Talk:Odyssey

Polishing and clean-up

Hi there. I'm going to be making some changes to the article over the next few days in order to try and raise it out of being a C-class article, given its importance to literature generally. I'll be updating this section regularly with what is being changed. If anyone has any questions or concerns, let me know. Foremost, I'm going to try and improve the article's lead by reducing it in size, and increasing clarity and conciseness. Imaginestigers (talk) 18:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

• Firstly, the lead. I've simplified the first paragraph, and drawn in information from elsewhere, to provide only details on composition and authorship. The second paragraph has become the refuge of plot details and an allusion to its structure. The latter two paragraphs mirror the first two: The third elaborates on composition, and the fourth highlighting the themes (as it relates to the plot) and significance as a text. Imaginestigers (talk) 19:55, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
• Next up, I'm going to tackle the Character of Odysseus section. It’s largely unsourced and reads like something that one might write down from a blackboard. Imaginestigers (talk) 11:01, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I haven't read the article, but I've read the lead. Noticing that it says that the poem is still read in the Homeric Greek, I would like to encourage expansion on this point, if there is not already something (a cursory look didn't spot anything). For example, I'm not a reliable source, but Homeric Greek is extremely delightful. Untitled50reg (talk) 19:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• • Untitled50reg, I'll see what I can find! A section about the original language might be more generally useful (as this is ultimately a page about a historical literary work, not written in English) than a bunch of stuff which is currently there. The article has a lot of simplified bloat. Imaginestigers (talk) 20:40, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• • I've overhauled the Character of Odysseus. I didn't want to delete too much of what someone else wrote, so I've re-written it, with more robust referencing. My next focus will be on pruning unnecessary, unsourced information from the rest of the article. Then I'll try and determine what kind of structural changes the rest of it needs. I'll update here as I go. Imaginestigers (talk) 14:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

• • • I've made a bunch of minor changes to In pop culture. Firstly, it was standardising the format of "Author's Book (Year)" or "Film (Year) is a (Country)" then it was deciding what would stay and what would go. Anything that had a good source stayed, and anything where a source was easily retrievable, I retrieved a source. As for the section on opera, only one of them was sourced. I've added CN's to each of them, because opera isn't really my area, so I don't want to remove them too harshly. I removed a reference to Rick Riordan's Heroes of Olympus books, because to my knowledge they most include larger mythology, not the Odyssey itself, and the reference was eNotes Homework Help.

I'm not convinced "In popular culture" is the right title for something that includes obscure opera pieces, I think I'm going to rename it to "Cultural impact" or "Cultural influence", something along those lines. I've also deleted the blank section which provides a main article link to English translations of Homer. But I think a section on the evolution of the Odyssey's translation is absolutely worthwhile, so consider that a placeholder removal until I fix it up! It’s included in See also until then. Imaginestigers (talk) 15:07, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

A new challenge for you: When I initially glanced at the article, a few days ago, I changed Ulysses to Ulixes, noting that, to the Romans, he was Ulixes, not Ulysses. I added a handful of references. I look now, and Ulysses has inserted himself with my references demonstrating that he was not Ulysses. Appropriately sneaky, perhaps, but, unless you can find Ulysses his own references, I am going to continually snatch him out, considering him a Demogorgon.Untitled50reg (talk) 11:06, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

For clarity: what I mean is that Odysseus is just a change of alphabet. Such was the Greek name. The Romans knew him as Ulixes. We don't change the alphabet there because we use the same alphabet. I repeat that I am not a reliable source, but I personally have only encountered Ulysses in English. Untitled50reg (talk) 11:24, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Though that is not entirely clear. I have not encountered Ulysses in Latin. I did not mean to imply that he is not so in Latin. He is probably medieval. Untitled50reg (talk) 11:29, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Untitled50reg:. The problem with those citations is that they link primary sources, which we aren't allowed to do. You have to link to a secondary source. I won't be tackling the Lede of the article for a little while, but if you aren't able to track down any secondary sources (articles on the reliable source list, scholarly articles), I'll probably have to end up removing it before I submit it for good article approval. I agree that both should probably be there, and I'll do what I can. But right now I need to fix the rest of the article before I go back and re-write the Lede (to suit the article that now exists). Imaginestigers (talk) 12:13, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

• Edited down the plot. It probably still needs more pruning. Imaginestigers (talk) 12:13, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

• Added a section on the problems with translating the book into English. Imaginestigers (talk) 13:12, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Sigh. "(Ὀδυσσεύς, Latin Ulixes from one of several Greek variants; hence English Ulysses), king of Ithaca; son of Laertes and Anticlea; husband of Penelope; hero of *Homer's Odyssey." "Virgil's references to Ulixes in Aeneid 2 follow the Euripidean conception [...] as does Seneca [...]".

