Thursday, February 25, 2010
Is the Slaughter Justified?
In Book 22 Odysseus with the aid of his son and loyal servants slaughters all the suitors (despite the pleas of mercy from some of them), all the maids, and even the priest Leodes. Are these killings justified? Could he have punished them wihout killing them? Could he have driven them from the house. Are some of the killings justified, but others not? What about the people they spared (Phemius and Medon) -- what was Telemachus' reasoning? Was it wise or prudent to kill them all?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Odysseus’ slaughter was definitely brutal, but I do not feel like it was unnecessary. For one thing, if Odysseus just sent the suitors away from his palace and told them to stop wooing his wife, there might have been consequences. By consequences I mean that most probably would have still wanted to marry Penelope and many would have tried to assassinate Odysseus later. This is not a very unbelievable situation because the suitors had been spending twenty years on this “project,” if you will. Imagine working in a competition to win an ultimate prize for twenty years non-stop, doing nothing except for feasting, and then all of the sudden, you have to leave. You might even look at this as an advantage; there would be less people trying to get the prize at this point. So, one possible consequence is the jealous rage of the denied suitors. Also, killing all of the suitors was a good idea because if one man came to tell all of those suitors to give up and leave, they might have laughed at him and stayed. This would have then led to fighting anyway. Once he killed about half, the other half might have tried to run, but allowing half to leave is not a good idea either. This is because the run-away suitors might tell of the massacre to others, and that would be bad publicity for Odysseus. Although this is not all that important in Ithaca because he is the king, other kings might stop trading with him or might start a war with him. It was important to kill all of the suitors, and not doing so could have jeopardized Odysseus and his family.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Andrew. While the slaughters that Odysseus committed were brutal, they weren't completely unjustified or unnecessary. Driving them from the house would do nothing, because they would just find a way to come back and wreck havoc and confusion in the palace again. The suitors are definetley at fault for their attack, though. If Penelope had been the Tiger Woods of the Homeric Age while Odysseus was gone (which is pretty similar to how Odysseus was acting), it would have been Penelope at fault. But, it is the suitors because despite Penelope trying to trick them in order to stay true to her husband, they continued to stay in the palace and harass Penelope, even after the maids told the suitors of Penelope’s weaving trick she pulled on them for three straight years. Punishing them would not help, because technically they didn’t do anything illegal, and if they were punished, Odysseus’ judgment of the way of the law in Ithaca would be questioned, even after his long absence from his kingdom. Not every one of the murders were justified though. To kill the people who pleaded for mercy from Odysseus probably were the ones who did nothing wrong, and not all the maids were at fault for wrongdoing. And the priest? You should not kill priests. That’s probably the number one sin, so that is not justified, despite whatever he might have done to Odysseus in the past. So, some of the murders, like the suitors, make sense, but those who were begging for mercy were the ones who probably didn’t deserve to be killed and therefore didn’t seem justified.
ReplyDeleteI wrote this comment before Caroline posted. Just making it clear if I repeat anything Caroline states in her comment.
ReplyDeleteLike Andrew said, I definitely also think that the killing of all the suitors was necessary and completely justified. The suitors invaded, feasted and plundered Odysseus’s home for twenty years and deserved to be punished for their acts. The suitors also wanted to kill Telemachus , Odysseus’s son to try to gain power and Penelope , which is an act that seems to have been made with much hatred which helps the reason that Odysseus completely demolished the suitors. I also think that killing the servants and the maids were vital. If most of them were like Metholaus , then they do not deserve to live in Odysseus’s kingdom or live at all. The maids slept with the suitors and contributed in letting Ithaca fall into pieces. The every single maid was tested by Odysseus and all found guilty, making the slaughtering of them justified. Another reason for killing the maids is for when Penelope was tricking the suitors with her weaving the web, a maid ratted her out to a suitor. This shows the disloyalty and hatred of the maids to their rulers , Penelope and Odysseus, by be so cruel as to tell the suitors of Penelope’s trick to not be wed. I feel like Penelope had a good reason to be faithful to her husband and the maids just did not understand that or are just whores.
To add on to Andrew’s point about if only killing half of the suitors and letting the other have leave:
The suitors , in my opinion would also try to come back with weapons for revenge on Odysseus and his family for killing the other suitors possibly causing a great deal of harm. Knowing the suitors, you can not only expect Odysseus getting bad publicity but the people of Ithaca might also think of him as a bad king and revolt.
