Tuesday, December 9, 2008
close calls
It's strange how this war keeps going back and forth. One second, the greeks are all about to die or flee, and the next the trojans are begging Paris to give back Helen. I think the whole war is nothing more than an ego trip. The greeks have no real need for Troy to fall, they're waging a war because Menelaus's woman left him. And the Trojans are fighting because Paris is too selfish to give her up to save the lives of his soldiers, and he's too scared to even fight for most of the war. It's his fault the war occured and his fault it's being prolonged, and he doesn't even fight until Hector and Helen order him to. If there were ever nations waging war for the sake of war, it'd be the Acheans and the Trojans.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I understand where you are coming from, but I do disagree with the idea that the affair between Paris and Helen started the war. I would think of this more as a trigger than the main cause. Before wars break out, the tension between the two peoples create war, and the "moments" or "triggers" that seem important are simply excuses to fight the tension that has built. I think it's pretty similar to the "shot heard around the world." I have heard some people say that this instance started the American Revolutionary War, when in reality, this shot simply sparked it.
The point that you made about Paris prolonging the war is right on. It comes back to the idea that the war is nothing more than an ego trip, another point in your post. Paris' inability to admit his faults ultimatley leads to the death of many men.
I agree with Mikey in that the loss of Helen was not the sole reason for the Achaeans to attack Troy. I hate to be cliche but it was "the straw that broke the camels back". There was clearly some prior conflict that had tensions between the Trojans and the Achaeans on edge. In the movie Troy (probably a bad reference, I know), they depict the Trojan-Spartan situation in a different light. They create a back story where the Trojans and Spartans have been long time enemies and have just recently agreed to a peace treaty. The loss of Helen then causes Meneleaus, in his anger, to break the treaty and declare war on Troy. I have not read the epic poems that precede The Iliad and do not know what they say in regards to the 'cause' for the Trojan War but I'm sure it was a little more complex than simply the loss of Helen.
I know this is going to sound unoriginal, but I disagree when you said Helen caused the war. Remember, as Mr. Crotty has said dozens of times, correlation is not the same as causation. Just because there is a correlation between when Paris ran off with Helen and when the war started, but who's to say that the war wouldn't have started even if Paris did not take Helen
I have to disagree. I think the essence of this war had nothing to do with Helen and fighting for the sake of fighting. The woman was a catalyst that hurried an inevitable war. It was fought because the Achaens desired control of the world, or at least their leader did, and his entire army followed. The girl was an excuse for the king to invade Troy.
I have to agree with Michael on this. Troy was a very powerful city and it was a place of trade and wealth. Agamemnon wanted Troy because of all the things that could be possessed after he defeated the Trojans. It was more of just an excuse to wage war. Yes you never steel a man's wife, but I believe that Agamemnon did not really care about Helen and all he wanted was to win over Troy.
Like everyone is saying, Paris' "abduction" of Helen was the trigger for the Achaeans to attack Troy. Troy was a very prosperous city with a propensity for trade, and the Greeks had known this for a while but did not act on it until they had a valid enough reason. Finally, as Mr. Crotty said, and everyone is repeating, try not to confuse cause and correlation.
I think the back and forth nature of the war is intended by Homer. It elongates the story and provides a background for multiple characters to b developed. I think we have to stop thinking of the Iliad as factual and analyze it based on the fact that it is a poem. Homer could manipulate it however he wanted as long as the overall war was accurate.
I would go as far as to say that Paris' abduction of Helena had little if any impact in starting the war. I think the whole "face that launched a thousand ships" is more of a story than anything else. The society that the Trojans and Achaeans live in values warriors and soldiers. The Iliad does not depict life outside of war. People exist to fight and that is there sole purpose. A man's greatest accomplishment is to die fighting in battle. How than this happen without war? Wars are essential parts of the cultures and societies presented in the Iliad. They value war, soldiers and violence. These two sides are probably looking for an excuse to fight and go to war.
I agree and disagree with your blog post. You last comment - If there were ever nations waging war for the sake of war, it'd be the Acheans and the Trojans - Im not sure if I am understanding this correctly, but a war isnt fought unless there is a trigger, small/unimportant or a huge threat. I don't think they are waging war like it is a sport.
But I do agree that Paris is a coward and selfish. I would exile him if I had the power
I know what you mean but I don't exactly think that Helen being taken by Paris was the ENTIRE reason for the war. It certainly seemed to be a trigger but I don't believe that many Greek nations could be rallied together for the sake of one woman and then dragged into a 9 year war for her. But I think you're more or less right about Paris. He's a coward, refusing to fight for the majority of the poem.
Post a Comment