 – "Odysseus", The Oxford Classical Dictionary (4 ed.) Edited by Simon Hornblower, Antony Spawforth, and Esther Eidinow Publisher: Oxford University Press Print Publication Date: 2012 Print ISBN-13: 9780199545568 Published online: 2012 Current Online Version: 2012 eISBN: 9780191735257 –

nb English Ulysses. Untitled50reg (talk) 12:52, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Good job, @Untitled50reg:, very much appreciated! Article leads aren't meant to have any references in them (and everything there should be cited elsewhere in the article), so what I'll do is shove them both into the Character of Odysseus section with that reference. They both need to go there, anyway, because Ulysses is the English name. Imaginestigers (talk) 13:12, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Untitled50reg:: Added to Character of Odysseus! Imaginestigers (talk) 13:23, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't know the rules, so I will let you do whatever you are doing. For myself, I am just stood Janusly on Wikipedia between "Throw physic to the dogs" and "Zarathustra is no longer a scholar". Untitled50reg (talk) 13:45, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Added a section about the Date of composition. Imaginestigers (talk) 13:56, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

"Cultural influence" section needs a lot of work...

Hello! I see this article is up for "Good Article" review. As someone who has helped bring over two dozen Wikipedia articles up to "Good Article" status and who is currently on my third year into a degree in classical studies, I am glad to see this, so I thought I would pitch in and add a little help. I've made some changes to the lede. I thought I should also mention that the final "Cultural influence" section isn't in very good shape. It's mostly composed of bullet points and there are a lot of points that aren't especially relevant and even ones that are uncited. I would suggest converting these sections into prose and removing claims that are uncited or of dubious relevance. —Katolophyromai (talk) 05:46, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Another huge problem I'm noticing is that the section "Textual history" doesn't say anything about how Greek manuscripts of the Odyssey were copied throughout the Greek-speaking world (mainly the Byzantine Empire) throughout the Middle Ages and that medieval Greek writers such as Eustathios of Thessaloniki wrote scholarly commentaries on it. The way the section is right now could easily give someone the false impression that everything we know about the text of the Odyssey comes from the scraps of ancient copies that have been found through archaeology, which is not at all the case, since most of our information actually comes from the medieval manuscripts. —Katolophyromai (talk) 06:00, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Katolophyromai: kindly leave the article alone until the review is over, thanks. -- Whiteguru (talk) 09:05, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

@Katolophyromai: Hi there! Thanks so much for your input. I've been looking for someone with some more expertise. I'm in my fourth year of an English Literature degree, and I studied these texts for a year, but there's a lot of things which do frustrate me. Cultural influence is a relic of a prior iteration on the article, and the one which I did not really give any attention to other than cleaning up the list. Once the GA review is over, I'd be really appreciative of your assistance. The same is true with Textual history, which I wrote myself. There are bound to be some gaps in my knowledge, and I'd be thankful for having someone to patch them up. Imaginestigers (talk) 16:35, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

@Katolophyromai: Actually, go nuts! Nothing wrong with editing while a GA review is in process. Especially if it’s helping. Imaginestigers (talk) 20:46, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

@Whiteguru: Your comment above makes no sense. Good edits are always welcome. @Katolophyromai: Please please please edit as much as you like. Paul August ☎ 21:43, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree with all of Katolophyromai's remarks above. It would be best it the "Cultural influence" section was converted from a bulleted list, into prose. But at an absolute minimum, everything in it should have a secondary source establishing relevance, significance and notability with respect to the Odyssey. Paul August ☎ 21:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

@Paul August: Excellent idea, and surprised I didn't think about that sooner. University is busy right now, so I'll need to wait until I have more free time to dedicate to it at the weekend. Imaginestigers (talk) 00:34, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

