Beowulf is a pagan epic poem passed down orally from the southern Swedes to the English in the 5^th century when the Anglo-Saxons and Jutes invaded Britain. Its Christian allusions were added when it was written down sometime between the 8^th and 10^th centuries.

Beowulf Manuscript (c. 1000)

The poem’s written text:

• Two scribes, A and B, working around the year 1000 CE transcribed the poem. They weren’t considered poets, but rather editors.
• The only manuscript survived a fire in 1731 and came to us as the text we have now.

The Beowulf-poet:

• The term “author” does not convey the same static quality in the Anglo-Saxon period as it does in the modern day. Beowulf could have existed in multiple versions, depending on how many Anglo-Saxon poets, scops (pronounced “shops” and related to the word “to shape”) were around to interpret and retell the tale, much like the many interpretations of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet.
• Every performance and reading reshapes the poem and how we approach it, even the modern day versions. The Beowulf-poet, in a sense, is more of a collective noun than an individual author.
• The poet takes poetic license (his own embellishments) with Beowulf’s character, and invites the audience to consider the complex role of oral poetry, and how the audience—both Anglo-Saxon and modern—should interpret this work. He uses terms such as “I heard” or “I have learned” to separate himself from the narrative.

The poem’s hero:

• Beowulf is mortal, but like other epic heroes (Gilgamesh, Odysseus, Achilles) he is stronger and more brave than most men. The last line of the poem tells us that “Beowulf was keenest to win fame.” Immortality in this culture means to win fame in stories and reputation.
• Beowulf fights monsters, as Gilgamesh fights Humbaba and Odysseus fights the Cyclopes, and we may glean the values of a Germanic leader, its culture, through its hero. Tacitus (56-120 CE) claims that warfare is a standard way of life for the Germanic people to survive and prosper. For example, a good king is a “ring-giver.”

Characteristics of the poem:

• It has Christian elements: Grendel is a descendant of Cain, the flood story is inscribed on the sword that Beowulf uses to kill Grendel’s mother, and in the mead hall the scop sings a song that recounts a creation story similar to the one in Genesis.
• J. R. R. Tolkien’s reading: the troll, the sea-woman, the dragon are from Norse and Germanic mythology—they represent coldness, darkness, wilderness, and are enemies of human values and reflections. The mead hall is a circle of light, which ultimately calls Grendel into existence. Tolkien’s criticism of the poem treats it as a poem, not as a historical document or an ethnographic study of the Germanic people.
• The poem begins with a funeral and ends with a funeral—nothing lasts.
• The three fights only take up 500 out of 3200 lines, and so community is more the driving point of the epic—it begins with Shield Sheafson. At the end of the epic, we know the Geats will eventually disappear because they fail to help Beowulf against the dragon.
• The poem contains understatements, such as “he’s feeling no pain” when someone is drunk; instead of saying “I’m happy,” they say “I wouldn’t want you to think that I’m not happy;” and “that was no good place” insinuates part of the darkness and vision of these people.

Beowulf read in Old English

From J.R.R. Tolkien’s “Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics”

It is just because the main foes in Beowulf are inhuman that the story is larger and more significant than this imaginary poem of a great king’s fall. It glimpses the cosmic and moves with the thought of all men concerning the fate of human life and efforts; it stands amid but above the petty wars of princes, and surpasses the dates and limits of historical periods, however important. At the beginning, and during its process, and most of all at the end, we look down as if from a visionary height upon the house of man in the valley of the world. A light starts—lixte se leoma ofer landa fela [“its gold-hammered roofs shone over the land”]—and there is a sound of music; but the outer darkness and its hostile offspring lie ever in wait for the torches to fail and the voices to cease. Grendel is maddened by the sound of harps.

We discussed about creation myths at the beginning of this semester. In the discussion of Genesis there was a specific question that grabbed my attention. Adam and Eve had all the pleasures because God created the world in good, but if that was the case, why was there a tree of knowledge? Why did God place something cursed and painful in the midst of all the pleasures?

