Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

The Iliad
The Iliad
The Iliad
Audiobook16 hours

The Iliad

Written by Homer

Narrated by Alfred Molina

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

4/5

()

About this audiobook

From the renowned translator of Rilke, Tao Te Ching, and Gilgamesh, a vivid new translation of Western civilization’s foundational epic: The Iliad.

Tolstoy called the Iliad a miracle; Goethe said that it always thrust him into a state of astonishment. Homer’s story is thrilling, and his Greek is perhaps the most beautiful poetry ever sung or written. But until now, even the best English translations haven’t been able to re-create the energy and simplicity, the speed, grace, and pulsing rhythm of the original. Now, thanks to the power of Stephen Mitchell’s language, the Iliad’s ancient story comes to moving, vivid new life, and we are carried along by a poetry that lifts even the most devastating human events into the realm of the beautiful.

Mitchell’s Iliad is also the first translation based on the work of the preeminent Homeric scholar Martin L. West, whose edition of the original Greek identifies many passages that were added after the Iliad was first written down, to the detriment of the music and the story. Omitting these hundreds of interpolated lines restores a dramatically sharper, leaner text. In addition, Mitchell’s illuminating introduction opens the epic still further to our understanding and appreciation.
LanguageEnglish
TranslatorStephen Mitchell
Release dateOct 11, 2011
ISBN9781442347328
Author

Homer

Although recognized as one of the greatest ancient Greek poets, the life and figure of Homer remains shrouded in mystery. Credited with the authorship of the epic poems Iliad and Odyssey, Homer, if he existed, is believed to have lived during the ninth century BC, and has been identified variously as a Babylonian, an Ithacan, or an Ionian. Regardless of his citizenship, Homer’s poems and speeches played a key role in shaping Greek culture, and Homeric studies remains one of the oldest continuous areas of scholarship, reaching from antiquity through to modern times.