@Imaginestigers: I have added some very brief information to the "Textual history" section about some of the really big moments in the history of the text of the Odyssey: the production of a standardized text and commentaries by scholars in Alexandria in the third and second centuries BCE, the archbishop Eustathios of Thessalonike's commentaries in the eleventh century CE, the production of the first printed edition in 1488 by Demetrios Chalkokondyles, and the production of the first English translation in 1614 by George Chapman. For some reason, none of these things were mentioned in the article before, but they are all there now. —Katolophyromai (talk) 06:19, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

@Katolophyromai: The honest answer is that this is not my field, and I could only make changes to what I was reasonably certain of, in the hope that someone would fill the other blanks in later. I'm glad you have come, though. Imaginestigers (talk) 20:06, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

I've removed the following from the Cultural influence section, because they are not cited, and I'm going to wait until I can rewrite the section (converting it into clear prose) before re-adding them:

• Max Bruch’s choral work Odysseus told the main highlights of the hero’s story.

• Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds use the Odyssey to form the "narrative" of the song "More News from Nowhere," released in 2008 as a single and on the album Dig, Lazarus, Dig!!!. In the song, Cave uses a variety of contemporary names to represent the gods and nymphs who populate the Odyssey, and sketches key episodes from the epic across an eight-minute track.

I'm preserving them here from the time being. Imaginestigers (talk) 22:16, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

GA pass

Just wanted to thank everyone who has worked on this article over the years. I'm really thankful to whoever put in the earlier work at making the images in the article relevant and well-suited to the page in particular, as well as to @Katolophyromai: for their additions to the Textual history section, and to @Whiteguru: for the review. Imaginestigers (talk) 02:08, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

@Imaginestigers: I am actually the one who selected a very significant portion of the images that are currently used in this article. See this series of edits I made in June 2017 in which I added, replaced, and moved around most of the images in the article. The images I put in place back then are mostly the same ones that are in the article now. —Katolophyromai (talk) 02:57, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Nice one! I've a few other projects first but once they're done with I'll come back to try to help determine if it's worth pursuing FA. I think a lot of it is strong/robust, but work has to be done on Cultural influence, and I think receptiom needs some sort of dedicated section (the Emily Wilson translation stuff can be moved there).Imaginestigers (talk) 06:09, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Pronunciation

The pronunciation was just changed from Greek pronunciation: [o.dýs.sej.ja] to Greek pronunciation: [o.dýs.seː.a]. This attracted my attention initially because it was not immediately obvious to me that this new pronunciation is actually possible. I then just doubted the facticity generally. Therefore I put my face in The Cambridge Grammar of Classical Greek. Page 9 therein offers the pronunciation of the short diphthong ει as: "[e:] (earlier [ei])". It notes also that "ι and υ in diphthongs were not pronounced exactly like the equivalent single vowels, but as sounds approximating 'semivowels' [j] and [w]". I am accordingly sceptical of this new pronunciation. Untitled50reg (talk) 13:51, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

@LangNerd1234: Hi there! Could you explain the change you made to the IPA pronunciation? Given a lack of explanation, I'm going to revert your change until one is forthcoming. Imaginestigers (talk) 16:45, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello! I am more than aware of the change in phonetic values when it comes to ει. However, since it is academically regarded for the term "Ancient Greek" to fit the description of classical Attic Greek, spoken from the 5th to the 4th century B.C., a period during which the standard pronunciation of ει has been proven to be [eː]. Thank you for your understanding! LangNerd1234 (talk) 13:10, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:34, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

A 15th-century manuscript of the Odyssey, book I

• ... that the Odyssey topped a BBC Culture poll of experts to find literature's most enduring narrative?

Source: Article: Odyssey (lede)

• ALT1:... that the Odyssey (manuscript pictured) has been used as a school text since ancient Athens?
  Source: "By the time Constantine inaugurated his new capital on the Bosphorus, the Homeric poems had been schoolbooks for at least eight centuries, ever since Athenian schoolboys had learnt by heart the meaning of such obscure Homeric terms as ἀμενηνὰ κάρηνα and κόρνμβα." Article: Odyssey#Textual tradition
• ALT2:... that scholars are divided on whether the island kingdom of Ithaca in the Odyssey is the same Ithaca of modern day Greece?
  Source: "This is not to say that the travels of Odysseus in Never-Never Land can be retraced on a map. All attempts to do just that, and they have been numerous from ancient times on, have foundered. Even the topographical detail of Odysseus' home island of Ithaca can be shown to be a jumble, with several essential points appropriate to the neighboring isle of Leucas but quite impossible for Ithaca." Article: Odyssey#Geography of the Odyssey.

• Comment: I recently promoted the article on the Odyssey to GA, and it was suggested to me that some elements from the article might be a good DYK candidate. I'm very new to this, so if I have messed anything up, please let me know.

Created by Imaginestigers (talk) and Katolophyromai (talk). Nominated by Imaginestigers (talk) at 15:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC).

• Newly promoted GA - plenty long, no issues. I would suggest a new ALT like ... that the Odyssey has been used as a school text since ancient Athens? as a bit flashier. I'm not sure the image is the best choice, as I'm finding it difficult to non-awkwardly refer to it in the hook. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:41, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

• Good change! Thanks Pi.1415926535. The image was a remnant from a previous hook -- you were right. I've changed it, with one which is generic enough that it can apply to any of the three (although it’s still perhaps a bit off). Imaginestigers (talk) 19:57, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

• Good to go with revised ALT1. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:11, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

  Can you please clarify for the prep builders which hook is to be taken, without expecting them to read all this? Safest is: strike all others, give it a number (ALT1a) and say you approved that one. The image will likely not be taken (they don't like manuscripts and music that you can't read, and I even understand), but IF taken, the clause in ALT1 is too long, - that's for the caption (which is even more too long). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

  • @Pi.1415926535: Is there anything else I should be doing here? I'm not quite sure how the process works (if I'm meant to be making changes or waiting for someone else). ImaginesTigers (talk) 19:59, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
    • @Gerda Arendt: I've struck the unused alts, and simplified the caption and clause in case the illuminated manuscript is visually interesting enough. Anything more needed? @ImaginesTigers: Sorry for the delay, and I don't think so. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:31, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

      Thank you, good! I see no reason to mention "book I" in the caption, and would rather say "Page from a 15th-century manuscript". Is it the beginning? Then perhaps "Beginning" instead of "Page". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:37, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

      @Gerda Arendt: and @Pi.1415926535:: I can confirm that it's the first page. ImaginesTigers (talk) 20:40, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

References

Further improvements

Ideally, the plan is to get this article in a good shape for FA nomination. To that end, I'm going to outline my broad structural plans.

1. Cultural influence. The most pressing issue are the current problems with this section. I intend to follow-through all the significant texts mentioned, and convert the material into something that does not have a list. Similarly, the poem's influence should be described in more detail beyond explicit references in other texts.
2. Analysis and criticism. Both of these are currently sprinkled in throughout the article, a remnant from a WikiEd project. The student did some excellent work that I was able to polish up, but I think that it can be condensed. I'm using the Hamlet article as a primary influence here. It’s incredibly well structured, and highly accessible. I think the current state of Themes and patterns focuses excessively on a few elements from a small sliver of critics. It needs to be reduced, and built out. Geography of the Odyssey is another point of pain for me. I mention it here because I think it could be folded into a section on analysis and criticism.
3. Odysseus. This section still, after a lot of work, gives me a headache. I'm not entirely sure how to approach it (open to feedback). Noting here that I know it’s an issue.
4. The lead will require rewriting when all this is done.

This isn't an exhaustive list. It’s just what is currently on my radar. If anyone has any suggestions, I'd be happy to hear them. Imaginestigers (talk) 14:11, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Katolophyromai and Paul August: You've both given really helpful feedback before about the Cultural influence section of the page (now just "Influence"). I've started making changes to it. If you have any feedback on the changes I've made so far, I'd appreciate the input! If not, I shall carry on. ImaginesTigers (talk) 20:50, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Temporarily on hold while I work on changes for another GA review. Work should resume within a few days. ImaginesTigers (talk) 22:35, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

• Some thoughts on this: Aza24 (talk) 19:51, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

• Yes the cultural influence section is tricky because even if the list is converted to text, it will likely still be "list-like" and I'm not sure there's an easy way to avoid that ("list-like" in the way that the literature section is already). Btw, I've found some other songs: "Tales of Brave Ulysses" and "Ulysses (song)" and the opera: Die Odyssee by August Bungert (check out its grove article); I know that U is a character in Troilus and Cressida but I think that story is mostly based on the Iliad. You may want to look through Category:Films based on the Odyssey as well and there are definitely a lot of paintings that could be mentioned – I think I brought some up at your talk. this chapter has some information that might help for general influence. The two other things I would recommend is more comparison to the Iliad, perhaps a small section and way more comparison to the Aeneid (which would go under influence I assume) – after all, there's a reason that this article exists. Sorry for throwing so many different things at you here!

Hi, User:Aza24! Appreciate the input. I think I've been doing okay with Influence so far. My major plan is to get it to resemble Hamlet#Influence, but the Odyssey has a much broader impact (imo), so it’s important to keep it narrow. My long-term goal is to separate Influence not into mediums, but movement. A section about its impact on Renaissance artist; a section about its (great) influence on modernism. But right now I need to keep things narrow, so that I have some material to work with. This section requires a lot of work. Thanks for the links to the music pieces! Regarding the Iliad, I've been advised against comparing the two in detail. It’s possible I can do it briefly (a section about all three of those texts and how they interact could work), but that's definitely a subject for later. ImaginesTigers (talk) 20:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree that Hamlet is a good format, the article itself is among the highest quality on WP. I understand the hesitency about Illiad, but the influence on the Aeneid seems more important anyways. Aza24 (talk) 00:47, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

• The Odysseus and Geography sections look OK – I think you'd have to be careful about expanding them too much, however, just glancing at it, I suspect one or two more sentences to Geography wouldn't hurt. I am yet to look closely at the analysis/criticism you're saying is sprinkled throughout.

I think there's a good chance Geography is going to be transformed into a subheading at some stage in the future. ImaginesTigers (talk) 20:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I would advise against that, only because it seems to be subheading for the sake of subheading. Considering that there's an entire article on Geography on WP, it would seem prominent enough to be its own thing – obvious no big deal if you disagree though. Aza24 (talk) 00:47, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

• Some random things:

• Not sure that "Influences on the Odyssey" and "Geography in the Odyssey" need the "in the Odyssey part" – surely that's implied.

Great point! "Influences on the Odyssey" might find a better home under the Textual history section. I haven't done much to "Influences on the Odyssey" other than fix up some formatting. ImaginesTigers (talk) 20:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

• I wonder if the place of the influences section may be better suited somewhere else, perhaps between themes and textual history

YEP! Agreed. ImaginesTigers (talk) 20:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

• The referencing throughout it a bit odd, I know that most people prefer not putting pages in the text but obviously there's no rule against this. Either way, it doesn't make a lot of sense at the moment, for example, ref 30 has "127–31" in the ref but page numbers of 127–31 in addition and then 124–5 later while it still refers to the "127–31" ref (if that makes sense?). I personally use sfn citations which I find solves issues like these, since you can separate the source from the page numbers and still link back but this up to you of course. I would also recommend you move more citations to the bibliography, such as "The East Face of Helicon: West Asiatic Elements in Greek Poetry and Myth" and then use page numbers throughout the text, otherwise there seems to be a big mix of citation styles.

So referencing is not my thing, really. I always try to include a direct page number to where I am quoting from. I won't do that if I instead put a quotation. I'll seek advise from a GOCE editor with some experience in that area much closer to the time, I think. We're a long way off FA nom. ImaginesTigers (talk) 20:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

• With a further reading section like that there will likely be some skepticism from FA reviewers that not enough literature is used, you may want to consider trying to use more of them... Aza24 (talk) 19:51, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

WIP! Can only tackle so many parts at once. Right now I'm improving the worst sections so that I can solicit further feedback on important critical material. I'm also going to reach out to a lecturer at my university who specialises in classics; I think she might be helpful in that regard. But it’s going to be a slow process — I can only work on one section at once, and despite this article's very high views, it doesn't look like there's a whole lot of interest in improving it, which is disappointing. I've tried reaching out to people to no avail. For that reason alone, I am very very thankful for your feedback! It’s good to get another pair of eyes on it.

