint; the war was bound to happen, because lots and lots of people wanted to take the riches of Troy. Helen was just a convenient excuse for one man, and that man, a convenient excuse for everyone else.)

Anyhow, the book didn't end with the death of Achilles, but with the end of his blind fury. Once he feels he is revenged, and he gives up the body of his enemy (which he was keeping, so that it couldn't have an honourable funeral.) Then, once the emotional journey is done, and his enemy's body is interred, The book ends.

So, the superficial story, of the war, is left unfinished. Perhaps that is meant to make the reader realise that the whole thing, from beginning to end, was not about the war, and killing (though there was an awful lot of text devoted to descriptions of who killed who, with which fatal stroke, in which part of the body, with which weapon. ("And then he too, bit the dust, and lay dead, far from his home.") The whole tale was about not that, but about the inner changes in one man, (and then, the inner changes that take place in us all.)

Well... at least that's what I think about it now. I started reading this book two months ago or so, and as such, I am sure that many many thoughts about it went through my head.