#homer translations

[katerinaaqu]

Heyyy I’ve recently looked at different English translations of the odyssey and noticed smth very confusing when I went to a specific translation (which is Emily Wilson) and her translation started as such :

“Tell me about a complicated man. Muse, tell me how he wandered and was lost when he had wrecked the holy town of Troy” now what immediately caught my eye was the complicated which she used for Odysseus and I wanted to ask what you think of that translation?

In other translations it’s always stuff like

“The various minded man”, “that man skilled in all ways of contending (not sure about this one)” or “the man of twists and turns” so yeah I’m well aware of her goal in trying to achieve a more objective and open to the audience kind of translation but given that she translated Agamemnon as a cannibal I’m just kinda playing safe and would love to know your opinion

I see. Well Emily Wilson wouldn't be my first recommendation because she dums down many things and she deliberately twists many words. She is also one of those to my knowledge who supports writings like Miller even though it is clear that Miller doesn't write accurately. Yeah for Agamemnon Emily Wilson translated "cannibal" because she dumped down the phrase:

δημοβόρος βασιλε���ς -> people-eater king

But the term "δημοβόρος" is not literal. It means someone who destroys his own people or someone who steps on others and that has as a result to destroy them. The accusation was spoken by Achilles in his rage. The word δήμος means "people" in the political essence. Not the literal. Wilson seems to have used deliberately the cruel word "cannibal" to dump that down AND judging by the general turning towards her direction to have a certain bias against several characters she seems to deliberately turn the political term into a literal one.

And that is not the only deliberate word she twisted. In the Odyssey for once Odysseus calls Penelope δαιμονίη which means "possessed by a god" or as more specifically "weird" or "unnatural". Wilson translates "extraordinary". Just like with Agamemnon that Wilson seems to be deliberately choosing a negative connotation for Agamemnon, she chose a word that means "unnatural" but also sounds positive too. But Odysseus was not complimenting Penelope, he was complaining. Likewise Wilson seems to mistranslate yet another passage in the Odyssey to deliberately deflect from the hero's motivation especially in an already interesting passage; the testing of Laertes. Wilson translates "with teasing and abuse". There is no such thing in the original text. The original Greek says "he decided to test him because that seemed right to wise people". So Homer called him "wise" for testing the waters. Wilson made it sound like Odysseus felt like doing some sort of psychological torment to Laertes.

As for the passage of the Odyssey, Wilson for some reason translates "πολύτροπον" (=of many ways, of many wiles or of many turns) and she translated it "complicated" for no reason, to fit for her metric system too. Wilson doesn't seem to care for accuracy. She cares for accessibility. Also in her introduction she seems to call towards the modern day feministic approaches and she doesn't speak with the most positive way on the characters such as Odysseus. She also says that the reason The Odyssey doesn't come to an end completely is because Odysseus will always have the desire to "be absent" or "to destroy other people" and yet that seems to have little to nothing to do with the hero. Odysseus was the guy that tried to avoid bloodshed when he could and he even tried to test and spare the suitors and yet of course his war trauma made him uncontrollable and impossible to stop, that much was true that destruction would be inside him but the way she voiced it seemed to me like she truly believed...dunno the way recent retellings wanna picture him as "monstrous". As for the "desire to be absent" I find it funny the very least. The character that identified himself with the name of his son many times instead of his father's out of his need to be there "wants to be absent"? I doubt it. She also conveniently left out the prophecy of Tiresias that dictates that Odysseus has yet to break his curse. The reason The Odyssey is not finishing is simply because Odysseus is not done. The Odyssey was never about a perfect ending of Odysseus's life in the first place. It was about his return to his home and the cognitive trip he had along the way. The fact that his story is a "nostos" aka the return home is simply that. The Odyssey just like The Iliad were never supposed to have a perfect ending to begin with. Wilson deliberately leaves that out and instead she projects it as if Odysseus has some sort of a desire to leave. He doesn't. At least not in the way Wilson presents it.

Last but not least from what I remember she is a full supporter of Telegony being a good continuation of the Odyssey even if it bears so many contradictions to the Homeric text starting from the prophecy of Tiresias for a peaceful death of old age for Odysseus (he dies by a spear in Telegony which we cannot exactly call "a peaceful death" by the hands of his son Telegonus (and even that according to some readings of the Odyssey is also contradicting the "only son line" from Cephalus's line) and he is not seemingly "surrounded by loved ones" either till the whole thing of Odysseus marrying another woman when Penelope is alive even if in Homer he rejected two goddesses and one young Princess for the sakes of Penelope.

