~The Odyssey: Book 4~
“The King and Queen of Sparta”
Part One: Discuss Significant Scenes and Characters
Telemachus in Sparta:
How does the court at Sparta compare with Telemachus’ home in Ithaca? To what can we attribute these differences?
The court in Sparta is quite different from that of the court in Ithaca. So far, Homer has depicted Ithaca as glorious and grand as any other city in their society, however, this theory becomes questionable during the scene in book 4 when Telemachus is feasting with Nestor’s son, Pisistratus, in Menelaus’ palace and comments, “Surely Zeus’s court on Olympus must be just like this, the boundless glory of all this wealth inside! My eyes dazzle…I am struck with wonder” (126). Why should he be so shocked by the King’s palace? Is not Odysseus’ palace very similar in quality? When Homer refers to Odysseus’ “palace” he mentions “high-roofed halls”, a “burnished rack against a sturdy pillar” and a “chair of honor”. Perhaps this is not the case at all and the author simply glorifies Ithaca to be a far greater city than it is. In the scene where Telemachus finally divulges his reasoning for being at the King’s palace he says, “My house is being devoured, my rich farm lands destroyed, my palace crammed with enemies, slaughtering longhorn cattle” (134). This line gives reason to believe that Telemachus’ home in Ithaca is a simple farmland that could easily be destroyed. His shock upon entering Menelaus’ court parallels this idea.
How does it affect us as readers to see so much weeping on the part of all the main characters when they discuss the Trojan War and the memory of Odysseus?
“So Menelaus mused and stirred in [the guests] a deep desire to grieve. Helen of Argos, daughter of Zeus, dissolved in tears, Telemachus wept too, and so did Atreus’ son Menelaus. Nor could Nestor’s son Pisistratus stay dry-eyed” (130). When reading these lines the reader gets a sense of sadness and sympathy for those that lost loved ones in the Trojan War. This intense scene with all of the characters mourning the death of Odysseus and family members of their own finally makes the story real to us; this is the point in which we are pulling for Telemachus to find his father because we are finally able to experience the realness of what the characters feel.
The Suitors Plot Against Telemachus:
What do the suitors have planned for Telemachus upon his return to Ithaca? How does their plan reveal the true nature of their motives in courting Penelope?
“Quick, fetch me a swift ship and twenty men-I’ll waylay him from ambush, board him coming back in the straits between Ithaca and rocky Same. This gallant voyage of his father will find him wrecked at last!” (145). The suitors are planning to get rid of Telemachus because he stands in the way of their courting his mother, Penelope. They are going to attack him upon his return back to Ithaca so they will at last be able to take over Odysseus’ palace and have the riches of the King all for themselves.
How does Penelope react to finding out that Telemachus has left without telling her? What view of Penelope might readers start to develop at this point in the story?
When Penelope found out that her son has left “she stood there speechless a while, struck dumb, tears filling her eyes” (147). She felt incredible pain when “she sank on her well-built chamber’s floor, weeping, pitifully, as the women whimpered around her” (147). She cannot stand the thought that in addition to losing her husband, Odysseus, there is now the prospect of losing her son as well. Because of this scene, the reader gets that “motherly” feel from Penelope and we see her as a nurturing character. Her reaction to the news of her son’s voyage puts her in a feminine light with the response of a wife finding out about her husband’s death at battle, or a mother dealing with her son leaving for war.
How does the visit of Penelope’s sister’s ghost advance the story?
The visit of Penelope’s sister’s ghost gives the reader the sense that Telemachus will return home safely. She tells Penelope to have “courage!” (150) and not be “overwhelmed by all [her] direst fears” (150) because he has Athena to help him. After Penelope’s meltdown scene we are left with the feeling of doom that her son will indeed be killed, but after her sister’s ghost’s visit we are uplifted and enter Book 5 with hope.
Guiding question #1: What other key scenes not mentioned did you find vital to understanding the story? What themes are found in these scenes not mentioned as well as the scenes mentioned above?
Part Two: Illuminate the Text
The Odyssey is filled cover to cover with literary elements whether those are literary devices, epic machinery, or not part of the actual literature at all; the translator’s notes from the back. A literary device used over and over throughout book 4 is the simile. The first scene in which we are introduced to the Queen of Sparta, Helen, Homer provides us with the description, “Helen emerged from her scented, lofty chamber- striking as Artemis with her golden shafts” (Homer 128). A comparison is drawn between Helen and Artemis, the beautiful Mistress of Animals to emphasize how “striking” Helen is at first glance. This literary device is used again to describe Menelaus, the King of Sparta, as he awakens to begin questioning Telemachus for the reason behind his visit, “Over his shoulder he slung his well-honed sword, fastened rawhide sandals under his smooth feet, stepped from his bedroom, handsome as a god, and sat beside Telemachus” (134). With this line Homer portrays Menelaus as godly which in turn gives the reader an impression of him as a strong and beautiful man. In other words, the King’s presence and importance, just as his Queen’s, is emphasized. In addition to Helen and Menelaus, Homer uses the power of similes once more to describe Antinous, perhaps the worst of Penelope’s suitors, “Antinous rose up in their midst to speak, his dark heart filled with fury, blazing with anger-eyes like searing fire” (145) Here, we are provided with a simile and some imagery as the suitor’s eyes are paralleled with searing fire to show his rage toward Telemachus for a variety of reasons, one of which includes taking his ship on the voyage to find Odysseus.
