I used to think that reading was
amazing, and I often preferred it to listening or watching. However, I have
learned that we lose so much when we communicate alone. Books, films, and online
communication are useful, but I think they only give us a glimpse of what it is
like to interact face-to-face. As I read The Iliad, I found a few characteristics
that seemed a bit odd to find in a written text. But they made more sense when I
considered them in light of a face-to-face storytelling culture.
Practical
detail: Often, Homer thoroughly describes what the
characters are physically doing. In Book 16 there is more than ample description
of the battles. In Book 24 there is a section that describes step-by-step how
Priam’s sons prepare his cargo wagon for the trip. This detail seems excessive
and boring for a written narrative, but from the perspective of storytelling,
it appears to have more purpose. What would it be like to experience these (seemingly
boring) descriptions through a real person, one we can see, hear, and respond to?
Metaphors
and similes: As we have discussed in class, there are many comparisons throughout the text. Homer compares characters and events to
stars, snakes, eagles, hawks, hounds, trees, and war events. He even commands
us (in second person) to think about the strokes of woodcutters as a metaphor. Some
of these metaphors take a large chunk of text to describe. They slow down the
pace of the reading, allowing listeners to slowly and fully experience the tale.
There seems to be less an emphasis on plot and more on an attempt to feel and
understand each small event, something a storyteller would prioritize. It’s
slower, descriptive, and more life-like.
Clarification
of identity: Another odd characteristic is Homer’s
constant reminders of characters’ identities and relationships. When first
reading, I tried to write down all of the names and relationships in order to
keep them straight, but I soon realized that Homer often repeats these details
for us. With multiple reminders, a reader – and even more importantly, a
listener – doesn’t have to work too hard to remember the core relationships. The
Homeric epithets add to this too. By the end of even just a couple of The Iliad’s
books, we can have no doubt that Athena has white arms and Achilles is a
fast runner. Perhaps this clarification is a tool that storytellers used for
themselves and their listeners as they performed.
What purpose do these characteristics serve in The Iliad? If you were to tell a story orally (even a short one), would you find that these characteristics make more sense when there is an active audience in mind?
What purpose do these characteristics serve in The Iliad? If you were to tell a story orally (even a short one), would you find that these characteristics make more sense when there is an active audience in mind?
This is a really interesting and well thought out perspective! I never thought of it this way before, and I agree with what you’re saying. There are definitely certain stories that just work better to be told rather than read- I kind of think of it as when you have something you want to tell a friend but you can’t text it to them, you have to wait until the next time you see them in person because it just wouldn’t be the same to write it and it would lose some of itself. How cool would it have been to be in the audience when these stories were being sung? We’d definitely get a much better sense of not only what happened and why and how, but the emotion or lack thereof behind it all depending on the mood it was sung/told in. In addition, obviously I have no idea whether they did this back then, but using hand gestures when you tell a story also helps a lot when it comes to visualizing the events in your head. I wonder if they did any acting out of these scenes as they sung? We know there were plays in Ancient Greece, did they ever perform the Iliad and Odyssey as comedies/tragedies or were those strictly for poetic/musical purposes?
ReplyDeleteAs for whether having an active audience gives the characters more meaning, I think it’s definitely likely to help, but also not the only way. Even just having any sort of visual in general like a movie would clear up a lot of things that are hard to get across on the written page. If Homer had written these stories down when they first came into existence, I wonder how the ancient Greeks would’ve felt if they could’ve chosen between reading them, hearing them, or watching! Maybe today we’re just spoiled with options.
I really like how you brought up that writing something important in a text message can downplay the event and cause it to "lose some of itself." I definitely agree. From your perspective then, how much have we lost from reading The Iliad and not experiencing it in person?
DeleteYour question about hand gestures is interesting, Raquel, but they couldn't have. Their hands were busy playing the lyre...
DeleteI have always been the type of person to enjoy listening the same as I do reading. I enjoy listening to a trained reader who has practiced the phrases and knows how to make the story more interesting through their tone or voice acting. I find myself putting an audiobook on while I drive on a long trip or I will play one in the background while I follow along.
ReplyDeleteYour ideas were great and very descriptive to prove the point you were getting at. Since we discussed how The Iliad was actually sang or in storytelling form, this was a great topic of discussion. I think that Homer's abundance of metaphors and similes would have be wonderful to listen to. While listening you could look around and feel like it was happening in front of you because you were hearing it. Not just reading it.
I love reading a lot, but I've always loved storytelling and listening to oral tales. When reading The Iliad, it reminds me of reading an urban legend or a tale of war. The world that Homer created in The Iliad is very much like a fantasy world of gods/goddesses and mortals.
ReplyDeleteI also really liked how you noticed that all the characters had a 'title' or are constantly reminded of their relations to other characters, such as "Thetis, silvery-footed daughter of the Old One of the sea" indicating that she is a sea nymph and the daughter of a sea god. I feel relieved that I wasn't the only one seeing all these constant reminders of which character is related to who. The only that really confused me was to why Athena was always described to have white arms. I think the white arms resemble wisdom and purity, since Athena is also been called "the Virgin goddess."
