Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> I decided that Achilles is a bloodthirsty assshole and fuck him and his μήνις

In the French translation I have, the translator mentions that "wrath" is used once or so in the book, only to describe Zeus's behavior.

I believe the key is to interpret the text in a theistic setting: it's not "rage" in the human sense: Agamemnon is going against Apollo by disrespecting his priest, Achilles helps Agamemnon to solve the issue, and instead of being thankful, Agamemnon punishes Achilles.

Achilles would have slayed him, but he didn't because Athena told him not to.

That's a key difference between Agamemnon and Achilles: the latter is much more respectful of the Gods than the other. In theistic societies, you don't pick heretical heroes.

Agamemnon is motivated by this blind human rage when he punishes Achilles. Achilles isn't.

I believe we could make similar comments regarding the act of killing back then: in a setting where people firmly believe in immortality of the soul, the moral rules are probably way different that in today's essentially atheistic setting.




>> In the French translation I have, the translator mentions that "wrath" is used once or so in the book, only to describe Zeus's behavior.

It's the very first word of the very first verse:

  μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος
Literal translation:

  μῆνιν      ἄειδε  θεὰ       Πηληϊάδεω        Ἀχιλῆος
  [The rage] [sing] [goddess] [of Peleus' son] [Achilles]
More grammatically: "Sing, o goddess, the rage of Achilles, son of Peleus".

It really is all about Achilles having a hissy fit, throwing a tantrum, stamping his little feet, chucking his toys out of the pram and holding his breath until he's blue in the face. The analysis of the translator in your book is over-engineered, I would say.


(I'm seeing this quite late, my bad).

Let me rephrase this: the observation is the translator's; the analysis is mine.

Why would anyone chose to celebrate so highly such a childish behavior? That's preposterous. People weren't stupid. Teaching people to show respect to virtuous people, I barely see how over-engineered of an interpretation this is: it's basic common sense.


Thanks for the clarification. You're quite right about the childish behaviour, yet I don't think it was celebrated, as such. I think the Illiad makes more sense in the context of the ancients' notion of hubris. I think they enjoyed the Illiad as a cautionary tale, of what happens when success goes to peoples' heads and they think they're invincible.

Many Greek myths and legends have similar themes: Icarus, Phaethon, Arachne, anyone who put on airs and defied the gods, or acted above their station.


Exactly!

I believe those myths, like the Bible's and others, were used in part to teach people a few basic things, so as to ensure some amount of social stability, hence allowing societies to persist.

"Controlling the masses via fear and tall tales" is unfortunately too common of a caricature: we're probably making a sizable mistake by discarding them, and replacing them with whatever's trending on TikTok, or whoever's agendas.

For example, the definition of "courage" exemplified by Herakles's behavior has nothing to do with the "courage" of a man showing off his breast implants on TV: using the same word to qualify both behaviors is ill-suited (regardless of any opinions, positive or negative, on the latter case; I'm merely pointing that distinct words would be more appropriate to qualify fundamentally distinct behaviors) (it's a real example, but I won't be able to source it).




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: