A Guide to the Odyssey: A Commentary on the English Translation of Robert Fitzgerald (42 page)

245–51
This explains only the change of appearance and does not prove his identity (see 232–33 and 238–41, above). The pious proverb with which Odysseus concludes this little speech (250–51)—bromides like this were felt to be fitting caps to a speech—refers to the gods’ ability to do much more than change a mortal’s clothes or give him a face-lift.

262–66
Telémakhos has sensed that the story Eumaios had been told and had summarized (72–78) is likely not the whole truth.

269–70
Phaiákians … / as they give other wanderers:
Alas, the present tense of “give” [
pempousin
, 228] no longer holds true, because of the disaster Odysseus brought upon them, although he has no way of knowing it (see XIII. 171–235, a story that well exemplifies the truth of XVI.250–51). In this small detail, then, what Odysseus tells Telémakhos is not as true as he thinks, although for once Odysseus intends to tell the truth.

273–74
bronze and gold / and stores of woven things:
Tricolon crescendo, filling one full line in Greek [231]. (See also III. 117–20 and XI.294–95, above.)

285–87
Telémakhos could have heard this from many sources, among which were of course the epic songs of bards.

308–19
There is much more to the exchange here than the battle-scarred and ever-victorious veteran talking to an untried and less-than-confident tyro. The point of Odysseus’ first response is that Athena and Zeus will be fighting on their side (308–10). Telémakhos, for all his sincere piety, still has doubts—unconscious as he is of having received divine assistance—that the gods actively concern themselves with human affairs (312–15). Odysseus has experienced it, often, and on the field of battle: his response (317–19), brief and to the point, is the most convincing rejoinder he could make. Telémakhos will experience it. There are still many things for father to teach son.

331–32
From Odysseus’ point of view, having heard Athena’s death sentence on the suitors, he is assured that they are doomed not only in his eyes but in those of the gods. Hence the tone of ineluctable fate, even predestination.

339–52
Odysseus leaves nothing to chance. He is not satisfied to have instructed Telémakhos to remove the arms displayed in the hall (337ff.) but also tells Telémakhos exactly what story to give the suitors if they question him. Odysseus knows that no one can
cook up such plausible lies as well as he can. Indeed, he comes up with not one but two lies. Here Odysseus is seeing to Telémakhos’ education in rhetoric and, especially, dissembling.

350–51
Tempered / iron can magnetize a man:
Another proverb to cap a speech (see 245–51, above), translated later as “Iron / itself can draw men’s hands” (XIX. 16–17). It has long been debated whether Homer, in saying that iron “attracts” or “draws on a man” [294], was actually thinking of the metal’s magnetic properties. It’s not impossible, but I prefer to take it more figuratively, as we do when we call certain dangers “attractive nuisances.” (It can’t be entirely literal, for the only men iron could magnetize would be iron men.) I am more sympathetic to the view that sees magnetism as one of the properties of iron which caused the new metal to be regarded as magical (see Russo in HWH 3.75 [on XIX. 13]).

357
our young friends:
In the Greek, simply “them” [297]. Telémakhos of course is younger than the suitors.

359
If son … and blood of mine:
A powerful injunction. Telémakhos will want nothing more than to show himself worthy of his great father.

363–64
… how far the women are corrupted:
This lays the groundwork for the execution of the treacherous maidservants at the end of
Book XXII
.

380–81
… a scrutiny / of cottagers:
Telémakhos’ suggestion to put off testing all the householders of Ithaka is a good one. The bad serving maids are traitors to Odysseus’
house:
not only are they more easily observed and punished, but the status of each—loyal or treacherous—is less susceptible to ambiguities. Although we do not see the testing of all householders carried out in anything like the form implied by Odysseus, the issue of their loyalty is resolved in
Book XXIV
along with the composition (i.e., settlement) of all the feuds arising from the suitors’ mass murder. In their response to Odysseus and Telémakhos’ punishment of
their relatives, the men of Ithaka test themselves, as it were (see especially the assembly, XXIV.455–520).

382–83
In his last words, Telémakhos shows that he has been moved to defer to Odysseus’ living faith in the power of the gods to assist them.

385
We now rejoin Telémakhos’ ship, last mentioned at the end of
Book XV
, when Telémakhos had disembarked to make for Eumaios’ hut.

417
we said he could not:
This has of course a darker undertone: “we declared he would not,” in other words, “we would see that he did not.”

435
All others:
An exclusive meeting of the suitors, no other Ithakans allowed (not all the suitors are Ithakan, of course: see 294–300).

449–93
Telémakhos’ escape from ambush at sea does not guarantee his future safety. On the contrary, Antínoös seems more resolved than ever to do away with him, and his insistence in this speech that the suitors should murder Telémakhos, and soon, raises the possibility that even as Odysseus and Telémakhos make their plans on the basis of the suitors’ well-established habits, the suitors may initiate a new and unpredictable offensive (see XVII. 189–202, below). After a speech like this, we are prepared to feel it is only just that Antínoös is the first suitor to die (XXII.8–21).

453–59
his people are all tired of playing up to us …:
For this reason the exclusion of Ithakans was necessary (see 435, above). At the same time, we infer that there are many Ithakans prepared to take Telémakhos’ side against the suitors if called to do so, laying the ground for the composition of all quarrels in
Book XXIV
. Not all of the suitors are prepared to go as far as Antínoös (see 478–92, immediately below).

478–92
Amphínomos has good intentions but not the strength of character to oppose the suitors to the end. He would prefer not
to commit murder but doesn’t want to fall out with the whole pack. (Note the qualification of 485–88: it’s not murder but royal assassination which sticks in his craw.) Hence his proposal: consult an oracle, and if Zeus gives the command to kill Telémakhos, then, so he claims, he’ll do it. Such a message from Zeus’ oracles is hardly likely. Amphínomos is probably not thinking of that so much as hoping to put off having to take sides. Granted, he is the only man courageous enough to speak up, but for all that he is a coward. It may indeed be fear of the gods that moved him to object in the first place. (For further reflections on this problem, see XVII.631–38, below.) Even lukewarm opposition to evil is punished, and Amphínomos will die at Telémakhos’ hand (XXII.98–101).

493
Now this proposal won them:
It is not that the other suitors are so pious. Rather, Amphínomos’ proposal has the advantage of permitting them to postpone action. They may continue to feast without having to commit themselves to act and risk the loss of their places at the trough.

496
Meanwhile Penélopê the wise:
Homer gives no reason for Penélopê’s decision to appear at this juncture. We might imagine that having heard, first, that Telémakhos has returned and escaped one set of risks, and, immediately thereafter, that there is renewed plotting against his life, she might feel sufficiently emboldened and outraged to accuse the suitors to their faces. Unfortunately, from a strategic point of view, this is not a smart move: once accused openly, they have no reason to delay putting their plot into action and every reason to hasten it. Of course, it is Homer who decided that Penélopê would appear, and not merely because her doing so gives him an opportunity for a dramatic scene. More important, her appearance gives him the chance to present the other archvillain among the suitors, Eurýmakhos, in his characteristic role as sweet-talking dissembler. His tongue, ever ready to lie, will do him no good at XXII.47–94.

501
The faithful herald Medôn will be saved (XXII.401–24).

516–23
We learn now that, given Antínoös’ family history, his plotting demonstrates outrageous ingratitude. There is a strong family resemblance, so it sounds, between Antínoös and Antínoös’ father. We might wonder why Odysseus defended him.