In general, I agree with Andrew that mass killing was necessary and Odysseus was being careful and sensible for killing them all.
(But it was an epic fail on the suitor’s part for defending themselves. )
I completely agree with everyone about how Odysseus was justified in killing the suitors. My reasons are basically the same as their’s so, I’ll leave out the list. I would like to talk about an intriguing idea that everyone else so far has ignored. This idea is the question of why Telemachus had Phemius the bard and Medon the herald spared. I offer three reasons why he chose this course of action
ReplyDeleteReason one: They were more innocent than the suitors. Alright, so it is a stretch to say that the two of them were completely blameless in the twenty years of Odysseus’ absence. They did not appear to fight against the suitors much, though Medon did tell Penelope about the suitors’ plots back in Book 4. Even though they were rather passive, the two of them, unlike the suitors, did not try and court Penelope and take over the throne. That in itself can be considered fairly good behavior. Also, the two of them were more like pawns to the suitors than actually bad people. They simply did what they were ordered. As Phemius puts it, “They were too strong, too many-/they forced me to come and sing-I had no choice!” (22.372-3). While I am sure that there was not very much coercion used on either Phemius or Medon, it is true that they were not the ones plotting the evil plans. Therefore, they cannot be blamed for the suitors’ evils.
Reason two: It was good PR to not kill them. Imagine the people of Ithaca’s reaction when they hear that their king has suddenly returned home after twenty years. Then imagine their reaction when they hear that he killed all of Penelope’s suitors, as well as many of his maids. Hearing this, some people will probably be more than a little alarmed. I mean, Odysseus has hardly gotten back and has already racked up a huge death count. Hearing that Phemius and Medon were killed as well would be yet another blow to the people’s opinion of Odysseus. After all, Phemius is a bard, an entertainer. His job is to make people happy. If Odysseus kills someone whose purpose is so innocent and unthreatening, it makes him look bad. Also, Medon is the herald, which means that he is the king’s representative to the people. He would probably be fairly popular among the general population of Ithaca, therefore, because they all turn to him to hear what the king has to say. Killing off this important public figure would simply add another level of distance between the returning king and his citizens. Telemachus, being politically savvy, knows that Odysseus cannot afford to create an image of himself as a totally bloodthirsty ruler. Therefore, he recognizes the importance of keeping these two alive, even if their loyalty may have been somewhat in question.
Reason three: Odysseus needs servants. Odysseus just wiped out many of his maids, his goatherd, and all of his other unfaithful servants. If he wants to be able to rule effectively, he needs some sort of staff to take care of matters. Phemius and Medon are two experienced members of Odysseus’ household. He will need assistants like them as he tries to reclaim control of his homeland. This makes it in his best interests to keep them alive. Again, clever Telemachus knows that their assistance will greatly benefit Odysseus. Because of this, he makes sure that they are alive to play their part in the recovery of Ithaca.
ReplyDeleteIn conclusion, there are several legitimate reasons that Odysseus, or really Telemachus, chose to let Phemius and Medon live. I think, in fact, that this choice by Telemachus really shows his complete transition into adulthood. Not only is he willing and able to kill those who deserve it, but he is just as willing to stop the killing of those he believes should be left alive. In some ways, this is just as hard as killing, especially when his father is the one about to play executioner. Telemachus has truly come full circle, going from the youth who was unable to fight the suitors to the man who is unwilling to let potentially useful lives be taken away. He also shows in this scene that he has inherited the family cleverness. Trust me, few families have as much cleverness to spare as Odysseus’ family, so Telemachus is bound to do at least okay in the world.
I do not agree with many of the points made to justify Odysseus' killing spree. I believe, as I stated during the in class debate that no killing is truly justified. No matter how grave the crime, how terrible the person is, they still deserve to be alive. Although I do not feel that killing is ever justifiable, I believe that there was not much else that Odysseus could have done in his situation. Odysseus could have possibly told them to leave, and if they came after him he would kill them out of self defense, but not slaughter every one of them. I believe that killing out of self defense is much more honorable and justifiable than to mercilessly go on a killing rampage. All in all I believe that Odysseus most likely had to do what he did, but he could have made a few changes. I think that he should have spared Leodes when he flung himself at Odysseus and cried, “I hug your knees, Odysseus -mercy! Spare my life!/ never, I swear, did I harass any woman in your house-/ never a word, a gesture-nothing, no, I tried/ to restrain the suitors whoever did such things.” (22.327-330). I believe that Odysseus should have spared this mans life because he is begging him and saying that he had nothing to do with it. Instead Odysseus cuts off the mans head.