I think the plethora of detail in The Iliad (I couldn't figure out how to italicize so I'm a little bummed) says something not only about the conventions of storytelling, but, more specifically, about the conventions of storytelling in this time period. I was thinking about how I relate a story to my best friend: lots and lots and lots (again wishing for italics) of detail, but STILL not to the degree that this text does! Whenever a certain person comes up in a story that I’m telling, I may give a good bit of background information, but not to the point of who the person's great-great grandfather was. I think the fact that these kinds of details were considered necessary when these tales were being spun says a lot about their culture. Clearly, lineage matters, and this is further supported by the fact that Diomedes spares Glaukos after discovering that they have ancient family ties. I also think of the abounding detail used in describing different aspects of battle, including the armor and other battle gear. The purpose of this is that certain facets of their gear had symbolic significance that would have struck the audience and given them an impression about the importance of a particular character. This is why it was such a clever idea for Patroklos to disguise himself in Achilles's armor -- Achilles's armor was distinct because it was designed to be that way. Achilles was a big shot, so he needed unique armor to outwardly demonstrate that.
ReplyDeleteAbout the metaphors and similes, I was amazed by the use of figurative language! These stories are ancient, and they were fabricated and transmitted in a culture considerably different from our own. Despite this, the mental framework of building and deepening understanding through comparison held through in this text; some of the figurative language was elaborate and highly detailed, showing the complexity of thought that existed even in the very early stages of the literary experience. We typically think of our society as being the most sophisticated, but epics like these we have been reading implicate that former societies justifiably rivaled, perhaps even excelled beyond, our accomplishments. I just thought that was super super cool.
Your discussion of clarification reminded me of our discussions of the usage of repetition to propel orally transmitted stories. We’ve talked about how the repetition helped to guide and solidify listeners’ understanding of significant events and details. Based on your experiences, the tactic definitely works! Homer’s clarifications helped you to remember, and now that I think about it I naturally started to get a grasp on certain details and connections just from them being constantly reiterated. The epithets I think are especially interesting. They have rhythmic importance, but they also help to construct concise representations of recurring characters. Athena being described as the “grey-eyed” goddess gave me such a distinct impression of her, almost foreboding, that I was reminded of with each recurrence of the epithet, helping to set a certain mood around her character and the scenes she appeared in.
You make a great point about the epithets setting a specific mood for the characters. I had a similar experience to yours, just with Achilles instead of Athena. Every time Homer mentioned his speed and ability to run, I had this mental picture of a runner form around Achilles. The epithets certainly helped me make stereotypical judgements about the characters. This is a lot more than just clarification for information's sake.
DeleteI also appreciate your input about culture. Storytelling today is different because of differences in values (not just things like print and digital technologies). We might not be as concerned about family histories when meeting new people, but we are sometimes curious about occupations.
I wonder how the poet would have performed it physically in addition to your ideas? Many people find it difficult to watch someone simply standing there and reciting a long narrative. In order to be so thoroughly documented, the story and the poet must have been remarkable. I also think it would be fun to imagine the town gathered around the singer as he gestured wildly to the various comparisons in the long, drawn out similes as he stalled to come up with the next line or acted out the multitude of battles with an imaginary spear. The epithets helped me as well, especially with so many different characters involved - since everyone has some sort of legacy and every one is listed, people are introduced and killed within lines of each other, making it impossible to remember who is who and why they are important without the epithets.
ReplyDeleteI also found myself wondering how much they acted out the scenes. It seems impossible not to (at the very least) make large hand gestures while describing the battle scenes. Above, rzattoni mentioned the same thing as you about the physical performance.
DeleteYou make a good point about the town. I wonder how many people came and what it was like to be there. How did they all hear? Did people tell each other the stories that they missed? (Kind of like how we catch each other up on tv episodes that we miss?)
I feel that practical detail as well as similes would be better transmitted in written form. I feel this way because they would become "official" in a sense. When a story is transmitted orally, it is open to the modification of the bard or story teller. That being the case, I feel that a lot of detail and similes would be lost in an oral translation. Similes and detail are very contemplative and thought out, and when you tell a story off the top of your head, you lack the time to create substantial detail/simile. However, when it comes to the identities and relationships of characters in a story, the reader develops them in his mind. Of course I can write down that so and so was the son of whoever but that's about it. The dynamics of a character and his/her relationships with others are developed in the readers mind, and consequently lends itself to better "live" story telling. I feel it is much easier to express how you feel about a person orally rather than through text. Just ask anyone who has tried to tell a girl how he feels over text..
ReplyDeleteYou make a good point about written work becoming "official"...but why is the practical detail there then? It doesn't make sense that the information is there to actually teach someone how to do something, so what is its purpose? I can only think that it enhanced the listeners' experience by adding more detail and slowing down the storytelling (dramatizing it). Or perhaps there actually was acting, even by multiple actors, who physically presented those details as the storyteller spoke. I'm not sure why...
DeleteI think the idea that storytelling offers some interesting counterpoints to what we can gather from strictly reading. Like you said, if I am interpreting your post correctly, looking at these stories from an outside point of view offers a slower, more descriptive outlook. Doing so truly adds to the interpretation and appreciation of the overall story. Like we've discussed, these stories were meant to be performed and are written down as such. This is apparent, like you said, when Homer continuously describes the characters and their characteristics. This would have definitely reinforced the facts to the people listening to the stories.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, this is a very well said discussion post. I liked that you had evidence to back up your claims, and that you clearly split up your points. To answer your question, yes, I do believe that Homer wrote this keeping an audience in mind. The Iliad is exploding with way too much imagery/specific details to not be orally told. I think that is largely part of who Homer was and what made him such a genius.
ReplyDeleteTerrific seed post, Alice, and thoughtfully curated. You sparked some excellent commentary from your readers...
ReplyDelete