Epic Facework: Self-presentation and Social Interaction in Homer (review)

Misunderstandings, slights to integrity, and insults are a common by-product of human social interaction. In Epic Facework: Self-presentation and Social Interaction in Homer, Ruth Scodel analyzes how sensitive Homeric warriors negotiate reactions to offences through complex forms of “social behavior” (ix) which defuse many, if not all, of the potentially explosive causes for violent reaction to loss of “face” (153). Scodel relies heavily on the term “face” from politeness theory, which she contextualizes with the well-known Homeric pair of τιµή and κλέος as yet another form of “prestige”: face is “the positive social worth that everyone claims in social self-representation, and that others attribute to him or her. There are two sides to face: negative face is an individual’s claim to freedom of action, while positive face is the positive self-image based on approval of the social group.” Unlike τιµή, face is not “social capital” which can be stored, nor is it normally material (13). Threats to face provoke a heavy risk of anger: “[m]ost often … a hero replies angrily, because anger is the proper response to unjustified criticism and defends the hero’s face” (14). In addition, Theory of Mind leads Scodel to posit the inner thoughts of, and to attribute possible motives to (xi), various Homeric characters as they ponder how to behave in socially complex interactions; Scodel herself admits that “[s]ome of the preceding excursions into Theory of Mind … are probably far-fetched” (156).

Epic Facework attempts to understand primarily Agamemnon’s face managing strategies within the normative social codes of the Iliad. In her preface, Scodel shares her “special concerns…with” Agamemnon, who is “an ordinary second-rate man with a bad temper in a job too difficult for him” (xi). A Homeric character such as Agamemnon has at his disposal gifts, apologies and “face-sacrifice” through which he can make amends for causing someone else’s loss of face and for restoring “communal harmony” (103); for the more hostile assaults of the seizure of captives and killing the remedies are ransom and vengeance or compensation (ἄποινα and ποινή). Particularly with respect to ransom and vengeance, Scodel engages closely with, and often relies heavily upon, Wilson’s excellent Ransom, Revenge, and Heroic Identity in the Iliad (Cambridge, 2002). Despite Scodel’s claims that at times Agamemnon can ignore “immediate face-concerns in pursuit of larger purposes” and is “capable of face-management” (138), his conflict with Chryses in Iliad 1, followed immediately by his “test” of the troops in Iliad 2, establish Agamemnon’s failure at face management in the most crucial junctures. After carefully and informatively analyzing the shifting negotiations of face in the opening lines of the Iliad, Scodel concludes that Agamemnon is unable to salvage the situation, and does not do the “massive face-sacrifice” (136) which would keep Achilles in the war. In Iliad 2 Agamemnon looks “both defeatist and incapable of controlling his army” (65) and in the end “the tactic [of the Diapeira] is not successful” (68). Despite these failures, Scodel seems to be suggesting that the combination of tactics (gift exchange, apologetic shifting of blame and increasing dependence on the defense of ἄτη) to which Agamemnon resorts unsuccessfully in Iliad 9 are finally successful in persuading Achilles to fight again in Iliad 19. Yet here again Agamemnon’s face management is unequal, or irrelevant, to the task: Achilles no longer cares for the gifts, the girl, or the social niceties of the dance of “communal harmony” but is consumed with anger and guilt over Patroclus’ death. Even though the remedial exchange between Achilles and Agamemnon allows the “community to move forward as if everyone agreed,” Achilles’ dismissive attitude only highlights the expediency of these methods of maintaining “social harmony” (123) and the fragility of the system.

Scodel does an excellent job of alerting readers to how Homeric heroes typically handle loss of face, and I will in future read and teach the numerous exchanges...