As for the translation as I said by her biases alone has several problems but I leave you this post by @alatismeni-theitsa that you can see Wilson vs other translators before her:

And you can see the quality of precision from one or the other. On one hand it is true that Wilson aims to make the translation more accessible to the masses but I think she became so famous because of the projection rather than of precision. And here's my own translation of the same passage:

The man sing for me, Muse, of many twists and turns, who wandered in so many places, ever since he took the holy citadel of Troy

(Translation by me)

As you can see I can translate the words one by one, even focusing on the word "man" instead of starting with the classical way of "sing for me oh muse" for indeed the first word is "man" but what Wilson does is that she mistranslated the passage for the sakes of accessibility and yet the passage is not THAT difficult to begin with given how the words go as such:

ἀνδρα -> the man μοι -> for me ἔννεπε -> sing, chant (imperative) μοῦσα -> muse πολύτροπον -> of the many twists and turns/wiles ὃς -> the one who, who μάλα -> many, a lot, very much πολλά -> many (places) πλάγχθη -> wandered about ἐπεὶ -> ever since, after Τροίης -> of Troy, Troy's ἱερὸν -> sacred, holy πτολίεθρον -> citadel, castle ἔπερσεν -> took, conquered

As you see from your passage Wilson seems to be more interpreting than translating. Is it wrong? Not necessarily, for I have seen interpretative translations before. However you need to beware of these differences and unfortunately for the average reader that doesn't happen (thank goodness that people read more than one translations to get an idea). So no. By no means would I call Wilson "objective". Not at all. Does she do an effort to start with the opening word her translation? Yes. Does she write in a simple language that could bring more people to read the epics? Also yes. Is she objective and accurate? No. As I said Wilson tends to translate with more negative words certain characters while choosing positive for others. She also adds words that are not there to fit in her narrative and the metric system she chose. (By the way she uses pentaton while that is not the initial metric system of Homer but it makes sense that the original metric system would be almost impossible to capture with english text)

So yeah if it is accuracy you are looking for then no Wilson is not my first choice. If you wanna read her because her language is easy for you to understand then go ahead but bear in mind that she is not accurate and she has many different passages that do not correspond to the original. The most faithful text I heard in English is Lattimore although his language is harder and also I personally know the translation of Murray is also very accurate and I use it as reference myself from time to time when I translate from ancient Greek to modern Greek in my brain and then I translate to english. Butler is also very good as well as Feagles who is also very close to the original but also has a better language.

So if accuracy AND better language is what you want to go for I would suggest you Feagles or Butler over Wilson but if Wilson's translation is easier for you to follow (and she does have some good parts in her intros as well, I'll admit that much) then read it by all means but as I said I wouldn't call her objective by any means.

I hope this answers your question, Anon!

[achillessulks]

People have been very mean to Emily Wilson online lately. I’ve been on record as saying her translation of the Odyssey (or Iliad) wasn’t my favourite, but do I agree with the accusations of oversimplification or inaccuracy? (Spoiler alert: no.)

[chengchengj]

''Odysseus cheated on his wife'' My first reaction is: you don't know how to differentiate sex from rape and it's disgusting.

[irate-iguana]

Underrated moment from the Odyssey: this description of Odysseus forming a blanket burrito when he’s unable to sleep

You rotate your blorbos like rotisserie chickens? Well I rotate them like sausages full of fat and blood over a blazing fire. We are not the same.

[lyculuscaelus]

Telestratus

So, we have the word ὁμοφροσύνη (homophrosynē) which approximately means “like-mindedness, oneness of mind”. The word seems to be an ideal state for a man-woman relationship, as proclaimed by Odysseus in the Odyssey, book 6, line 180–185, when he was wishing Nausicaä the best kind of marriage:

σοὶ δὲ θεοὶ τόσα δοῖεν ὅσα φρεσὶ σῇσι μενοινᾷς, 180 ἄνδρα τε καὶ οἶκον, καὶ ὁμοφροσύνην ὀπάσειαν ἐσθλήν: οὐ μὲν γὰρ τοῦ γε κρεῖσσον καὶ ἄρειον, ἢ ὅθ᾽ ὁμοφρονέοντε νοήμασιν οἶκον ἔχητον ἀνὴρ ἠδὲ γυνή: πόλλ᾽ ἄλγεα δυσμεν��εσσι, χάρματα δ᾽ εὐμενέτῃσι,  μάλιστα δέ τ᾽ ἔκλυον αὐτοί. 185 May the gods grant you all that your heart desires, A man and a household, and may they send with like-mindedness, A good gift—for nothing is better or greater than this, When a man and a woman maintain a household together, Their thoughts like-minded—a great pain for their enemies, Yet pleasure for well-wishers, and they know it best themselves.

Many scholars have been analyzing like-mindedness in man-woman relationships in Homeric epics, the most famous examples should be Odysseus and Penelope, Menelaus and Helen, etc. Apparently, like-mindedness is a strong bond to keep their family together, and their love intact.