If we carefully observe a person’s life we might discover that if we were to graph the history of that life, it will look something similar to the graph of our heartbeat. It is very rare that a person’s life will have an upward slope of pleasures. We also have to deal with factors similar to that of the tree of knowledge. Some of these factors might cause depression and regrets. According to the hedonistic theory, a person will always pursue something that derives pleasure while avoiding everything that derives pain. However, the “pleasure machine” experiment put forward by the philosopher Robert Nozick in 1974, contradicts the hedonistic theory. This theory claims that even if there was a machine that could be plugged into our brains to receive constant pleasure, most of us would not be willing to plug in such machine. According to this theory experiencing as much pleasure as we want is not all that matters to us. We want to be a certain sort of person by doing certain things and plugging into a pleasure machine limits us to a man-made reality. Therefore:

Is achieving the highest amount of pleasure in one lifetime the ultimate goal of human beings? If a person is successful in avoiding pain, has that person led a successful life? Or is there a deeper meaning of happiness and success?

Prophecy

Prophecy is a prediction made by a prophet. In Oedipus the King, prophecy is an important part of the story. Prophecy led everyone who were involved with Oedipus to meet tragic endings.

In Oedipus the King, prophecy led everything to downfall. When Laius and Jocasta were married, oracle told them that their son would kill Laius. Afraid that the prophecy might come true, Laius, the king of Thebes, decided to kill his infant son Oedipus. However, his servant did not obey Laius’ order and gave Oedipus to someone, wishing that the baby would go live in a foreign land. Oedipus grew up with different parents in a foreign land. When Oedipus went to Oracle in Delphi, he heard that he would eventually kill his own father and mother. Oedipus, similar to Laius, decided to leave his country fearing that the prophecy might come true. On his way to Thebes, he met travelers and killed them. Not knowing that he had killed his father Laius, he became the king of Thebes and married his own mother Jocasta. Eventually, when Jocasta found out that Oedipus was her son, she hanged herself. Prophecies all came true even though Laius, Jocasta, and Oedipus tried to avoid them.

Did they really need to know their future? If they did not believe in the prophecies, would results be the same? Since prophecies always came true to them in Oedipus the King, I think their future would have not changed even if they did not act in such ways.

Knowledge is helpful most of the time; however, it could also hurt people more than it should. Having a knowledge in one’s future could lead them in more painful moments. Oedipus and Jocasta had tragic moments when they found out that their actions had caused the endings that they tried to avoid. I believe that Oedipus and Jocasta had more painful moments when they realized that the prophecy had come true.

What is the actual purpose of a creation story?

Creation is “the action or process of bringing something into existence”. It can also be equivalent to bringing something to life. Creation stories vary throughout the world. They also vary amongst religions. For example, the creation story Genesis. This story is a story that originates from the Hebrew Bible and goes into depth about the supposed beginning of time. God is the main character in this story and is considered omniscient and omnipresent. He knows all things because he created all things. Only one’s belief can determine whether or not this story is actual factual. In Genesis, God speaks and it is so. Everything that is created is created from the works of him and his words. Not only does God create the earth but he gives life. He creates Adam, the first male, and then from Adam he creates Eve, his woman. Any first timer reading this story would most definitely be in doubt. So why was this story created? In actuality there will be no definite answer to this question but there are some possibilities. One possibility is that it gives meaning to the human race as a whole. No, it is not possible to find your purpose in life from just reading this story but you can find hope. You can find hope in the fact that a sole designer took time to create you and had you in mind. This is what Genesis is trying to depict. A creation story as this one gives humans comfort in knowing that they were created for a reason. It gives insight on your origin. Humans will get farther in life to their aspired destination as long as they know where they came from.

Loneliness and Loyalty in the Odyssey

In Homer’s The Odyssey, the most predominant themes are that of fidelity, longing, loyalty and home. The central emotion of the epic being loneliness, many of the characters portray these themes in how they show emotion towards people or places they are no longer with.

