The Unknown Odysseus: Alternate Worlds in Homer's Odyssey

Notes

notes preface 1. Felson (1997), though focusing on Penelope, also analyzes “possible plots,” story lines that are raised by the poet and then not pursued (see x–xi), which in turn suggest alternate ways for characters to develop. Peradotto (1990) explores potential variants in the plot and the poem’s hero. See especially pages 59–93. Pucci (1987, 13–15) suggests two contrasting readings of the Odyssey organized around the question of whether or not Odysseus changes in the course of his journey. My reading is also contiguous with studies of the poem by Katz (1991), who focuses on the element of “indeterminacy” in the character of Penelope , an openness that is achieved within the text by a form of intetextuality, and Doherty (1995), who discusses the relationship between “open” and “closed” readings of the Odyssey. Perhaps most important for my thesis is the succinct de‹nition by Murnaghan (1987, 178) of the “two contrasting visions” that the Odyssey holds in suspense. This excellent book, which I believe has not yet received the recognition it deserves, has been seminal in many ways for my own work. See also Gregory (1996, 17–19). Buchan (2004) reached me after I had completed the writing of this book. I am interested to see that, though his approach is quite different from mine, he has been drawn to many of the same qualities in the poem that I address here. In particular, his chapters 6 and 7 explore , working from Peradotto’s poststructuralist paradigm and the ideas of Lacan and Z&iz&ek, the implications of other personae for Odysseus. I am sorry to have missed the chance to acknowledge more fully the fascinating reading of the poem that Buchan offers. 2. Peradotto (1990, 53–58). 3. See Stanford (1963, 81–89); Clarke (1981). 4. Hyde (1998, 171–99). 127 chapter one 1. See Stanford (1963); Clarke (1981). 2. Pucci (1987) argues for a complex intertextuality between the two Homeric poems, asserting not only that many passages in the Odyssey can be read against the background of speci‹c passages from the Iliad but also vice versa. 3. See Murnaghan (1987, 84). 4. The question of succession in the house of Odysseus is vexed. It is not at all clear why Telemachus ought not be the presumptive king of Ithaka in the event of his father’s death (e.g, 1.387) or why Laertes is not the king in his son’s absence. M. Finley (1978, 84–85) notes these dif‹culties and assumes that the proper succession must be patrilineal. More recently Finkelberg (1991) makes a compelling argument for a system of kingship by marriage existing in a society that was politically controlled by men. 5. On polytropos, see Nagy (1990, 18–35); Murnaghan (1987, 10); Pucci (1987, 16–17, 127–28, 149, 150); Murnaghan (1995); Clay (1983, 30–31); Hyde (1998, 51–54); Marquardt (1985). 6. On Athena’s role as protectress of Odysseus, see Stanford (1963, 25–42); for Athena as orchestrator of the return plot, see Reinhardt (1960, 45) and Felson (1997, 5), who sees the “opposing actions” of Athena and Poseidon as constituting the Odyssey plot. Pucci (1987, 19–22) stresses the role of Athena. 7. On the theme of hospitality in the Odyssey, see Reece (1993); Edwards (1975); Lateiner (1993); Pedrick (1988). 8. Wohl (1993, 24). 9. On this scene, see Pucci (1987, 195–208). 10. The meaning of this speech for the Odyssey’s portrayal of divine justice has been much discussed. See, for example, Clay (1983, 213–39); Rutherford (1986, 148); Friedrich (1987); Nagler (1990); Segal (1992). 11. On the family of Agamemnon as paradigmatic for the Odyssey, see further Olson (1990) with bibliography. 12. See note 10. 13. On Telemachus and the Telemachia, see Calhoun (1934); Clarke (1963); Rose (1967); Murnaghan (1987, 34–37, 159–66); Felson (1997, 67–91). 14. See Felson (1997, 95–96) on a possible alternate trajectory for Telemachus, following Aegisthus. 15. On the contest of the bow, see Clay (1983, 89–96). 16. See Murnaghan (1987, 160). 17. On the stories of Menelaus and Agamemnon as vehicles for creating irony and suspense, see Olson (1989); Felson (1997, 97–99). 18. Murnaghan (1987, 8–9) notes the connection between Odysseus’ endurance in the Odyssey and his use of disguise; see also Pucci (1987, 76–79). 19. For the parallels between Menelaus and Odysseus, see Anderson (1958). 20. Felson (1997, 99). 21. I remember hearing, when I was a little boy after World...