But that’s not what I’m gonna do at the moment, cuz I’d like to bring up another text where this word appears once more in the Odyssey. Basically, Book 15, line 194–202, when Telemachus was asking Peisistratus not to bring him to the house and hear Nestor yapping this time:

καὶ τότε Τηλέμαχος προσεφώνεε Νέστορος υἱόν: ‘ 195 Νεστορίδη,  πῶς κέν μοι ὑποσχόμενος τελέσειας μῦθον ἐμόν; ξεῖνοι δὲ διαμπερὲς εὐχόμεθ᾽ εἶναι ἐκ πατέρων φιλότητος, ἀτὰρ καὶ ὁμήλικές εἰμεν: ἥδε δ᾽ ὁδὸς καὶ μᾶλλον ὁμοφροσύνῃσιν ἐνήσει. μή με παρὲξ ἄγε νῆα, διοτρεφές, ἀλλὰ λίπ᾽ αὐτοῦ, 200 μή μ᾽ ὁ γέρων ἀέκοντα κατάσχῃ ᾧ ἐνὶ οἴκῳ ἱέμενος φιλέειν: ἐμὲ δὲ χρεὼ θᾶσσον ἱκέσθαι. ’ And then Telemachus addressed the son of Nestor: “Son of Nestor, can you make me a promise and fulfill it, as an order of mine? We can claim that we’re guest-friends forever, Through our fathers’ friendship, but we’re also of the same age; And this journey will greatly inspire our like-mindedness. Don’t lead me past my ship, O you cherished by Zeus, but leave me here, In case that old man keeps me in his house against my will, Eager to treat me kindly; I need to go home quicker.”

So Homer, you’re telling me that Telemachus was using a word commonly used for the bond of a couple, to describe his relationship with Peisistratus???

��Sure. And they were roommates.

[johaerys-writes]

....the Iliad doesn’t have anything explicit, or even implicit, about our heroes having sex. Patroclus and Achilles sleep in the same tent, but the narrator tells us that each of the men has an enslaved woman at his side. I felt I had to respond to the reader’s possible expectations and possible disappointment in two ways. One was to discuss the Patrochilles relationship fairly extensively in the introduction and notes, and make clear the ways that it’s taken absolutely seriously, and is at the emotional heart of Achilles’ narrative arc. In the introduction, I also discuss the fact that the Iliad doesn’t treat sex as a measure of closeness or love—so the fact that the poem doesn’t tell us that Achilles and Patroclus had sex is in no way a sign that they’re less than everything to each other. The characters who do have sex in the Iliad—Helen and Paris, Hera and Zeus, and various warriors with the enslaved women whom they regularly rape—are not exactly doing so out of “love.” 

Within the translation itself, I knew that I had to convey the profound intimacy and love of Achilles and Patroclus; the reader or listener has to understand on a deep emotional level that Patroclus is Achilles’ person, and that without him, he is all but dead himself—and he also knows that his death is at least partly his own fault. You, the reader or listener, should feel his devastation.

“My friend Patroclus, whom I loved, is dead.

I loved him more than any other comrade.

I loved him like my head, my life, myself.

I lost him, killed him…. “

By the time you get to Book 18, if you don’t feel the full horror of that moment with your whole being, I’ve failed.

Excerpt from Enduring Epics: Emily Wilson and Madeline Miller on Breathing New Life Into Ancient Classics on Literary Hub

[dearorpheus]

"In ways that are often hard to articulate but run through everything, my work has been deeply informed by my own experiences. I have been reading Homer throughout my adult life. Whenever I hear blustering winds and rain-storms, surging rivers or choppy seas, when I watch a flock of geese or a swooping hawk, when I walk through rustling woods or up a mountainside, I know I am inside the world of Homeric similes. Even the most trivial moments of daily life remind me of Homer. I notice that my feet are not "well-oiled" whenever I tie my sandals on. I cannot watch my dog happily rolling in mulch without thinking of Achilles, prostrated in grief and tossing around in the dust. More seriously, the poem gives me a language to understand my deepest emotions and those of people around me. When I weep for my mother, who died recently in a distant land, I remember the grief of Achilles and of Priam. The Iliad is with me always."

— Emily Wilson, in the translator's note of her Iliad

[risetherivermoon]

Telemachus in the Odyssey meeting Athena is actually rlly funny compared to EPIC,

bc Athena is disguised as Mentes at first, so Telemachus welcomes this stranger into his home and offers him food.

Then the suitors come in the room to eat and he's immediately leaning over to Athena going like: "i fucking hate these guys, look at those happy dumb idiot freeloaders- anyways, who are you?"

[autumnmobile12]

Odysseus and Calypso Were Lovers

As problematic as that sounds because WTF, hear me out because it's complicated and there's a lot to discuss. Trigger warning for sa. Also, not directly Epic: The Musical related; that's a whole other ballpark.

She trapped him on her island!

I'm not denying that nor am I denying how objectively messed up that is.