Along with literary devices, book 4 uses patronymics: the name of a male ancestor to describe a son, grandson, etc. Examples of this are found on page 125, “Eteoneus, son of Boethous”, page 129, “Son of Atreus, King Menelaus”, and page 145, “Eupithes’ son, Antinous.” I understand patronymics as serving several purposes: to remind the reader of the family line and father-son relationships in the stories, to show respect to male figures in the story, and to depict these fathers and sons as holding some title of value during this time period. In other words, patronymics would not be used to describe a homeless person or beggar on the street because they hold no value in this society. If the name of a father is mentioned in the description of their son then both must hold some level of worth simply by their formal mention.
Although literary elements are vital in book 4, it is important to take time and search through all parts of this translation by Robert Fagles. This includes, but is not limited to, the very back of book where we find the Notes on Translation created by Bernard Knox. How are readers supposed to understand the reading if they do not understand the language? Knox does an amazing job of picking key lines and passages to explain from every book in The Odyssey. I used Knox’s feature to help me figure out Menelaus’ quote on page 127, “What hardships I endured, how I lost this handsome palace built for the ages, filled to its depths with hoards of gorgeous things.” My initial thought was why did Menelaus, King of Sparta, lose his palace? He seems like a character that would never have his status or belongings brought into question, a man with a great deal of power and control. I made a note of it in my book and continued reading. After I finished book 4 I went searching through the Notes on the Translation and found the explanation. Knox essentially clarifies how Menelaus’ palace was lost as he explains that in Homer’s other classic, The Iliad, terms of a dual between Menelaus and Paris, also known as Alexander or the Prince of Troy, stated that if Paris wins he will keep “Helen and all her wealth.” Judging by the passage in book 4, it is safe to say that Menelaus lost this dual that took place between himself and Paris. This short line on page 127 seems useless and trivial while we read, but I quickly found how untrue that statement is simply by making a little note and searching through the Notes on the Translation. This section in the back of the book serves as a great tool to understanding the background stories of characters in The Odyssey that we would have trouble fully appreciating otherwise.
Guiding question #2: What other literary devices were used in book 4? What do they add to the story?
Part Three: Make Connections
In book 4 we are submersed in the theme of hospitality, or xenia. We are made aware of its significance during this time period as Homer offers examples of the King and Queen’s generosity toward Telemachus’, their guest, during his stay at their home. As soon as Telemachus and his men arrive by horse at the King’s palace in Sparta, one of Menelaus’ men asks if he should “unhitch their team for them or send them to someone free to host them well” (125). King Menelaus is so offended by his helper that he yells, “Now I see you’re babbling like a child! Just think of all the hospitality we enjoyed” and “Quick, unhitch their team. And bring them in, strangers, guests, to share our flowing feast” (125). Upstanding people during this time period saw it as proper to invite strangers and guests into their homes for a meal and stay before even asking of their names or intentions. During Telemachus’ stay he is bathed and rubbed down with oil by maids and told that “of all the treasures lying heaped in [Menelaus’] palace [he] shall have the finest, most esteemed” (144). This idea of the host treating their stranger of a guest with such care and honor seems foreign to us as the readers because we are used to it being almost exactly the opposite. In our society, we act extremely polite to our hosts, try not to overstay our welcome, and leave them with a sort of parting gift as a thank you for their hospitality. Having their home as a place to stay is gift enough.
As I finish up this blog with Harry Potter Weekend on ABC Family playing in the background I find my connection to hospitality in book 4: The Weasley Family. The Weasleys take Harry into their home and provide him with shelter, care, and the love of a family that he has never had. Mrs. Weasley always makes sure Harry is fed, clothed, and cared for by all in their household and never fails to extend an invitation to their home. She, much like the King and Queen of Sparta, gives gifts to her guest, Harry. On more than one occasion the Weasleys provide for Harry even though they are not financially stable enough to do so, handing him gifts with a “Happy Christmas” as though he was one of their own.
Below is a cheesy, but good link that shows scenes in which Mrs. Weasley demonstrates hospitality.
Guiding question(s) #3: What does the hospitality a person provides say about their character? Why was this revered in this ancient Greek society? What provided for the change from that society to our modern society now?
