In this book, Odysseus and his crew face two horrible monsters, Scylla and Charybdis, and are able to overcome these physical obstacles. They instead fall to the temptation of the Sun God’s cattle. What do you think this says on the Greeks’ idea of the strength of man? Do you think Eurylochus was justified in challenging Odysseus and convincing the crew to land on Helios’ island? Eurylochus’ justification for eating the Sun God’s cattle was that he would rather die of the Gods’ wrath than of hunger. Which would you choose, slaughtering the cattle and being ensured a quick death, or waiting it out, with the hope that the winds would die down? When Odysseus and his crew pass the Sirens, he plugs his crews’ ears with wax, but has them tie him to the mast so that he may hear the song. This is an example of controlled temptation, but do you think Odysseus was being hypocritical by letting himself give in to temptation with the Sirens but then expecting his crew to stay vigilant on Helios’ island? Feel free to answer any of the above or talk about something completely different.
I think that the men surviving Scylla and Charybdis but falling to the temptation of the cattle is very representative on the Greeks view of the strength of man. A man is capable of surviving hardship, fatigue, and gruesome death, but he cannot survive hunger and temptation. This also lets us know that the Greeks made a solid attempt to understand themselves and most importantly, the human condition.
ReplyDeleteEurylochus was trouble throughout this entire saga. He was always the first to rebel at one of Odysseus' plans, but he ultimately got what he deserved. However, I think he does have a valid point about the starvation vs sudden death. Still, it would have been more wise to wait the storm out.
Odysseus was selfish in letting himself hear the Siren's song. He was not leading by example at all, and he simply trusted in letting his crew do as he had told him. There is a bit of cruel irony in this, (Sun god Cattle) but he is only a man, and a man is a curious being. Who wouldn't want to hear a great song? If it really mattered to the whole crew, than they could just sail back and forth and bind people to the mast one at a time...
The men are able to overcome two of the most terrible beasts I have ever heard described, but they all get killed because they got hungry. This illustrates the perception of man: physically strong, but with weak will power. I think that Eurylochus was right in challenging Odysseus, he should be able to speak his mind, and his plan made sense. What I don't understand is why Odysseus agreed to it. He is supposed to be the leader of the ship, and he knew that the gods were out to get him, why would he land on the island anyways? Also, I really didn't understand Eurylochus' logic, and frankly, I think the crew should have seen through his plans flaws. Option A, slaughtering the cattle, means certain death; it's stupid to bet against the gods. Option B, waiting the storm out, is much better, because they only have to fast for a few days, it's been done. Even option C, trying to sail in the storm, is better than the option they chose. A strong wind doesn't mean certain death, and do you remember the last time there was a storm? They took down the sail, and rowed the boat, rather than sail it. Why couldn't they do that? It is stupid that the crew chose the only option that ensured their miserable fate.
ReplyDeleteOdysseus was being hypocritical in listening to the song. I think this is just another example of Odysseus' narcissistic personality. His crew isn't allowed to listen to the song, but he is because he is special for some reason. I don't know why he is a hero he is a major tool, and I think the greeks should learn how to pick better idols.
After finishing book twelve, I think that the Greeks’ might have believed that overall men are very powerful, but they give into to things. In this case the cattle. Maybe Homer/the storyteller is saying that everyone has flaws, and so do these men. The question Will asked about what would I choose, I think if I was in the same situation as Odysseus I would’ve waited. The only thing I would want to do is get back home and eating the cattle would promise me death. If the wind kept coming and my men needed food desperately I would kill the cattle. Either way I would die, so why not do it on a full stomach. Overall I thought this book was filled with many more adventures for Odysseus. I was surprised that it was the end of his tale already and we are only half way through the book. I wonder what else could happen to him with 12 books left.