However, the captor and prisoner trope is one that does crop up in Greek mythology now and then.  The most famous example I can think of is Hades’ kidnapping of Persephone.  I have seen that situation blatantly called rape in the original story, and yet today, modern storytellers do like to revise that myth into a version that makes Demeter out to be an overbearing mother and Persephone's ‘kidnapping’ so to speak becomes an escape.  Personally, I think that is a very graceful way to make a barbaric story a bit more palatable to modern audiences.

So regarding Odysseus’ situation where falling in love with his captor is problematic…my thought process runs as, “Fucking Greek mythology and its weird idea of what constitutes as a love story.”

As a result, I have no serious thoughts on the morality of certain figures of Greek mythology because they frankly come from a time period where the people had a very different culture and set of moral values and ideas on what was acceptable. Therefore, it's futile to judge their stories by my own modern moral compass.

Where in The Odyssey does it say they were lovers?

The main line I can't ignore that strongly implies the nature of their relationship is Odysseus' farewell to Calypso:

“The sun went down and brought the darkness on. They  [Odysseus and Calypso] went inside the hollow cave and took the pleasure of their love, held close together.”  - The Odyssey, Homer, translated by Emily Wilson.

Keep in mind, she’s already told him he’s free to go.  He’s free to build his raft, she’s giving him supplies, and yet he says goodbye this tenderly.  Note the absence of Calypso using magic to compel him. If you cherry-picked this line, you'd find a fond goodbye.

Odysseus’ Tears

A lot of people making the ‘Odysseus/Calypso was a non-consensual situation’ argument like to cite the line that Odysseus cried every day on Ogygia.  And yes, he did weep every day he was there.  But this is the full stanza.

“On the tenth black night, the gods carried me till I reached the island of Ogygia, home of the beautiful and mighty goddess Calypso.  Lovingly she cared for me, vowing to set me free from death and time forever.  But she never swayed my heart.  I stayed for seven years; she gave me clothes like those of gods, but they were always wet with tears.” - The Odyssey, Homer, translated by Emily Wilson.

‘Beautiful and mighty….Lovingly she cared for me….she never swayed my heart.’  He speaks highly of her, not with hate or venom for her delaying him.

In my literature class where we read The Odyssey, the tears line was discussed and largely interpreted as Odysseus’ reaction to all the monsters he’d faced and losing all his crew and friends.  The PTSD of a war veteran.  From the cultural mindset of Ancient Greece, Odysseus was a king, and he failed his people when they all died under his command and he was unable to bring them home.  Similarly, the hero Theseus was once king of Athens.  He was usurped in absentia (Theseus being trapped in the Underworld at the time) and when he returned to his kingdom, he found another man on his throne, was forced to flee, and died a rather ignoble death when a supporter of his usurper shoved him off a cliff.  So Odysseus being a king who let an entire fleet die under his watch is certainly grounds for shame to the point of tears in the eyes of the Ancient Greeks.  And with an entire line-up of men attempting to court his wife and take his place, it drives home the idea that he was replaceable.

Also important to note:  He’s still miserable when he leaves Ogygia.  When he arrives at King Alcinous’ court, he is welcomed, provided food, shelter, and entertainment, but when the king checks in with his heartbroken guest, he pleads with him to tell him what’s wrong, which kickstarts the telling of Odysseus’ journey.

Odysseus was afraid of Calypso!

That said, it's also important to address this concept because this is Odysseus' reaction to the goddess telling him she is sending him on his way to Ithaka:

‘Goddess, your purpose cannot be as you say; you cannot intend to speed me home. You tell me to make myself a raft to cross the great gulf of ocean--a gulf so baffling and so perilous that not even rapid ships will traverse it, steady though they may be and favoured by a fair wind from Zeus. I will not set foot on such a raft unless I am sure of your good will--unless, goddess, you take on yourself to swear a solemn oath not to plot against me any new mischief to my ruin.’ The Odyssey, Homer, translated by Shewring.

His suspicion certainly suggests mistrust and fear that she intends to do him harm, and considering his track record of being hated by deities, that's understandable. This isn't exactly what you'd call a loving relationship. But this also brings up a weird contradiction in the poem. I would 100% say this was a completely non-consensual situation were it not for this line:

His eyes were always tearful; he wept sweet life away, in longing to go back home, since she [Calypso] no longer pleased him. - Wilson.

Not ‘she did not please him.’  She no longer pleased him.  That implies she 'pleased' him at one point and because of that, one could argue Calypso was a mistress and Odysseus eventually tired of her. (Probably long before seven years had passed.)

What Do The Translators Say?

I can't speak for all translators, but in the Emily Wilson translation, she includes a lengthy introduction describing Odysseus' world, the culture of Ancient Greece, the reasoning behind specific English wordage in the translation, etc. In the introduction, she refers to Calypso and Circe as Odysseus' affairs. Not his abusers. He also has a brief flirtation with Princess Nausicaa, the daughter of his final host, King Alcinous. Wilson then goes on to describe how these affairs are not a character failing of Odysseus in comparison to the treatment of Penelope where she is expected to be faithful and how that is indicative of a good woman.

