Take a photo of a barcode or cover
kikiandarrowsfishshelf's review against another edition
3.0
Quite frankly, I don't know why anyone would see Homer as a good study of what was, but Finley's quasi rebuttal is packed full of data and insight.
jonfaith's review against another edition
4.0
In a measure, these virtues, these values and capacities, were shared by many men of the period, for otherwise there could have been no distinct age of heroes between the bronze and the iron. Particularly in the Odyssey the word "hero" is a class term for the whole aristocracy, and at times it even seems to embrace all the free men.
Finley provides dazzling yet largely plain-spoken erudition. The expat is also largely certain. Strange behavior, that, for a historian, even a Marxist one Finley didn't pen the book on a tendency or a cantankerous But or If. The world-view of the Iliad and The Odyssey ae explored and situated largely in contrast with the evidence of archeology. The concept of Oikos or the fortified family unit and the practice of gift-giving serve as templates for exploring both narratives. There is a lament at the absence of the common born. Oh and there’s a rancor with the anachronistic.
I was fascinated throughout.
Finley provides dazzling yet largely plain-spoken erudition. The expat is also largely certain. Strange behavior, that, for a historian, even a Marxist one Finley didn't pen the book on a tendency or a cantankerous But or If. The world-view of the Iliad and The Odyssey ae explored and situated largely in contrast with the evidence of archeology. The concept of Oikos or the fortified family unit and the practice of gift-giving serve as templates for exploring both narratives. There is a lament at the absence of the common born. Oh and there’s a rancor with the anachronistic.
I was fascinated throughout.
cody240fc's review against another edition
3.0
A thorough look into the sociological implications of “The Iliad” and “The Odyssey.” Finley discounts the possibility of a real Trojan War on the same grand scale as told by Homer, but he finds value in what the famous orator has to tell us about the Greek ‘hero’ society of that period. I admire Finley’s direct approach to the controversial topics, but the material is a little dry. A good book, but best suited for passionate fans of Homer.
booksnbeards's review against another edition
3.0
Oh I forgot to review this.
Interesting book. I gather Finley was a life-long skeptic, and so World of Odysseus runs off the assumption that the Iliad and the Odyssey are for the most part myth, or at the very least so warped and elaborated by years upon years of oral storytelling that the historicity of the actual events is negligible.
There's an interesting example in the foreword of this edition where a few years after World War II, one of the few remaining true oral skalds in Crete was asked to tell the story of how the island was liberated - and the story told by the skald (a lot of it made up on the fly by the man, whole-cloth) was already inaccurate, 10 years from the events. What chance did Homer have, writing 500 years after the 'events'?
Regardless, the World of Odysseus focuses not on the plot of the poems, but on the world that they are set in - the society of an ancient Greece so long ago that there exists essentially no records of it. He explores what is believable in the poems by comparing to other societies in a similar time (i.e. gift-giving as a form of trade rather than benevolence). Interesting stuff, though a bit dry.
Finley himself seemed more than a little bit of a snippy wanker, to be honest. There are a couple of appendices in this edition, one of which is spent snarkily responding to a paper written disagreeing with the original publishing of World of Odysseus, and another explaining away the discoveries of the various Troy's as not being proof of the historicity of at least parts of the Iliad.
I enjoyed it, and I feel that I appreciate the poems more as a result of it - but I doubt I'll read it again.
Interesting book. I gather Finley was a life-long skeptic, and so World of Odysseus runs off the assumption that the Iliad and the Odyssey are for the most part myth, or at the very least so warped and elaborated by years upon years of oral storytelling that the historicity of the actual events is negligible.
There's an interesting example in the foreword of this edition where a few years after World War II, one of the few remaining true oral skalds in Crete was asked to tell the story of how the island was liberated - and the story told by the skald (a lot of it made up on the fly by the man, whole-cloth) was already inaccurate, 10 years from the events. What chance did Homer have, writing 500 years after the 'events'?
Regardless, the World of Odysseus focuses not on the plot of the poems, but on the world that they are set in - the society of an ancient Greece so long ago that there exists essentially no records of it. He explores what is believable in the poems by comparing to other societies in a similar time (i.e. gift-giving as a form of trade rather than benevolence). Interesting stuff, though a bit dry.
Finley himself seemed more than a little bit of a snippy wanker, to be honest. There are a couple of appendices in this edition, one of which is spent snarkily responding to a paper written disagreeing with the original publishing of World of Odysseus, and another explaining away the discoveries of the various Troy's as not being proof of the historicity of at least parts of the Iliad.
I enjoyed it, and I feel that I appreciate the poems more as a result of it - but I doubt I'll read it again.
kingkong's review against another edition
3.0
I must be really smart because this all seemed obvious to me