The most intriguing example of loyalty comes from Penelope. Penelope has not seen Odysseus in twenty years, yet throughout the whole epic is waiting patiently for his return. Of course she is lonely and often cries at night and must be comforted by Athena in her dreams, but regardless of her situation Penelope never takes another lover despite the many suitors she is presented with. She leads suitors on by telling them all that she will make a decision as soon as specific events transpire in order to put them at ease and make them go away. She even induces an archery competition and says she will choose the winner, knowing the only person who could actually win was her husband.

Hear me, proud suitors. You have used this house

For an eternity now – to eat and drink

In its master’s absence, nor could you offer

Any excuse except your lust to marry me.

Well, your prize is here, and this is the contest.

I set before you the great bow of godlike Odysseus.

Whoever bends this bow and slips the string on its notch

And shoots an arrow through all twelve axes,

With him I will go… (Book 21, Lines 66-74)

Another example of loyalty is displayed in Odysseus’ loneliness. Even when he is spending luxurious time with Calypso on the beach, he is still longing for his land and his home and often weeps about it during his time here. However, he does show more longing for his home than for his wife and family and seems to view them more as property and people he owns rather than people who love him. With Odysseus’ longing it seems as though he just misses power and how people act under his reign.

Telemachus, Odysseus’ son, even stays loyal to his father who he barely knows. He is loyal to his mother and keeping her for his father until he returns. He knew he had to protect his parent’s marriage from all of the suitors that were approaching their estate. Even the workers – Eurycleia, Eumaeus and Philoetius – remain loyal to their masters and possessions by just speaking highly of them. Contrasting are Melanthius and Melantho who had become friendly with the suitors and insult Odysseus while he is in disguise and even go as far as sleeping with the enemy and thereby insulting the royal family.

This issue leads further into the discussion of Odysseus expecting loyalty from people who are actually his property like Penelope. Even though it sounds ignorant to many reading today, the expectation of possession is justification when it comes to sexual fidelity within the Odyssey in terms of the people of Ithaca and Penelope especially are expected to be absolutely loyal to Odysseus.

How do you think modern relationships reflect the relationship standards displayed in the Odyssey? Do you think most aspects have changed or do some remain in current culture?

The Power of Women

Throughout the Odyssey, we follow the journey of Odysseus back home. He is the main character of the epic, and his tribulations and victories are the central plot to the story. However, all of his successes are not possible without the help of the goddess Athena, who is always by his side. Athena, a female goddess, is the one who goes to the gods and asks them to allow Odysseus to leave Calypso’s island and go home. She does this knowing Poseidon was away and she seized the opportunity.

The power and intervention of the gods and goddesses is clear throughout the epic. They are constantly getting involved on behalf of the mortals and see them as pawns that are at their mercy. Although both the gods and the goddesses have power, there are times when the gods seem to have more control then their female counterparts. This issue comes up when Hermes tells Calypso that she must let Odysseus go:

You gods are the most jealous bastards in the universe-

Persecuting any goddess who ever openly takes

A mortal lover to her bed and sleeps with him.

When Dawn caressed Orion with her rosy fingers,

You celestial layabouts gave her nothing but trouble…

When Demeter followed her heart and unbound

Her hair for Iasion and made love to him

In a late summer field, Zeus was there taking notes

And executed the man with a cobalt lightning blast.

And now you gods are after me for having a man. (Homer 73)

In this scene, Calypso is raising an issue well beyond the ancient times. She’s bringing attention to the double standard between the men and the women. She brings different instances when a goddess took a mortal lover, and was stopped by a god. Yet, when the gods do the same thing, they are left alone. The hypocrisy and lack of justice is clear in her fight for goddesses and women everywhere. Even though she herself is a goddess and is very powerful, she is still forced to do as a god tells her.