More audiobooks from Homer

Related authors

Related to The Iliad

Related audiobooks

Poetry For You

View More

Related articles

Related categories

Reviews for The Iliad

Rating: 4.052256756252313 out of 5 stars
4/5

5,406 ratings146 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    At long last! The Illiad by Homer DIfficult to rate a literary epic. However, the entire book takes place in the 10th and last year of the Trojan War. Achilles’ wrath at Agamemnon for taking his war prize, the maiden Briseis, forms the main subject of this book. It seemed as if there were a lot of introductions to characters we never hear from again. The word refulgent was used dozen of times. All in all I'm glad I slogged my way through this. The novelized from of Song of Achilles was more satisfactory to me than the Illiad. I read the translation by Caroline Alexander because that's the one the library had. 3 1/2 stars 604 pages
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    The best translation for those who cant read the original, thank you so much!
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    I remember when I was around fourteen or fifteen years old I decided I wanted to read the Iliad. I went to the public library and asked for it (they had to pull it out of their back room for me). And I remember opening the first page and seeing that it was in poem format. I was immediately put off. I had never liked poetry and at my age the few pages I did try to read went over my small head. Ever since I knew some day I would come back to the epic poem. This semester was the year in my literature class. I love literature and I love this class because it is finally getting me to pick up and read the epic stories that I have always wanted to read. I've read excerpts here and there and seen online summaries. I've even read a few children's books renditions. But nothing compares to the actual poem itself. This was my first read of the poem as a whole. Now my professor doesn't like how Lombardo has translated the epic, and says that it is too 'dumbed down' now. I can see where she is coming from because some phrases that Lombardo includes certainly takes away the image of the elegant language this would have been first told in. It did however give me a simple and very understandable rendition of the events to the epic. However, now I want to find another translation that doesn't do this. I want something that seems more authentic to the time period. I think it's a good translation for someone who hasn't come across the classical language in the time of the Greeks and Romans, but for those who have, it may not be exactly what you're looking for. (Above it says: Lombardo attempts to adapt the text to the needs of readers rather than the listeners for whom the work was originally intended.' Does that say something about the needs of readers now-a-days?) The other complaint I have is that in this translation, some Books are left out of the whole poem. I believe this is because the books included are the most important one when dealing with turning events in the epic, but there's bound to be some information that is lost that way. Anyways, I'm glad I finally got to the epic. It's a fantastic myth! Now I want a more complete translation. :) I'm going to go find an audio book translation, because really this epic was meant to be listened to, not read :)
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Alfred Molina's narration is excellent in this! Stephen Mitchell's translation of the Iliad is easy to read and has a natural flow to it.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Important in the history of literature and classical Greek thought.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    With a plethora of themes to focus on, two struck and stuck with me throughout this piece: 1) Truly, the Victors of the war wrote this account. Almost never was a smile far from my face as I found Homer bestowing glory unto the Greeks, and shame unto the Trojans. The Greeks always seemed to retreat in better thought haste, while the Trojans retreated cowardly, to flee the might of the Greeks. [i.e Ajax retreating from Hector momentarily versus any retreat of Hector's] 2) Fate robs men of freedom. After the work, I read the preface, where Sheila Murnaghan makes an interesting argument: "It is important to recognize... that divine intervention is almost always in harmony with the preexisting qualities and instincts of of those human characters. Divine favor may make possible displays of heroic excellence, but it is also a response to that excellence; in an unbreakable circular logic, men are heroic because the gods help them, and the gods help them because they are heroic." Introduction, xxvi. Whenever a character seemed to become more personal to me, I was disturbed that he knew of his fate, yet marched headlong into it. I understand Ms. Murnaghan's position, and it is a valiant attempt to import freedom into the work, but i feel it is flawed. This era looked to the heavens for reasons why an event occurred, and although we still do this today [i.e. God was with me when...], my culture recognizes and celebrates autonomy.As similar as we still are to our brethren of old, as shown in how the recording of history is slanted in favor of the triumphant, so too have we evolved in our perceptions of self worth and self recognition.