528
Antínoös has no answer. Typically, it is Eurýmakhos who speaks.

538–42
Eurýmakhos can even enumerate the very reasons he ought to be eternally grateful to Odysseus and his house. He recites them and uses them in his carefully constructed rhetorical argument: no man who had received such benefits would wish to harm his benefactor or his benefactor’s family; I received such benefits from Odysseus; hence I cannot harbor such thoughts. We know, however, that it is a lie, and, in case we have any doubts, Homer takes care to remove them (546–48). Odysseus is a master rhetorician, as we have had many occasions to observe, but nowhere else in
The Odyssey
does Homer so clearly show us rhetoric’s capacity to be used for evil. Clearly, what counts is the character of the person behind the words: Eurýmakhos is a clever but thoroughly evil person. No wonder he can deliver such a speech.

544–45
Heaven / deals death no man avoids:
Eurýmakhos also caps his speech with a pious bromide (see 245–51, above).

551
to weep for her dear lord, Odysseus:
It is significant that Penélopê weeps for Odysseus, not Telémakhos, even though she has just voiced explicit concern for her son’s life. As we know, Odysseus is soon to reenter their house.

554–92
In this final scene of the book, Homer reunites Eumaios; Odysseus, quickly redisguised by Athena at the approach of the swineherd (558–63); and Telémakhos, now privy to his father’s counsels (see esp. 584–86). If Eumaios’ answer to Telémakhos’ question (of whether or not the suitors who sailed out to ambush Telémakhos have now returned to port, 567–69) is less than decisive (582–83), it is at least quite certain that Telémakhos’ return is known to one and all in Ithaka.

11–29
Telémakhos is talking about Odysseus, but Eumaios doesn’t know that. Nonetheless, Telémakhos doesn’t bother to explain to Eumaios why he now suggests a different course of action than he had outlined earlier (XVI.81–105). The ready, enthusiastic assent (20–29) of the “beggar” heads off any reservations Eumaios might have or at least might voice to his young master. Lines 233–39 confirm that he does have reservations.

17
Plain truth is what I favor:
In other words, “I prefer to speak the truth”—another proverbial cap to a speech (see XVI.245–51, above).

37
Eurýkleia
, we recall, was of special assistance to Telémakhos as he prepared to depart on his secret journey to Pylos (II.370–403). She will prove indispensable to all three of the major figures—Telémakhos, Odysseus, and Penélopê—in this last third of the epic. She is the faithful servant within the house, as Eumaios is the faithful servant without.

41–43
The mention of Odysseus at this point makes us think of the
differentiation of the maidservants to come and the punishment reserved for those, fortunately in the minority, who have gone bad. The “other maidservants” here presumably include none of the corrupted ones, unless, of course, they are dissembling.

46
“The choice of Artemis and Aphrodite together as a comparison for Penélopê is especially felicitous…. Penelope has been a chaste Artemis-figure during Odysseus’ twenty-year absence, but she is at the same time a desired sexual object or Aphrodite-figure every time she appears before the suitors” (Russo, HWH 3.21 [on XV1I.37]). At the close of
Book XXIII
she comes close to melding these two radically different views of women. The double comparison is repeated at XIX.66–67.

59–69
Although Telémakhos puts off giving even a summary report to his mother, line 64 must be a very clear indication to Penélopê that her son’s mood has changed and that something is likely to be afoot. Telémakhos leaves unstated the reasons vengeance is called for. Nonetheless, she carries out Telémakhos’ wishes to the letter (71–75).

65–69
I am now off
…: These lines refer to Theoklýmenos, left in Peiraios’ care at the end of
Book XV
.

104–7
But if my hour comes:
While he had only hinted at this indirectly to Penélopê (64), he speaks more openly to Peiraios.

134–36
Could you not / tell me … / what news:
In Greek Penélopê adds, “if you have heard anything” [106]. This qualification, which may seem a meaningless end-of-line formula, in fact saves Telémakhos from actually lying in his speech, for he now knows much more than he heard from Nestor and Meneláos—having seen and talked to Odysseus—which he has no intention of revealing.