In the epic, we see many times when a goddess seems to have power, and other times when a god has the power. Each god and goddess have their respective powers and they come into play at different times. In some situations, that means the “man” has the power. And in other situations, the power goes to the “woman”. Ultimately, the power between the two forces balances out.

Do you agree that both the gods and goddess have a balanced power? Do you think that there is a double standard between the gods and the goddesses in the Odyssey? Do you think that although goddesses have power, the gods are truly the ones that make the decisions? Or perhaps, the goddesses strength is even more powerful then the gods?

Oedipus the King

Oedipus the King in film

The ancient Greek theatre:

SKENE is the building that functions as background to the stage.

PARODOS is the side entrance for the actors and chorus; it is also the name of the first song the chorus sings as they come on stage.

ORCHESTRA is the center spot where the chorus stands.

THEATRON is where the audience sits.

GREEK TRAGEDY

FROM ARISTOTLE’S POETICS:

For tragedy is not an imitation of men but of actions and of life … it is not for the purpose of presenting their characters that the agents engage in action, but rather it is for the sake of their actions that they take on the characters they have. Thus, what happens—that is, the plot—is the end for which a tragedy exists, and the end or purpose is the most important thing of all.

Thus, Tragedy is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and possessing magnitude; in embellished language, each kind of which is used separately in the different parts; in the mode of action and not narrated; and effecting through pity and fear [what we call] the catharsis of such emotions. By “embellished language” I mean language having rhythm and melody, and by “separately in different parts” I mean that some parts of a play are carried on solely in metrical speech while others again are sung.

IMPORTANT TERMS RELATED TO GREEK TRAGEDY

Tragic irony is the incongruity (disharmony) created when the (tragic) significance of a character’s speech or actions is revealed to the audience but unknown to the character concerned. For example when Oedipus vows to find the murderer and curses him for the plague that he has caused, not knowing that he himself is the murderer.

Peripeteia (Reversal) is a change from one state of affairs to its exact opposite. For example when the Messenger comes to relieve Oedipus’s fear with regard to his mother and it has the opposite effect because he reveals his true identity.

Anagnorisis (Recognition) is a change from ignorance to knowledge, leading either to friendship or to hostility on the part of those persons who are marked for good or bad fortune.

Hamartia is a mistake or error of judgment, sometimes translated as “tragic flaw” – for Aristotle, it is not a moral defect.

Katharsis is the process of releasing repressed emotions, and is an uplifting of the spectators “through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation of these emotions.”

Throughout the epic, Odyssey, we can see similarities between the two lovers, Penelope and Odysseus. How Penelope is just as smart and cunning as her husband. She is always testing people. This is evident in Book 19 of the epic when we finally see a conversation between them, even though Odysseus was disguised as a beggar. Penelope asked the beggar to tell her how he knows Odysseus and would not believe him until he was able to describe her husband correctly. Another evidence of Penelope’s love of testing others is seen when she asked:

            Nurse, bring the bed out from the master bedroom,

The bedstead he made himself, and spread it for him

With fleece and blanket and silky coverlets. (Book 23, line 184-186)

Here she is testing if the man in front of her is really Odysseus. Only Odysseus, her, and the nurse knows that their bed is immovable. Similarly, Odysseus is always skeptical with everyone that he meets. He does not easily believe anyone until they have proven themselves worthy, such as when he was testing the swineherd Eumaeus’s hospitality.

We also see how tricky the two of them can be. Penelope tricks her suitors in saying that she will only marry when she finish stitching a burial robe for Laertes. Everyday her suitors would see her working on the robe, but at night when all of them are asleep she would undo her work from that day. This scheme work for a couple of years before the suitors eventually find out. Odysseus’ scheme was when he showed up at his palace as a beggar to fool Penelope’s suitors.

What do these similarities they share say about them as an individual and as lovers? Is it because of these connections that no one can replace their love for one another? In the our world today, do you think people who are alike are more attracted to one another? Or do you believe in the saying that “Opposite attracts”?