Taking a step back from Greek mythology, consider the actions of King Henry VIII of England. Most historians agree that, for the first few years, the king's relationship with his first wife Katherine of Aragon was unusually good for the times. And yet he was an unfaithful husband, had at least one acknowledged bastard and historians speculate there were more. But while 'indiscretions' such as this were frowned upon in the Tudor Period, Henry VIII did not receive near as much criticism as Queen Katherine would have if she'd had an illegitimate child. If Katherine was 'indiscreet,' that was considered treason because she compromised the legitimacy of the succession and that was cause for a beheading.

Because misogyny. Again, different time, different moral values.

Misogyny in The Odyssey

Whatever one's thoughts on Calypso are, it is incredibly misogynistic of Homer to solely blame her for keeping Odysseus trapped while he conveniently ignores the plot hole that her island is completely surrounded by ocean and we all know that Poseidon was lurking out there just waiting for his shot at vengeance.  Odysseus is barely two stanzas off Calypso’s island before Poseidon goes after him.  It’s almost hilarious how quickly it happens.  The poem says Poseidon was returning from Ethiopia, not that he was there for the whole seven years, and Hermes clearly did not pass along the memo that Odysseus was free to return to Ithaka.  Although I like to imagine it was Zeus who forgot about Poseidon’s grudge against Odysseus, and Hermes, being the mischievous scamp that he is, did not remind him.

If one line in the text says Odysseus/Calypso was consensual while another says otherwise, which is it?

Honestly, I don't think there's a conclusive answer with just The Odyssey. I'm a hobbyist, not an expert, so I do refer to the judgment of translators like Wilson to make that call. If she and other translators say Calypso and Circe were affair partners and I can see the lines in the text to support that, I'll believe it and chalk up the rest as Greek mythology being problematic.

That said, we can also look at the opinions of other Greek poets in their further writings of the mythology:

“And the bright goddess Calypso was joined to Odysseus in sweet love, and bare him Nausithous and Nausinous.” - The Theogony; Of Goddesses and Men, Hesiod, translated by Evelyn-White.

“… after brief pleasure in wedlock with the daughter of Atlas [Calypso], he [Odysseus] dares to set foot in his offhand vessel that never knew a dockyard and to steer, poor wretch…” - Alexandra, Lycophron, translated by Mair.

Both seem to be of the opinion Calypso was Odysseus' lover.

Interestingly, Hesiod also writes in The Catalogues of Women Fragment:

“…of patient-souled Odysseus whom in aftertime Calypso the queenly nymph detained for Poseidon.” - The Catalogues of Women Fragment, Hesiod, translated by Evelyn-White.

The wording ‘detained for Poseidon’ implies Calypso was acting at Poseidon’s command or she was doing the sea god a favor or she possibly didn't have any free will herself whether or not Odysseus stayed on Ogygia. Either way, it does neatly account for Homer's aforementioned misogyny/plot hole.

But if Hesiod and Lycophron's works are not part of The Odyssey, why should we take them seriously?

You don't have to consider them canon. Just because I prefer to consider all mythology canon doesn't mean anyone else does. Just as easily, I could ask why we should take Homer's work seriously even though historians can't even agree whether or not he was a real person.

The truth is, Ancient Greece as we think of it lasted a thousand years.  Their culture/values changed several times and so did their stories to reflect those changes, and those stories continue to evolve to the modern day. Odysseus himself goes through a few different descriptions over the centuries, being described as scheming and even cruel in other works. So I consider modern works like Percy Jackson, Epic: The Musical, Son of Zeus, and so on to be just more cogs in the evolving narrative. Much like how retellings of Hades and Persephone are shifting to circumstances easier to accept by audiences today.

But why would Odysseus be unfaithful to his loving wife?

The loving wife he claimed as payment for helping out King Tyndareus? Yeah...Odysseus and Penelope's relationship may not quite be the undoubted loving one modern retellings make it out to be nor is Odysseus a saint in The Odyssey.

“A blast of wind pushed me [Odysseus] off course towards the Cicones in Ismarus.  I sacked the town and killed the men.  We took their wives and shared their riches equally amongst us.”  - The Odyssey, Homer, translated by Emily Wilson.

Raiding a town unprovoked, killing the men, kidnapping the women, stealing their treasure is not indicative to what we in the modern day consider heroic or good protagonist behavior. Also, at the end of the Trojan War, Queen Hekuba was made a slave and given to Odysseus.

As for the chapter with Circe, Penelope's name isn't even mentioned. Moreover, the wording of the Wilson translation gives the troubling connotation that Circe may have been the one who was assaulted.

