Questionable Morals

Throughout the first 21 books of the Odyssey, the reader is made to anticipate the ending, where Odysseus will finally get home and take revenge against the suitors. But upon arriving at book 22: Bloodshed, it isn’t necessarily obvious that Odysseus’ actions are entirely justified. Even more so, the way in which Odysseus takes his revenge makes his moral integrity a little weaker from the reader’s point of view.

It is entirely understandable that Odysseus wants to take revenge as he does in Book 22, after being informed by Tiresias in Book 11 that there were “invaders eating [his] supplies at home, courting [his] wife with gifts” (11. 118-119). Interestingly enough, it is also Tiresias who tells Odysseus that he will “match the suitors’ violence and kill them all” instead of Odysseus deciding to do so himself (11. 119-120). When Odysseus goes to take his revenge, he goes a little overboard. As we discussed in class, it seems like killing an entire generation of townspeople might be overdoing it a little. Plus, Odysseus ignores Leodes’ plea of mercy, a man known for having “disapproved of all their bullying” (21. 144). In Book 21, he specifically urged those who could not string Odysseus’ bow to leave and go court “some other fine, well dressed Greek lady” (21. 161). Despite this, when Leodes begs Odysseus for his life in Book 22, neither Athena nor Telemachus stand up for him and recognize his lack of involvement in the proceedings, unlike with the poet Phemius and the house boy Medon. Instead, he is, basically, convinced and executed for wishing that “[Odysseus’] wife would marry [Leodes] instead and bear [Leodes] children” (22. 324-5). What makes this scene particularly morally ambivalent is that Leodes is killed, not because of an abuse of xenia (that we know of), but rather because he even tried to court Penelope, something which, to our knowledge, would have been perfectly acceptable.

In addition to Odysseus, Book 22 adds some interesting moral ambivalence to Telemachus’ character; one who previously had been very sympathetic. In this book, Telemachus makes his first kill as part of the revenge fight with the suitors. Starting at line 89, Homer narrates,

Amphinomus attacked Odysseus. He drew his sharp sword hoping he could force him to yield his place. Telemachus leapt in and thrust his bronze spear through him from behind, ramming it through his back and out his chest (22. 89-93).

Along with Amphinomus being one of the more sympathetic and moral suitors, Homer has the added awkward detail of Telemachus stabbing Amphinomus in the back, something generally associated with cowards. This action completely destroys (at least in my opinion) the personal and moral growth that we have noted in Telemachus’ hero journey.

The end of book 22 contains possibly the most disturbing view of both Odysseus and Telemachus, as heroes and people in general. After killing all of the suitors, Odysseus asks Eurycleia which of the slave girls are loyal and which are not. He orders the men to have the disloyal slave girls clean up the bodies of the suitors and then to “hack at them with long swords, eradicate all life from them” (22. 443-4). After the slave girls have cleaned the bodies up Telemachus, “showing initiative,” suggests to instead hang the girls (22. 461). Homer describes their deaths as “agonies” and that “they gasped, feet twitching for a while, but not for long” (22. 473-4). This is both simply a disturbing description of their deaths, one possibly only beaten by Melanthius’ death, and a disturbing vision of Telemachus in his (ideal?) position as head of the house, mimicking his father’s cruelty when it comes to killing those involved in the courting of Penelope. There is also an interesting mix of views concerning the slave girls, as Odysseus, as he condemns them to death, implies that the “suitors made them do” things, while Telemachus, as he strings up rope with which to hang them, says that the girls “poured down shame on me and Mother, when they lay beside the suitors” (22. 444-5; 464-5). It is confusing as to how we should read it, but the perspective that makes the most sense to me is that Telemachus’ perspective is that of one who assumed that they were doing it voluntarily, while we were previously told that the suitors have raped the girls, a view with which Odysseus appears to agree. Why he still has them killed is not clear.

In the end, after reading Book 22, I do not feel satisfied. Though my view of Odysseus has gotten worse and worse as we have read further into The Odyssey, this was the crux of all the morally ambiguous and just cruel things he has done or endorsed. In addition, his willingness and enthusiasm to continue to fight against the townsmen in Book 24, inevitably killing another generation of the town, was horrifying to see from the supposed hero of the epic poem. While a case can be made that Odysseus, as the king of Ithaca returning at long last, needed to make a point in these acts of violence to discourage betrayal and show that he will harshly punish any who wrong him, one would think that, even for the people of ancient Greece, such a cruel and unforgiving character would not appeal as a hero.