There's a lot of critical material missing. There's an over-lingering on some ideas (Homecoming, Patterns) with total neglect of other (the story's meta qualities, for instance; how enchanted it is with its own storytelling). Thanks again for the input. It means a lot. Check in on it every now and again! ImaginesTigers (talk) 20:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Reaching out to a professor is a great idea – my work in Medieval music has forced me to do the same on many occasions. I'll watch the page and try to keep an eye on your progress, but yes a long process for sure. Also, if it would help, I'd be able to reformatting/standardizing the citations myself; I've done it for some other high profile pages before (Abraham Lincoln and Leonardo da Vinci which is a work in progress) – up to you though. Aza24 (talk) 00:47, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

That would be great! But I won't ask you to do so now, when everything is in flux. I'll give you a ping when I'm at the stage where unifying the citations is needed. That'd be really helpful. Thanks Aza! ImaginesTigers (talk) 11:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes just let me know – and no problem at all. Aza24 (talk) 02:38, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

I just had a little sniff at the present influence, as far as literature. I thought I would note that I don't think that Dante had read any Homer, so I am not sure if he counts as being directly influenced (if you want to limit it to direct influence). Also Ezra Pound's Cantos literally opens with the Odyssey. I don't know if Theocritus is adequately notable, but idylls 6 and 11 involve Polyphemus. Obviously you know Euripides'play. This is just what came immediately to mind... Otherwise I think there's an English idiom touching Skylla and Kharybdis (or however they are spelled). And that reminds me of Sin in Paradise Lost, but I am too ignorant of the Latin poets to offer her with any confidence. Untitled50reg (talk) 12:49, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Though I should add to that missing confidence The Faerie Queene, which I have not read in a long time but vaguely recall some monsters which diminish the Sin business further. Untitled50reg (talk) 12:58, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

There's certainly a fair amount of criticism on Dante and the Odyssey. And scholars have noted it. Ezra Pound will be added soon! He's on my list of important features. I think the current list doesn't include Keats' On First Looking into Chapman's Homer, which is also on my list. It'll be built out in time. If, when I finish each section, there's glaring stuff missing, ping me. I'll definitely be including The Faerie Queen — the lecturer I mentioned above is an expert on Spenser! ImaginesTigers (talk) 13:14, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Ridiculous far left politics shoe-horned into article

Edith Hall suggests that Dante's depiction of Odysseus became understood as a manifestation of Renaissance colonialism and othering, with the cyclops standing in for "accounts of monstrous races on the edge of the world", and his defeat as symbolising "the Roman domination of the western Mediterranean".[32]

Modern writers have revisited the Odyssey to highlight the poem's female characters. Canadian writer Margaret Atwood adapted parts of the Odyssey for her novella, The Penelopiad (2005). The novella focuses on Penelope and the twelve female slaves hanged by Odysseus at the poem's ending,[72] an image which haunted Atwood.[73] Atwood's novella comments on the original text, wherein Odysseus' successful return to Ithaca symbolises the restoration of a patriarchal system.[73] Similarly, Madeline Miller's Circe (2018) revisits the relationship between Odysseus and Circe on Aeaea.[74] As a reader, Miller was frustrated by Circe's lack of motivation in the original poem and sought to explain her capriciousness.[75] The novel recontextualises the sorceress' transformations of sailors into pigs from an act of malice into one of self-defence, given that she has no superhuman strength with which to repel attackers.[76] 2600:1016:B024:4429:BC0D:1B9A:889:C46B (talk) 06:54, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

The need for an "Allergorical Analysis" Section

Obviously the Odyssey has allegorical and metaphorical significance throughout the book. I am trying to create a section within the page to address this topic. For some reason Imaginestiger is blocking me from adding this section. I see nothing wrong in adding such a significant topic as allegorical information to this page.

Here is the entry I am trying to add: Allegorical Analysis - new section title - The Odyssey has similarities with the ancient mythical archetypal pattern of what Joseph Campbell calls a hero’s journey and the monomyth. The three main stages are identified in the story, which consist of several steps: the Departure (or Separation), the Initiation, and the Return. Joseph Campbell speaks of this parallel in his book: “Thus Odysseus answers, throughout his entire saga in The Odyssey, the single mythic question posed at the beginning, the one which could be phrased as: How do I ever find true home again? Greg1wiki (talk) 17:12, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Given that Campbell’a hero cycle theories apply to hundreds of works of literature, including on this article is pointless. Aza24 (talk) 19:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

How can it be pointless when Campbell references the Odyssey story with a quote is his most famous book? Greg1wiki (talk) 20:32, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

I have already explained this to you: the Odyssey is more important to Campbell's theory than Campbell's theory is to the Odyssey. I reverted the addition of your content 3 times; another editor reverted it once; and a third editor removed it again. This is edit warring. You have warned about edit warring before, on an unrelated topic. At this point, you are wasting multiple editors' time with disruptive editing. — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 21:35, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