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Stanley Lombardo's translation of Homer's Iliad is wonderful and very readable, better evoking the grittiness and rage of warfare than most other translations. I think of it as the "Vietnam War version of the Iliad." However, there are also parts where Homer's humor shines through, particularly when the Greek warriors are ribbing each other.Though the translation is excellent, I only got through about half of the book. The plot moves quite slowly, and the long lists of characters and backstory become tiresome. Also, there also is a lot of conversation between the various warriors, which illuminates Greek values (such as what makes for heroism or cowardice) but does not advance the storyline. Parts can get repetitious. I preferred the Odyssey, which I read in the Robert Fagles translation.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Dit lijkt een vrij saai boek met vooral talloze, bloederige strijdtaferelen en de erbij horende redevoeringen. Een overdaad aan herhalingen dus. Het werk vormt een mooie eenheid en is veel minder complex van structuur dan bijvoorbeeld de Odyssee. Bovendien is de moraal van het verhaal nogal simplistisch: ieder ondergaat zijn lot, maar de grote helden zorgen ervoor dat ze dat met roem en eer doen.Aan de andere kant steken er tal van verfrissende elementen in:1. de po?tische kracht die uitgaat van de taal (de epitheta), en vooral van sommige scenes: afscheid van Hektor en Andromache, het verdriet van Achilles om zijn vriend Patroklos,...2. de open en stoutmoedige confrontatie tussen de meerderen en hun ondergeschikten, vooral in de controverse rond koning Agamemnoon: herhaaldelijk wordt die door verschillende helden voor vuile vis uitgemaakt en verbaal vernederd. 3. Bovenal getuigt het beeld dat van de godenwereld wordt opgehangen in de eerste plaats van een heel dynamisch en modern aandoend mensbeeld: de goden zijn als mensen met humeuren en luimen, met een hi?rarchie die regelmatig opzij wordt gezet maar toch wordt gerespecteerd als het er op aankomt, met een moraal die wel enkele formele regels volgt maar die tegelijk te pas en te onpas links wordt gelaten. Kortom: het archetype van de vrijheid?Nog enkele andere elementen over het wereld- en mensbeeld:1. De dood is onvermijdelijk en door het lot bepaald (zelfs de goden moeten er zich naar schikken), maar toch kan enige vorm van onsterfelijkheid worden nagestreefd door roemrijke daden te stellen. Dat belet niet dat de Onderwereld voor ieder een oord van verschrikkelijke ellende is. 2. Vrouwen zijn volstrekt ondergeschikt en hun waarde wordt zelfs voor een stuk uitgedrukt in runderen, tenzij voor de echtgenotes of moeders van de helden cfr Andromache (Hektor heeft een "hoofse" relatie tot haar). Uitzondering hierop vormen de vrouwelijke goden die als het erop aankomt wel ondergeschikt zijn, maar geen enkele gelegenheid onbenut laten om hun eigen weg te gaan (Hera, Athene, Afrodite). 3. Het standpunt van de verteller is heel objectivistisch: hij kiest globaal geen partij; wel worden in het verhaal sommige figuren in een minder daglicht gesteld (aan Griekse kant vooral de broers Agamemnoon en Menelaos, aan Trojaanse Paris). 4. De typisch griekse lichaamcultuur is hier al aanwezig: bij de persoonsbeschrijvingen worden vooral de fysieke kenmerken onderstreept; heel veel belang wordt gehecht aan het conserveren van het lichaam na de dood (en omgekeerd voor vijanden aan het zo wreed mogelijk verminken).
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    The narration was excellent, and I enjoyed the introduction, being a newcomer to Homer.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    2. The Iliad by Homer, translated by Robert Fagleswith an introduction and notes by Bernard Knoxcomposition: arguable, but let's say ~750 bceformat: 689 page Kindle e-bookread: Jan 1-23acquired: Nov 2013, when I thought I might finish the Old Testament soonishRating: 5 stars sort ofIt's remarkably difficult for me to formulate a response to this classic, Homer's Iliad. It's a foundational text. But it's very unfoundational in feeling. A valid question is, is the Iliad great or just very old? And a typical answer will be that it has the whole essence of humanity within. But does it? And, if so, does Fagles' translation provide it? It's a bit early in my thinking process to be asking these unanswerable questions. But really my question is how to approach it. I can come at it from the angle of history and the migrations of and clashing of peoples, from heroic imagery (or if you like, hot muscular long-haired blond men in shining golden-ish colored bronze armor and weaponry), at the style (and it's clash with the biblical style), at it's construction (which I'm reading about in Adam Nicolson's Why Homer Matters). And there is the translation issues. And eventually my response. What is my response anyway? I can think separately of all these (overwhelming) different things, but I'm having a lot of