Hermes’ instructions to Odysseus are as follows:

"...draw your sharpened sword and rush at her as if you mean to kill her. She will be frightened of you, and will tell you to sleep with her." - Wilson

She'll be frightened of him? Hermes is encouraging Odysseus to render Circe powerless by eating the Moly plant so she can't turn him into a pig, then threaten her with a sword, which does frighten her, and then sleep with her. That line of events is disturbing. Circe is the one who offers to take Odysseus to bed, sure, but there’s a strange man in her house, she’s allegedly afraid according to Hermes, and she’s unable to resort to her usual defense and turn him into a pig as she did with the others.  Under those circumstances, sleeping with an invader is a survival tactic.

However...after Odysseus makes Circe promise to turn his men back, she bathes him and gives him food like a proper Ancient Greek host. Yet before Odysseus accepts the meal, he puts his men first, saying he can't bear to eat until he knows they're well. So Circe turns them back, then Odysseus returns to where the rest of the crew are waiting on the shore. They're all convinced their comrades are dead until Odysseus tells them what transpired and they rejoice. All except suspicious Eurylochus who calls them fools for trusting Odysseus' word based on his previous bad decisions. Odysseus thinks about cutting his head off for speaking that way. Damn, that went from zero to a hundred fast.

But Penelope's name is missing from the story.

Odysseus only thinks of leaving Circe's island when his men speak of returning to their homeland, after which he goes to Circe about the matter, and she instructs him to go to the Underworld.

"That broke my heart, and sitting on the bed I wept, and lost all will to live and see the shining sun." - Wilson

Odysseus and his men all lament the idea of sailing into the land of the dead. So his tears and despair did not start with Calypso. Also, they return to Circe's island after the journey so she can help them make sense of Tiresias' instructions.

But setting all that aside, even when Hermes instructed him on what to do, Odysseus didn't make some grand speech on how he can’t betray his wife.  He doesn’t specifically say he’s crying for Penelope on Calypso’s island.  He doesn’t mention Penelope at all, and when King Alcinous asks him about his sorrow, Odysseus tells his whole story, barely bringing up his wife or his love for her.

So is Odysseus a good guy?

In all, Odysseus is a clever character who is known for using his wits to get out of any situation.  Polyphemus, the Sirens, Scylla, he had a plan.  The idea that he’s suddenly helpless against Calypso and Circe is out of character.  They may be goddesses, but they’re not exactly the heavy hitters of the pantheon, which is why Poseidon could absolutely order a minor sea nymph to stop what she’s doing and hold a man prisoner for him. And while Odysseus spends the entire story being thwarted by the gods, one could say he also thwarts the gods right back by refusing to give up.

Like most Greek heroes, I would say Odysseus is not what we today would call a hero. But when he shares a roster with characters like this:

Zeus:  Serial rapist

Poseidon:  Serial rapist

Hades:  Kidnapped Persephone (setting aside modern interpretations she went with him willingly)

Herakles:  Raped a princess named Auge  (Yes, really.)

Theseus:  Kidnapped Helen of Sparta when she was a child because he wanted to marry a daughter of Zeus, aided and abetted his cousin in an attempt to kidnap Persephone, abandoned Ariadne, etc.

Jason the Argonaut:  Tried to abandon his wife. (I say ‘try’ because he didn’t get the chance. His wife Medea killed the other woman first.)

Hephaistos:  Raped Athena after she refused him.

Achilles:  Murdered a child to prevent a prophecy from coming true.

...Odysseus's atrocities are weirdly tame by comparison. Even the narrative where he kills the infant Prince Astyanax, modern retellings usually give that role to the lesser known Neoptolemus. More on that here.

In the end, it's not necessarily thematically important whether or not Odysseus is good or bad. The core of his character revolves around his cleverness and ability to build and strategize and make his own way in the world he lives in. Rounding this out is Emily Wilson's commentary on the symbolism behind the tree bed,

"In leaving Calypso, Odysseus chooses something that he built with his own mind and hands, rather than something given to him. Whereas Calypso longs to hide, clothe, feed, and possess him, Athena enables Odysseus to construct his own schemes out of the materials she provides." - The Odyssey, Homer, trans. by Emily Wilson, Introduction Pg 64.

So were Odysseus and Calypso lovers?

Based on the above, my opinion is 'Yes they were, but with the caveat they were problematic af.' Because problematic themes like that are pretty par for the course in Greek mythology.

[nysus-temple]

i did NOT just see someone saying "Calypso actually allowed Odysseus to go, she gave him materials to make a boat. He wasn't being kept against his will."

yeah, no shit, Sherlock. she did it when HERMES using THE WRATH OF ZEUS as an argument, TOLD HER to do so.

I'm genuinely concerned by you guys' comprehension to read, dead serious, you cannot understand a basic sentence AT ALL.

[greekmythcomix]

Ok my dudes, place your bets…

[katerinaaqu]

Homer's Menelaus: Ah, I grieve for my best friend, the one who suffered more than any of us to the point I cannot sleep or eat! What accursed fate has befallen on that great man!

Eurypedes's Menelaus: Ah that blasted son of Sisiphus is a people pleaser addicted to the love of the crowd! He will do anything to give blood to please the mob! If he is onto us we're lost!

