This thread will focus on Virgil's larger motivations, purposes, and style as a writer in relation to Homer.
We talked in class about how Virgil was well-versed in the Homeric texts, which had become common knowledge by his time. A lot of us found Virgil to be a worse "director" than Homer in placing and delineating scenes--they are more confusing. We also pointed out that Homer's description of gore is more poetic, while Virgil's is just that--gore. Heck, even Allen Mandelbaum the translator in his introduction points out "the theme of Homer versus Virgil, using the father to club the son, coupled at times with some variations on the theme of Dante versus Virgil, using hte son to club the father. Whichever way one turned in the line of affiliation (Homer-Virgil-Dante)...the middleman Virgil lost" (vi).
In all of the above, Virgil seems to get short shrift. But the Aeneid is after all a so-called masterpiece that we are required to read for our class; Virgil's name IS inscribed on the outide of Butler. So let's find out what the deal is about this guy Virgil, and what is so good about him. Having structured the Aeneid similar to the Odyssey, was Virgil's motivation not to build on the great Homeric work and to surpass it? Did he do a good job at this? What are some specific instances of direct references to Homeric texts, and how do these references in your opinion supplement or take away from the Aeneid's depth? What are the stylistic differences between Homer and Virgil? Can you maybe compare them using references to modern film directors (e.g. "I think Odyssey v. Aeneid is like American Psycho v. Kill Bill")? Can Mr. Eric Rosenberg elaborate on his parallel Trojan Horse idea that Jeff didn't like too much and how it might fit into this discussion of what Virgil is borrowing from Homer and why?
In short, elaborate on your opinion on Virgil v. Homer.
Cheers,
Bryan
Recent Comments