trouble tying it together into something coherent. It's like the different parts of my brain not only refuse to align, which is normal, but refuse to concede. Each aspect is holding its ground, and a mental stalemate conjures up, uselessly.Adam Nicolson might like me to see this way. The Asian hordes rushed to the ends of the steppes an converted their nomadic culture to one that sea raiders with a home base. The combat hardened and ruthless pirates clash into the settled ancient cultures of the eastern Mediterranean, and made a living feeding off them. But the ancient cultures and their cities, with all their wealth and allies and mercenaries, with all their procured beauty, are at heart susceptible. At some point you can't buy off unreasonable and heroic passion. The bronze barbaric hordes will come even if we like to image them quite beautiful."As ravening fire rips through big stands of timber high on a mountain ridge and the blaze flares miles away, so from the marching troops the blaze of bronze armor, splendid and superhuman, flared across the earth, flashing into the air to hit the skies."Through time, as these cultures clashed, stories evolved in song, and they later began to standardize, acquired an author and authority, and become our Homeric epics. Or maybe there was a Homer. So, what is in these stories? Their origins date to one side of the Greek dark ages, the height of bronze age Mycenae culture circa 1250 bce. But their composition is dated to the other side, well into the iron age, to the dawn of the classical Greek world, around 750 bce. They preserve within what were otherwise long lost aspects of culture and warfare, including the bronze itself, as well as associations with an assortment of other largely lost stories. They create an oddly comedic mythology of quarreling gods who can charm, strengthen and lure humans, but also be hurt by them. And they create a heroic myth that is ultimately a tragedy, but also a blood and gore soaked work of entertainment. And that is one of the oddest things about the Iliad to me, that it is ultimately entertainment. And you can build it up as much as you like, but, well, doesn't that limit it? I mean is it ultimately an amusement, a distraction?I've probably lingered on long enough, and I still haven't mentioned Achilles, Hector, the woman who launched those thousand ships, or even a single god by name. There is plenty to into read in how Achilles, in slaying Hector who wears his armor, is symbolically killing himself, and at the same time suicidally walking into his prophesied doom. Really I haven't touched on the story. Achilles rage, Agamemnon's foolish bravado, Odysseus's practical cruelty, Hector's limitations, the women in Troy who are on the verge of become subhuman possessions of the barbarian conquerors. In book one Athena seizes Achilles by the hair to “to check your rage, if only you will yield". Of course, he won't really do that. The battles must be fought and civilization must fall to reality.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    As much as I love the Greeks in general, the Illiad is never as good a read as the Odyssey mostly because it's 80% horrible violent fighting and despair at a neverending war and then 20% interesting characters, speeches, and god/mortal interaction. I'll admit, I always end up doing a fair bit of skimming. The emotional resonance and epic descriptions are still as strong as the Odyssey, it just doesn't have the same fluid narrative. And then there's the fact that hearing how hundreds of people die in excruciating detail over and over again might be a good lesson against glorifying war, but it's just depressing. Personally, Achilles is just less likable a character. The really enjoyable part of this book is the relations between the gods and the mortals and the question of the inevitability of Fate.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    For those who enjoy different versions of Homer, this is a splendidly clear and fast paced, abridged version of the Iliad by a major 20th century literary theorist. He has been forgotten in recent years, which is a pity. Richards is an exhilarating rediscovery.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Of the epics I studied, the Iliad was my least favourite. My favourite character in Greek myth is Cassandra, but she barely appears in the Iliad. I ended up wanting to skip a lot of the fighting scenes.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    This is the original great war story. The translation here is phenomenal. Keeping the epic verse is key to getting a good read of this and here it is beautiful and informative.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    A cornerstone of Western literature that remains hugely influential. Read it for that reason, and because the poetry is still enjoyable enough to be read aloud with panache. The story itself is mostly a catalog of slaughter with very little human drama, although the interaction between the gods and the human characters is fascinating and tragic.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    This is one of the most amazing books I have ever read (and the best audiobook I have listened to so far). My only regret is having waited so long to hear this story.