Like...Eurypedes my boy I love your writing on many aspects but...what the fuck? 😅😂

[gemsofgreece]

Hi! What could be a good english version of The Iliad, like the most faithful translation of it? xx

Hello! I have read the Iliad only in the prototype and modern Greek renditions. So in order to answer this I started with a plain search on the web for the most famous English translations. I see Lattimore (1951) and Fagles (1990) being frequently recommended. I ended up finding however a fantastic post on Reddit by some good soul who decided to analyze in depth all the modern English translations. OP provides the first paragraph of most of these translations in order to back their commentary. As a result I was able to read them as well. So I will add the link to their post in the end of my answer but in the meantime I decided to also provide my own opinion alongside theirs. Granted, my evaluation is based only on the first paragraph but we know writers and translators strive for the best in the opening paragraph so hopefully my conclusions will be more or less safe. Let alone that the opening paragraph of the Iliad is famous, it’s the invocation of the Muse, so certainly the translators were trying their best. Please note I am only judging the translations for which OP provides the first paragraph.

Lattimore (1951)

Deviations counted: 3

Style: poetry

Other notes: A little difficult to read but there is something old-school about it I like. Despite its deviations, it tried to keep other elements most other translators failed to.

Reddit OP opinion: They did not like Lattimore, they think he’s overrated.

Fitzgerald (1974)

Deviations counted: 8

Style: poetry

Other notes: God forbid.

Reddit OP opinion: They like it but admit it’s not very faithful to Homer.

Hammond (1987)

Deviations counted: 3

Style: prose

Other notes: It sounds more humble than Lattimore’s pompous translation, however it is easy and readable without deviating much from the original.

Reddit OP opinion: We agree.

Fagles (1990)

Deviations counted: 7

Style: poetry

Other notes: Why is this one of the two most popular translations? If you have to pick one of the two all time classics, I definitely recommend Lattimore between the two. But my favourite so far remains Hammond.

Reddit OP opinion: They reject this for the same reasons as they did with Fitzgerald.

Murray & Wyatt (1999, latest revision, 1924, original)

Deviations counted: 7 (fewer in the original)

Style: prose

Other notes: OP provides the original version and some older revisions and they are significantly better than what you will likely find in stores now. The original is in an older style of English.

Reddit OP opinion: That was the point they were making: unnecessary revisions for the worse. They say the old version is out of copyright so maybe you can find that one.

Merrill (2007)

Deviations: 8

Style: poetry

Other notes: It’s poetic but not beautiful enough and certainly not very faithful to the original.

Reddit OP opinion: Somehow they seem to like the opening paragraph but then makes notes similar to mine regarding the rest of the poem - I’d argue it’s evident from the very beginning.

Kline (2009)

Deviations: 6 (7-1)

Style: prose

Other notes: I removed one penalty as a bonus for being the only one so far to translate the “for thus was the will of Zeus brought to fulfilment” line decently. Overall decent, the deviations aren’t too annoying.

Reddit OP opinion: They consider it average - not too good or too bad - and they say it is free to read online. Both they and I prefer Hammond still.

Verity (2010)

Deviations: 6

Style: prose pretending to be verse

Other notes: Interestingly, Verity deviates in easier lines and nails the ones nobody did.

Reddit OP opinion: They love this one.

McCrorie (2012)

Deviations: 5

Style: poetry

Other notes: He goes for an epic style and I do not dislike it. He uses unusual English versions of the characters names though (ie Akhilleus, Aides). I don’t mind but it could confuse you.

Reddit OP opinion: They say their rendition overall is inconsistent and claim some of their choices sound bad in English. I did not really find the examples they gave problematic or bad, but maybe it is because in Greek those sentences sound better and McCrorie was going for a Greek voice, which is why it did not feel jarring to me like to the OP. We disagree in this one. I still prefer Hammond though.

Green (2015)

Deviations: 4

Style: poetry

Other notes: It is pretty faithful but I can’t say I find anything impressive about it.

Reddit OP opinion: They love it.

Alexander (2015)

Deviations: 3

Style: poetry

Other notes: She gives a very loyal translation, however lacks a bit in style, it is a little plain for poetry.

Reddit OP opinion: They like it a lot.

Nurcombe (2020)

Deviations: 6

Style: poetry

Other notes: Nothing particular to remark.

Reddit OP opinion: They find it a loyal translation (which maybe it is, because the deviations are six yet not very significant) but think it’s lacking in its poetry. Maybe this is why I found it unremarkable.

Wilson (2023)

Deviations: 9

Style: poetry

Other notes: We Greeks have talked before about Wilson taking too many liberties and her translation of the first paragraph proves it once more. She adds stuff of her own in there.

Reddit OP opinion: They comment on the loose translation but overall like her style of poetry.

In conclusion, my opinion is:

If you want easy, very readable and accurate prose, pick Hammond.