ReplyDeleteI thought the men handling Scylla and Charybdis, was impressive, but then giving into the temptation of the Sun God’s cattle was typical and normal. Odysseus’ men have been through a lot trying to get home, so surviving the monsters was important, but it was crucial that they gave into the temptation and ate the cattle. Every man certainly has his own breaking point when they can’t take it anymore, and I think the cattle were the men’s. It wasn’t easy for them to survive the monsters, but when a person hasn’t eaten in a long period of time, they begin to get desperate and will do everything in their power to overcome the situation. As for Eurylochus, I don’t think it smart at all to rest on the island. I also didn’t know why Odysseus agreed to something he didn’t want to do and had mixed feelings about. If he wanted to protect his men, he would have thought twice about staying on the island. Once again Odysseus didn’t think this through, and caused an awful outcome as an end result of staying on the island.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading book 12 I have to agree with James when he talks about the illustration of a man being physical strong, but has a weak willpower. They are able to overcome these two massive foes being Scylla and Charybdis, but they something little like hunger, get to them and break them down. I also think this shows another example of how his crew screws him over again and so far they have proved to be more of a nuisance than helpful.
ReplyDeleteI think that Eurylochus acted very stupid when he asked Odysseus if they could rest on the island. Why would you even think about coming even near it if you know that the gods will punish you if you do anything. Odysseus even warned his men about not touching the cattle. But of course his men end up slaughtering the cattle and bringing the wrath of the gods down on them. I also found it kind of amusing that his men believe him and trust him to lead them through Scylla and Charydbis, but when it comes to something small like not touching the cattle, they ignore him and do it anyway. I also agree with Maggie that I wonder what could happen in the next 12 books when he has just finished telling his story.
I think that book twelve showed the breaking point of all of the men. After surviving the terrifying creatures, Scylla and Charybdis, and the Sirens, finally reaching the Island of Helios on an empty stomach left everyone desperate for food and sleep. This does reflect on the Greek's idea of the strength of men because from what has happened so far, men have had the power to sustain through the worst. Yet, when it comes to desire to listen to the beautiful Sirens sing their song or continue on their voyage on an empty stomach, men are left with nothing to hold them back.
ReplyDeleteSince Odysseus has not been risking the lives of all of his men, for example, revealing his identity to Polyphemus, I think Eurylochus had the right to speak out against Odysseus. Even though it was the wrong decision in the end to go against Odysseus' orders, everyone should have a chance to speak out, in some cases. Therefore, I would have waited longer. I would have waited until the winds had had a chance to die down until ruining the chances of ever returning home again.
This book really portrayed what the Greeks think of the strength of man. In past chapters, we've seen men kill cyclopses, out wit the gods, and survive any obstacle that is thrown at them; however, they are unable to resist temptation. This portrayal man seems to be very true today. People can overcome many things but when it comes to temptation, such as hunger as we saw in this book, people can't resist.
ReplyDeleteEurylochus did have a fair point in eating the cattle. However, I think he shouldn't have entirely given up hope and said "screw it, I'm hungry, and we're going to die anyway," because there was, in fact, hope. Although I can understand, the situation was dire and death seemed inevitable. But man's weakness of temptation prevailed, when he really should've listened to Odysseus and left the island.
The greek view on the average man seems to be a strong warrior with a lot of pride and power but also impulsive, impacient and instinctive. When faced with a straightforward, tangible obstacle, regardless of how intimidating, Odysseus' men are skilled and persistent. However, their pride and sense of what is honorable is their downfall. They can deal with monsters, war, and death but an obstacle like hunger defeats them. Personally I would have waited it out on the island because there were other food sources eg. birds and fishes.
ReplyDeleteThe passage of time in this book is also very strange. 7 years is described in a sentence while a description of beauty may take up two pages.
The strength of a man - the men fall to the temptation, maybe because of hunger and greed, and maybe because they weren't fully aware of the actual things that would happen to them. Eurylochus wasn't justified, I think Odysseus has been through enough, I mean, when will he get a break? It's like hes having tests everyday, without any time to study!
ReplyDeleteI think Odysseus feels that he is better and wiser than his men. To an extent it is true, but to an extent he needs to respect his men and trust them more if he really wants to get home. I blame the gods.