ReplyDeleteIn conclusion I believe that Odysseus had to do what he did, or else the problem in Ithaca would never be stopped. I think that no matter what he did the suitors would still come back to corrupt his city, unless he proved his ferocity and made them scared to ever return, and the only way to do this I believe was to kill the suitors. Although killing is never justified, it is still sometimes a necessary action when trying to achieve an ultimate goal.
There are certain points in everybody’s comments that I agree with. I believe that the slaughter of the suitors was justified. First of all, Odysseus planned this killing, because he believed that the suitors would kill him when he returned home, and Athena guided him through the process of returning home. Athena’s involvement in the slaughter brings fate into play. One could argue that the slaughter was justified because it was fated to happen. Once Odysseus revealed himself to the suitors, he told them he was going to kill them. Eurymachus then protested, giving reasons not to kill the suitors, saying they’d pay Odysseus back. Odysseus then replied by saying either leave and loose everything you have, or stay here and fight. Eurymachus encouraged the suitors to stay and fight Odysseus. This is an example of an opportunity where the suitors could have escaped death, and repaid Odysseus another way. The suitors chose to stay and fight Odysseus, and put their lives on the line. This is why I believe the killings were justified, because the suitors chose to partake in the fight. Last, some of the first deaths were because the suitors were going after Odysseus or one of his men, and they were protecting themselves, or each other. These deaths can be justified not only because the suitors were choosing to participate in the fighting, but because Odysseus and his men were practicing self defense. I believe that the deaths of the suitors were justified because they had the opportunity to change their fate, but they did not take it.
ReplyDeleteIn response to many of the ideas shared so far, I believe what we are truly looking at is the difference between what one person feels is necessary and what is actually justified. I agree with the many points people made about why it was necessary for Odysseus to rid his home of the suitors. While it is possible to argue that he could have just moved them somewhere else or asked them to leave his home, there would always be the possibility that they would return with a greater vengeance. As Will said, in this situation self-defense would be acceptable, if not honorable, in this situation. However, although it has been proven that Odysseus, and all of Ithaca, needed the suitors to leave so that he could return order to Ithaca, there is no justification for the murder of so many people. Yes, many of these men were ignorant enough to have concluded that Odysseus would not be returning after so much time away and then took it upon themselves to get “cozy” in his palace and try and put themselves in good standings with Penelope if she were to choose another husband. Regardless, none of them posed any legitimate threat for Odysseus. As demonstrated in Book 22, Odysseus cut down every one of the suitors who had resided in his home while he was away. I do not believe he can justify all of these murders because no threats on his own safety were made and he was not acting in self-defense. In conclusion, while it is possible to prove that the slaughter of the suitors that took place in Book 22 was necessary for Odysseus, Penelope, and the rest of Ithaca, I do not believe it can truly be justified.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Odysseus’s slaughter of the suitors in Book 22 of the Odyssey is totally and entirely, 100% justified. I believe this not because the suitors’ actions necessarily warranted their brutal deaths, but because the suitors totally betrayed any trust Odysseus may have had for them with their actions. One example of a suitor that may have been “innocent”, or at the very least not deserving of death is Leodes. Leodes begs for mercy from Odysseus, saying “Never, I swear, did I harass any woman in your house–/ never a word, a gesture – nothing, no I tried to restrain the suitors, whoever did such things.” (22.328-330) Odysseus, however, refuses to accept Leodes’s plea and kills him anyway, citing Leodes’s wish that Odysseus would not return and that Penelope would instead become his wife. I believe that this shows Odysseus’s real motive behind the slaughter of the suitors: the fact that he can no longer trust the suitors at all. If he knows these men tried to replace him as king, marry his wife, and kill his son, how can he ever expect that he will ever be able to live with and rule over these men in peace again? What is to say that they will not continue in their power-hungry ad disloyal ways and try to gain the thrown sometime in the future? I believe that Odysseus realized this and knew that the only way to ensure the wellbeing of himself, his family, and Ithaca as a whole is to eliminate all the suitors now why he still can.
ReplyDelete