The Odyssey, Hospitality

In Homer’s the Odyssey, the theme of hospitality continues to arise at every step of our hero’s journey. In the story we can see that the Ithacans highly respect the virtue of hospitality. In the first book we are confronted with this idea when we are told that Odysseus’s home is being bombarded by unwanted suitors looking to take over his kingdom. Penelope and Telemachus (Odysseus’s wife and son), unable to drive them away, have no choice but to be hospitable and let the suitors stay.

While away at sea Odysseus and his crew are shown an impressive amount of hospitality from the Phaeacians, to Aeolus, to Calypso. However, almost everyone who shows our hero any type of hospitality ends up worse off because of it. The Phaeacians, who are the most generous to Odysseus, end up being killed as punishment for their hospitality toward Odysseus in book 13:

Alas! The prophecies my father used to make so long ago have come to pass. He’d say Poseidon would get angry with us, because we conduct all men in safety. He claimed that one day, as a splendid ship of the Phaeacians was returning home, after a convoy on the misty seas, Poseidon would strike her and then throw up a huge mountain range around our city. That’s what the old man said. And now all this is taking place. But come, let all of you attend to what I say. You must now stop escorting mortal men when any man comes to our city. And let’s sacrifice twelve choice bulls as offerings to Poseidon, so he’ll take pity and not ring our city with a lofty mountain range.

Despite the fact the Greek gods are supposed to believe in its virtue and respect it, Zeus puts his feelings towards being hospitable aside because Poseidon is angry at Odysseus for blinding his son (an action that was provoked due to the fact that his son, Polyphemus, would not upholds the Ithaca’s long-standing tradition of hospitable conduct and goes so far as to mock it). Calypso takes in Odysseus after being shipwrecked, cares for him and falls in love with him. In return for opening her home and her heart she is forced to give up her beloved Odysseus to appease the will of Zeus in book 5. And while at first Aeolus shows Odysseus hospitality by providing him with a bag of winds to return home, when he returns after having lost the bag, Aeolus is convinced he has been cursed by the gods and refuses to give him anymore help. This can be viewed as his saving grace as nothing bad seems to come to him after turning him away.

So if hospitality is seen as such an important virtue in Ithaca’s society, why does homer bring upon an ill fate to almost everyone who displays it? Is this Homer’s critique of the overly welcoming and trusting Greeks? Or does he do this to demonstrate how cunning Odysseus is and how good he is at getting his way even at the cost of others? Regardless of what you believe Homer’s stance is on the subject, do you believe that we should welcome thy neighborhood or turn our backs in distrust and in the name of self-preservation?

While the Odyssey has been the topic of conversation in class of late I would like to reminisce about the Epic of Gilgamesh and our other hero, Gilgamesh himself. Rather, I would like to compare and contrast the two heroes from the epics we have read thus far and perhaps compile a list of similarities and differences between them.

To begin, both Gilgamesh and Odysseus are well established and known in their respective realms. Gilgamesh is renowned as a harsh tyrant who rules over his people with an iron fist, putting himself first and the health and wellbeing of his disciples second. Odysseus on the other hand is well respected among his peers as the King of Ithaca and is known as a brave and commanding warrior. Both heroes seem to possess Godlike qualities as well. Gilgamesh, who is in fact part God boasts about his strength and lineage with the Gods as well as towers over his mortal counterparts. Odysseus however is more so respected as a God for his prowess in battle and unwavering courage. Whenever either of these characters walk into a room, they demand the utmost respect. A major difference I stumbled upon is the way in which each hero goes about conquering the enemy. While Gilgamesh relies on brute strength to defeat the likes of Humbaba, Odysseus uses wit and cunning to bring upon victory (as seen by the duping of Polyphemus). What other similarities or differences could be inferred between these two epic heroes? Perhaps note any similarities or differences between the epics themselves. An example would be the fact that both arcs describe the interference of certain Gods who have encouraged, assisted, or pushed the two heroes about the courses they should take in their respective journeys.