If you want accuracy and one of the all time classics and don’t mind the occasionally challenging poetic read, pick Lattimore.

If your main concern is accuracy and can go for older, harder, more epic sounding prose, try to find the original Murray or at least one of the old revisions but skip the most recent ones.

If you don’t mind a hard poetic read, maybe even odd in English (as stated by the English reader) because it attempts to get close to the Greek poetic voice, even at a paradoxical occasional expense of word for word accuracy, give McCrorie a shot. I don’t know if this made any sense lol I mean that even when he is not extremely loyal word after word, there is a feel of attempted Greek voice throughout his text. In other words, if you want a wildcard, give it a shot. But it could be alienating to an English reader, I don’t know.

Having said all that, again, I could only judge from the first paragraph and some notes by the Reddit OP. I am adding now their in-depth analysis. OP’s favourite for fidelity and style was Green.

Of course, if someone here is fluent in Greek and well acquainted with the English translations, please help us out.

[transbutchblues]

The introduction to Emily Wilson’s Odyssey. Oh gods, the introduction to Emily Wilson’s Odyssey.

[lyculuscaelus]

The Odyssey, book 5, line 151–155:

τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀκτῆς εὗρε καθήμενον: οὐδέ ποτ᾽(1) ὄσσε δακρυόφιν τέρσοντο, κατείβετο δὲ γλυκὺς αἰὼν νόστον ὀδυρομένῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι ἥνδανε νύμφη.(2) ἀλλ᾽ ἦ τοι νύκτας μὲν ἰαύεσκεν καὶ ἀνάγκῃ(3) ἐν σπέσσι γλαφυροῖσι παρ᾽ οὐκ ἐθέλων ἐθελούσῃ:(4) She (Calypso) found him (Odysseus) sitting on the shore—never once were his eyes Dry of tears, while his sweet life was passing away Lamenting his homecoming, for the nymph no longer pleased him. But indeed in the nights he slept, by force, In her hollow caves, unwilling beside the willing (nymph).

(1) οὐδὲ ποτέ: this is a good phrase to invoke pathos, as we see οὐδέ, “never”, being put alongside ποτέ, “once, at any time”, showing the picture of Odysseus crying on Ogygia since day one, never once free from sorrow. Notice, too, how this phrase comes first and foremost, presenting itself as a lead-up to the entire sentence, overshadowing this part with a sense of melancholy.

(2) ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι ἥνδανε νύμφη: I’ve been seeing a lot of interpretations based on this one single sentence, “…since she no longer pleased him”—but you know what? Just a reminder that in Ancient Greek, the word ἥνδανε (it’s 1st person singular indicative form being ἁνδάνω), with the meaning “pleased, delight”, is mostly used in the context of “being pleased with ransoms/words/food and drink…”, which is anything that promises material gains:

(e.g. “ἀλλʼ οὐκ Ἀτρεΐδῃ Ἀγαμέμνονι ἥνδανε θυμῷ”, Iliad. 1.24: but it (Achaeans’ assent to Chryses’s speech that promised ransoms) did not please the heart of Agamemnon son of Atreus; “…ἐμῷ δ᾽ οὐχ ἥνδανε θυμῷ”, Odyssey. 10.373: but it (Circe’s urging of Odysseus to eat the food) did not please my heart; “…μάλιστα δὲ Πηνελοπείῃ / ἥνδανε μύθοισι…”, Odyssey, 16.397–398: but he (Amphinomus) pleased Penelope the most with his words; etc.)

Which means, in this case, the pleasure Calypso could’ve brought Odysseus was only material: food and drink to keep him from starving, shelter to keep him from dying… and nothing more.

(3) ἀνάγκῃ: the dative singular of the word ἀνάγκη means “force, constraint, necessity” and sometimes even more, “torture; anguish, pain” (the latter is more seen in tragic plays), but here I believe the former meaning alone is more than enough to demonstrate the lack of consent in Odysseus when he slept beside Calypso.

(4) παρ’ οὐκ ἐθέλων ἐθελούσῃ: I love this line so much—the way Homer uses the participle of the verb ἐθέλω “to be willing” twice, each in different gender—the masculine nominative one for Odysseus being οὐκ έθέλων “ not willing”, the feminine dative one for the nymph being ἐθελούσῃ “too willing”, and putting them together to fit both the meter and the theme? This is literally perfect.

[finelythreadedsky]

rereading emily wilson's rendering of the hanging of the slave women in odyssey 22 and i was really struck by how she consistently calls them "girls," even when the greek explicitly refers to them as γυναῖκες, and i was wondering why she might have made this choice to make them appear younger in english than they do in greek, but i realized that greek doesn't have anything else to call them. there simply isn't a word for a "girl" who isn't a virgin and isn't being talked about as someone's daughter. by virtue of being enslaved and raped, they are referred to as adult women, no matter how young they are.