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Media and language have shifted innumerably before, and will in the future, I imagine... the smart phone is just a stone skip of time. Nevertheless, I find the idea of reading ancient greek literature on a kindle app on a smart phone really amusing. Homer basically accomplished what I imagine one of his goals was - to immortalize the heroics and feats of the warriors and document the destruction of Troy for all time. Yet for all that, the Iliad reads like a game of football with the line of scrimmage moving back and forth and the Greeks and Trojans alternating between offense and defense. At first the 'well greaved Greeks' were winning… but now Hector 'of the glancing helm' has turned the tide and most of the Greek heroes are wounded and stuck in sick bay…. and then the tide turns again at the whim of Zeus. There is quite a lot of 'this one killed that one, and another one bit the bloody dust'. There are more creative ways to kill someone with a spear than I ever imagined. Some of the details are actually fairly gory. What's confusing, I find, is that at the moment of each death Homer tells the life story of the slain, or at least the vital information such as where they were from, their lineage, and who their wife was. There's a lot of familiar names and it's interesting to see them all in one place here since they are somewhat more ingrained in my head from elsewhere. Like Laertes (thank you Shakespeare) or Hercules (thank you Kevin Sorbo) or Saturn (thank you GM). There are the other random lesser gods or immortals like Sleep (no thanks to you Starbucks) or Aurora (the borealis is on the bucket list).Homer barely mentions the scene or uses descriptions at all unless it directly relates to the battle. Apparently the only such things worth recording was when the battle was at the Greek ships or Trojan city wall or if the gods were yammering away on Mount Olympus. Descriptions are fairly short and uniform and there is a lot of repetition. I heard on RadioLab that Homer did not use any instance of the color blue and some thought he may have been color blind. I did find, however, two instances of blue - one as "dark blue" and one as "azure" -- though never "blue" by itself. RadioLab gets a bunch of details wrong frequently anyway, which is really neither here nor there. One thing I found interesting is the idea and extent of how involved the Greek gods/immortals were in the lives and fates of the mortals. To the point where there are teams of gods aligned loosely for or against the Trojans. This was completely excised in the movie Troy, which I watched as I neared finishing reading this. I had no interest in seeing the movie when it came out but, figured why not. I was actually impressed with how much Hollywood got right in Troy - but of course my expectations were low to begin, thinking it would be a mixed-up and mushy story. I think the biggest things they told differently was how they treated women characters (nicer than Homer) especially Briseus. Also, Patroclus' relationship with Achilles was changed, and as I mentioned, there was no depiction of the gods. Plotwise, the movie included the Trojan horse episode, which is not actually in The Iliad (it's related in The Aenid, by Virgil). Apparently my memory from elementary school did not serve me well because I was expecting to read about the Trojan Horse and didn't believe what I was reading in front of me when the book ended without it! Even went downloading a few other versions and snooping around online to verify. Just goes to show me that my preconceived notions are not always right! And that things get muddied up when stories and retellings merge. Nevertheless, a lot of the detail and direct actions and even dialogue of the characters in the movie did come straight out of the book, so someone clearly was familiar with it, which was a pleasant surprise.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Confrontation upon confrontation (with some love scenes thrown in) - between man and god, between man and man. A rather incestuous story about what seems to obssess us even to this day. I love Lattimore!
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    At long last! The Illiad by Homer DIfficult to rate a literary epic. However, the entire book takes place in the 10th and last year of the Trojan War. Achilles’ wrath at Agamemnon for taking his war prize, the maiden Briseis, forms the main subject of this book. It seemed as if there were a lot of introductions to characters we never hear from again. The word refulgent was used dozen of times. All in all I'm glad I slogged my way through this. The novelized from of Song of Achilles was more satisfactory to me than the Illiad. I read the translation by Caroline Alexander because that's the one the library had. 3 1/2 stars 604 pages
  • Rating: 1 out of 5 stars
    1/5
    Poor literature. Bad plot; characters are flatter and thinner than the paper they're printed on. At least there is some interesting mythology here for later authors to write actual stories about.

