Homer: Poet of the Iliad by Mark W. Edwards (review)

94Rocky Mountain Review in German history in which social and formal revolution united briefly" (278). The reader has to accept it. Otherwise this would be "ein zu weites Feld." Dierick's slightly condescending approach, seen in his cliche-weighted characterization ofthe literary historian in the introduction, somewhat dims the importance of this work, which grew out of a dissertation under the supervision of George Wallis Field. The apparatus is extensive, comprehensive, and the bibliography as up to date as possible INGEBORG L. CARLSON Arizona State University MARK W. EDWARDS. Homer: Poet ofthe Iliad. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987. 341 p. This is an ambitious and innovative text. Recognizing the general situation of those who teach Homer, i.e., that they are often instructors whose primary training is not in Classical languages, literatures, and cultures, Edwards seeks to contextualize the Iliad in all three areas. The book has appeal to the general reader as well as to the Classicist. The book is divided into two parts, the first entitled "The Characteristics of Homeric Poetry," the second, "Commentaries." In the first part, the author analyzes the poetics of the Homeric epos. In the second, Edwards applies the poetics which he has isolated to a series of commentaries on ten books of the Iliad. Each chapter is broken down into subheadings which are clearly identifiable; there are useful suggestions for further readings provided at the end of each chapter. It is apparent from these suggestions, which take the form of short annotated bibliographies, that the author has sought to bring to this work the major issues of Homeric scholarship in an accessible manner. Edwards emphasizes for the non-specialist that the essential characteristic of oral poetry is its interactive nature, which makes it unique in the demands it places upon the poet. Having established this point, Edwards reminds the reader throughout of the immediacy of the experience of oral epic. Just as W R. Johnson has done in his brilliant analysis of the Aeneid, Edwards also employs descriptive analogies of cinema and cinematic technique. There are twenty sections in part one, and I would suggest that the reader choose those of most interest. For example, the Greek-less reader would do well to read the sections on meter and formulae, as well as those on word order and placement ofwords for emphasis. I found the section on storytelling and the use of myth stimulating and extremely well written, whereas the sections on simile, metaphor, and symbolism were brief and unsatisfying. Edwards has brought contemporary notions ofliterary analysis to the discussion of narrative and characterization, which are among the best and clearest discourses in the text. The sections on Homeric society are likewise deftly drawn and necessary reading for those who may be unaware of the nature, constraints, and mores Book Reviews95 of Bronze Age society, and the complexity of Homer's use of them. In his discussion of "Gods, Fate and Mortality," for example, Edwards states: "For the human characters in the Iliad, irrational evil comes from the gods; for the poet, who represents to us what is in the minds ofthe gods, human troubles are not irrational, but all too easy to comprehend if one believes ?? gods like these. But there is, of course, a difference between religion and artistic creation" (128). Edwards thus refuses to allow the reader either the simple view that the Iliad is "timeless" poetry which can be read without reference to the cultural context out of which it arose, or the view that all works of literature may be reliably mined as anthropological/sociological documents. He reminds us again and again of the underlying concept of poesis: Homer consciously and purposely selected and arranged his material to create a sophisticated work ofliterature within a tradition which had been refined over many centuries. This is a position which demands from the reader constant attention to the multiple layers of the work, and the interplay between each layer and audience. Thus this book is a refreshing entrant into the ongoing contemporary discourse regarding the manner in which the Classics "should" be read. Edwards' undertaking is difficult, and there are flaws and problems with the text. I believe this...