I do not feel that just because YOU think that Campbells Theory is not relevant to the Odyssey does not make it so. I have book references and citations to back up my argument for my edit. Where are your references and citations? The other people who reverted my edit also did not have basis to do so, as you can see from their comments in the talk. Aza24 only found the edit to be pointless, that is no reason for edit reversion. My edit is not unrelated to the Odyssey as you have stated, again just because you have a personal opinion in regards to related or not should not discredit my edit. This is an edit warning, you have been warned about reversing my edits. Greg1wiki (talk) 23:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

So, is this how Wikipedia works these days? I have three editors ImaginesTigers, Aza24, and Ferret revert my edit and then give me an edit warning and block my edit. Where are your valid arguments, references, citations, dialogue, discourse for your disapproval? It seems that you all just made up some arbitrary personal reasons without any valid points being made other than personal objections. How do I know that you are not all friends and are just teaming up to discredit my edit. How can you say “at this point, you are wasting multiple editors' time with disruptive editing” as you can see from this talk we have barely discussed anything, there has been no discourse? We have not even had any type of consensus argument over my edit? I thought that the Talk section was where you were supposed to debate your reasons for and against edits and back them up with valid references and citations to prove your argument/point.

Oh well, if this is how Wikipedia wants to allow their website to be run, so be it! It seems to be more authoritarian than democratic. This needs to be fixed. Greg1wiki (talk) 00:33, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Also, your argument that just because the "Odyssey is more important to Campbell's theory than Campbell's theory is to the Odyssey", who said this?, YOU? How do you know that statement to be true? The Odyssey was written in 8th century BC, there are ancient mythical monomyth (Campbells - hero's journey) stories that date back to 200-100 century BC, so who's theory is more important or came first? Where are your references and citations? Just because you make this personal opinion does not mean that we should not have an allegorical analysis section for the Odyssey page. Your statement has nothing to do with what I am proposing. Again, it sounds like you are making a personal opinion and you are definitely not backing up your argument with anything. Greg1wiki (talk) 00:52, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

I wanted to move the discussion onto Talk to seek outside voices. If you are patient more people will come and express their views; mine should not dominate the discussion. The above is not great in tone. So far my position is that I agree there should be a place for it in the article but it is to attributing it to sources which are talking about Campbell's theory or the effect his theory had, because I am objecting that it's significant enough to include, especially to dedicated a whole header to it. If it was possible, I think the paragraph as written could go under a Trivia header. Thanks, — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 01:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

I can be patient, patience is a virtue. I also felt as others can read for themselves that your tone towards me in the initial conversation were not great either. I am glad to hear that you think there should be an allegorical section. I would imagine that there are many other allegorical theories regarding the Odyssey story. It seems we are a little hung up on Campbell’s - a hero’s journey/monomyth theory. Campbell’s theory is but one allegorical theory that I myself have submitted for this section. There will be other editors who will have separate allegorical theories of the book. This is why I created the “Allegorical Analysis” section, so that other editors could give their separate allegorical/metaphorical theories that they themselves have researched and want to submit. Greg1wiki (talk) 02:17, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Not by Homer (the Iliad poet)

Modern scholarship has -- if not determined, certainly is leaning toward -- the conclusion that the Iliad and Odyssey were composed by different people and the Odyssey is quite a bit later. It was most likely composed when the Iliad was already a classic (at least generation or two after the Iliad; as late as around 600 to 550 BC). Martin West (I believe) among others asserted this, and it has gained substantial acceptance. I lack the time to correct Wiki's errors (which are pervasive) but if anyone has the inclination, they can easily find the references and update the very dated information in this article. 2600:1702:28E0:EE0:5D24:8197:2CAB:9CBC (talk) 01:23, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

The article already says:

"The Odyssey was originally composed in Homeric Greek in around the 8th or 7th century BC and, by the mid-6th century BC, had become part of the Greek literary canon. In antiquity, Homer's authorship of the poem was not questioned, but contemporary scholarship predominantly assumes that the Iliad and the Odyssey were composed independently and that the stories formed as part of a long oral tradition"

What about this disagrees with what you've said? Aza24 (talk) 04:05, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

The image and caption in the infobox doesn't seem to match

...about who is which. Neocorelight (Talk) 01:41, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Not sure, but I've restored the image to what is was for a while after the GAN. It seems to have been changed by a now-banned user without discussion or explanation. Aza24 (talk) 07:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)