    The Mahabharata is much more interesting if you'd like some ancient mythological literature.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    As much as I love the Greeks in general, the Illiad is never as good a read as the Odyssey mostly because it's 80% horrible violent fighting and despair at a neverending war and then 20% interesting characters, speeches, and god/mortal interaction. I'll admit, I always end up doing a fair bit of skimming. The emotional resonance and epic descriptions are still as strong as the Odyssey, it just doesn't have the same fluid narrative. And then there's the fact that hearing how hundreds of people die in excruciating detail over and over again might be a good lesson against glorifying war, but it's just depressing. Personally, Achilles is just less likable a character. The really enjoyable part of this book is the relations between the gods and the mortals and the question of the inevitability of Fate.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Of course, one of the great works of classical antiquity. If you decide to read it, I recommend first learning a smattering of classical mythology and of the historical and cultural context. I read the Barnes&Noble 1995 edition of the 1898 translation by Samuel Butler, which also contains a preface by him. The translation is highly readable prose without footnotes. A glossary identifies the gods and goddesses, Greeks, Trojans, women of Troy, and the scene of the action. Much fun!
  • Rating: 1 out of 5 stars
    1/5
    An extremely clumsy translation by an otherwise capable poet. I cannot critique the scholarship. but the word choice is ugly.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Most people halfway conversant with Literature (with a capital L) are familiar with the basic story of The Iliad—but halfway conversant doesn't mean we've read it. As one of those people, I've always felt slightly guilty about my lack of firsthand exposure to this great poem, and so I welcomed the chance to listen to it on audiobook. At 18 hours (including the introduction), it was a bit of a commitment, though fascinating to think that I was experiencing the poem as its ancient audience did, with someone reciting it aloud. Though there are many battle scenes and speeches, the main event in the poem is the death of Patroclus and the ensuing combat between Hector and Achilles, culminating with the high emotion of Priam's humble but daring request for his son's body. The Iliad ends with Hector's funeral, before the Achaeans leave their fateful wooden horse for the downfall of Troy, and the characters stand forever poised on the edge of their fate. We know what's coming, of course, but they never reach it in this piece of the larger tale. I found the gods to be some of the most fascinating characters in the story. They are all deeply invested (for whatever reason) in the outcome of the battle, with some favoring the Trojans and others the Achaeans. It's astonishing to what lengths they are willing to go to get their desired result. Interestingly, when they appear to mortals they have to wear the form of a human; they can't show themselves as they are. (Presumably the humans couldn't handle it.) Many of the gods are in fierce competition with each other, and their motivations seem very human: jealousy, anger, annoyance, selfishness, self promotion, etc. They scheme endlessly and fight among themselves, cowed and controlled only by the overwhelming might of Zeus. Near the end of the poem their fighting actually turns into physical confrontation, as they begin punching each other in their anger. So we have deities who are hugely powerful and majestic, but who act just like flawed human beings. They just happen to have supernatural powers. It's an interesting framework. In some ways the human characters are just puppets in the hands of the gods. The gods can trip you up in a chariot race, fill your heart with either cowardice or battle lust, deceive you by taking the semblance of a trusted councilor, cow you into obedience with threats, pull you out of battle to heal your wounds, snap your bowstring at just the wrong moment, whisk you away from certain death in single combat (so you stay alive and your honor is not impugned, conveniently), and engage in any amount of manipulation, deception, and outright coercion to get what they want. And yet... with all this control the gods exercise (and the humans acknowledge), I still have to wonder who is really controlling whom. Why do the gods care so much what happens? Some of them even wonder about this themselves, talking about the fleeting lifespan of pathetic humanity and asking why they are investing so much energy in creatures so insignificant. And yet they continue to involve themselves in the decisive events of the times. Are they afraid of becoming irrelevant? Is their desire for worship so overweening? The Iliad really is about war; all life is a battle and even the best and bravest can die horribly in it. Death in a thousand forms is described for us—death by spear to the brain, by spear up through the buttock into the bladder, by a spear to the liver (with the liver falling out of the gaping wound), by a spear through the eyes, by arrows, by skulls cracking and brains exploding inside your helmet, by being hit by a rock, etc. The battles rage for most of the poem and we see every kind of pep talk a commander can give, every flavor of taunt an enemy can yell, every victory and every crushing defeat. Homer describes the joy of battle and its terrible sorrows. His impartiality has allowed the poem to be interpreted in many different ways over the centuries, with some considering the poem an anti-war diatribe, with others (famously Alexander the Great) viewing it as a celebration of the courage and heroism displayed in war. Everyone has a backstory. We'll be at a pivotal point, someone's making a speech that will decide the army's course of action, and he launches into a long tale about, say, his father's exploits or something similar. Once I got used to the device, I grew to like it; these backstories are like bonuses, little pockets of story that enrich the larger history. But they do take a little getting used to.I didn't like the introduction by Stephen Mitchell, or his translation. First off, Mitchell reads his own introduction, and a more insipid, effeminate, weak, monotone voice can't be imagined. It seemed he was even boring himself. And it went on for two CDs! It didn't really tell me anything interesting, either. I should have just trusted my own English-major training and experienced the poem for myself, unhampered by Mitchell's extremely obvious observations. And his translation is distressingly dumbed down. The Iliad is supposed to be an epic... and Mitchell translates it to a fatuous modern parlance that almost makes the heroic content sound comical. In a letter, J. R. R. Tolkien once demonstrated how ludicrous it is to express heroic sentiments in modern slang and clichés, rewriting Théoden's archaically flavored speech about his desire to die on the battlefield to frame it in modern terms. The example is actually quite funny, and vividly demonstrates that heroic sentiments cannot be put in modern terms; we may have the vocabulary, but our words just aren't wired for it. And the astute reader senses the disconnect at once. Mitchell's modern take on the legend is disappointing, and I'm all out of patience with the back cover blurbs that claim he has "given fresh energy and poetic force" to the work. Not so much. Render it with an eye to the poetry and the distance of it, and you'll do better.Alfred Molina does the best he can with Mitchell's weak rendition of the poem, and reads it more like prose than poetry (which is probably a good choice). It was such a relief to hear his rich voice after the nasally tones of Mitchell.Though this version of the epic is not something I would recommend, I'm glad to have listened to it and gained firsthand exposure to its characters and themes. I'm sure that in the right hands the translation would lend power and grace to this perennially influential work, but I was able to enjoy it, even as it was. I would have rated it more highly had the translation been better. Eventually I'll probably look into a different translation; I've heard good things about the translations of Alexander Pope and E. V. Rieu. Any other recommendations are welcome!Thank you to Audiobook Jukebox and Simon & Schuster Audio for the opportunity to review this audiobook.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    This wasn't the story I thought it was. I enjoyed the Odyssey and knew the Illiad was about the Trojan War. When I think Trojan War, I think of the beauty of Helen and the Trojan Horse. The Illiad is about neither. It takes place 10 years into the war, but before it ends. It is mostly a long list of who killed who in what gruesome manner, and a bit of godly and human intrigue sprinkled throughout. Knowing that I probably wouldn't have read it, as battle scenes aren't something that typically appeals to me. However, I do think this translation by Fagles is good. It is in verse and reads smoothly.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Pretty amazing for a blind guy to come of with this. I can see why there are historical speculations that Homer might not have existed (I was started questioning that when reading The Iliad). Like most classics, this book has questionable homoerotic undertones with Achilles and Patroclus, inbred sex with Zeus and Hera, pointless wars with Achaeans and Trojans.

    I'm curious though where the Golden Apple of Discord and the Trojan Horse come from because neither were mention in my edition translated by Robert Fagles. If someone could answer that I'd much appreciation.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    I started this in March and spring sprung then summer came and I just didn't pick it up. But when I moved I was w/o a washer & dryer and picked back up while at the laundromat. Then hurricane Irene came along and I finished it.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Legend has it that Alexander the Great held Achilles as his role-model and slept with the Illiad under his pillow. I find that hard to believe: who'd ever look at Homer's Achilles -- this superhuman prima donna holding the entire Aechean faction hostage, leading hundreds of allies and enemies alike to the steps of Hades over his diva behaviour 'cause he's the deadliest thing since sliced caesium -- and find him inspiring? What kind of psychopathic, egocentric, megalomaniacal... oh, never mind.Thing is that -- at least through a contemporary lens -- Homer doesn't appear to commend anything that happens here: proud Achilles is irreparably left a shell of his former self due to an easily avoidable unfolding of events that he himself orchestrated; the four days' battle decimated the belligerents with no gains to either side; the war itself is in its tenth year due to sunk cost fallacy. And Homer goes to great pains to show just how awful the resulting loss of life is: every man slayed -- and there are many mans slayed -- brings with him a small biography, where he's from, who are his parents, what was his profession until just now... Imagine an RTS where the game pauses for a one-minute wake after every unit killed: that's the Illiad. And mind you, we have it "better" nowadays: we can skim. Imagine Ancient Greece, you're being told for hours on end: "then Ajax thrust his spear into Peneleus, son of this guy and from this place, he did these thing and that at that place and wanted this, but now he descends to Hades instead. Then Ajax sliced Promachus's neck with his sword, Promachus was this and that and this. Then Hector killed etc. etc". The tedium can't possibly be an accident. With my 2021 vision, that reads like Homer making a point of how dehumanizing battle is. Parallels with covid btw: first death, shocking, incredible how it can come and take literally anyone. And oh my god they're holding their own intestines in their hands, feck, this is horrible stuff. Where are we? Page 56. Oh, there goes another one. Gee. Zus. Ouch. And to think of what his wife will go through now... By the middle of the Illiad, you read them like statistics: okay, so here Hector kills one, two... five people, right. Aaaaaand Diomedes took out, let's see, four. Toward the end, you're doing triage with your attention: who killed who? Whatever, just take out Patroclus already, then we can talk.And the final bitter note Homer puts in: the ellipsis ending, promising that these four days' meaningless carnage were just the start, that future skirmishes would be even more cruel, to avenge what transpired. If the Illiad came out today, it would have been considered an anti-war novel, I'm sure of it. Then again, exchange Achilles for Steve Jobs and the siege of Troy for shady business dealings and wannabe entrepreneurs the world over would sleep with the outcome under _their_ pillows, so maybe I read this the wrong way. Homer's dead so he can't correct me, but centuries of Classics research likely can. Reading the Illiad for myself, I was surprised at the Classical philosophers' protests at its inclusion in the at-the-time curriculum. It doesn't seem to present anyone as an example to follow: the major characters are all flawed, and their flaws leave them suffering / dead. Even the proto-sophist Odysseus gets beaten up and out of the story. However while characters display actions more in tune with the philosophic virtues, they suffer less. For example, the cowardly / lazy prince Paris is ridiculed and his death foreshadowed severely, _until_ he gets his act together. Then, once he assumes his role in service of his people, the story becomes more benign toward him, and the character you initially most assumed would be gruesomely killed is alive by the end. Another example, Hector. While his behavior was virtuous he was basically indestructible: in his bravery he'd get mortally wounded but live to get mortally wounded again. But when his bravery turned to hubris, awakening the beast-diva Achilles in the process, that's when his luck changed. You may accuse me of making here too secular a reading of the story beats, seeing the important role played by fate, but for the philosophers I imagine it would be these pragmatic concerns that mattered most re the curriculum. Then again, they could have had a stock of wannabe Alexanders to contend with, and I know from experience the efficiency with which a megalomaniac will miss the point of a story to suit his warped view of the world.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    It's a classic. C'mon people. Read it.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    I know the story well, through years of younger/abridged versions, but I did not enjoy this translated version, which was my first time reading as an "adult" version. It could be the timing, or it could be the story itself. Not sure. But it was just ok for me. That's all. It was difficult to endure the infantile bickering of the gods. The Greek and the Trojan warriors were the playthings - their puppets - and they manipulated them to work out their own selfish pride and jealousies. It was cruel and contentious, and very annoying.