aster's thoughts

Before I start this rant, I want to preface that this is not me saying "I'm not like other girls". I cringe when I think back on my "not like other girls" phase, and I think that teenage girls and their interests are always looked down upon by society. I'm a fully grown adult, and I am just voicing my opinions on my experience, knowing that I am not alone or unique in this experience.

Growing up, I never really liked makeup or beauty. I have no idea why, but if a party included getting makeup done or nails done, I would do the least possible necessary. I never really let myself have fun with crazy makeup or even something as simple as face paint as a child. I was a strict rule-follower as a kid, and I think I made arbitrary rules for myself to follow. I never did my own hair until the start of secondary school; my mum would do my hair in a ponytail every single day. The outfits I put together were atrocious, the colours would not match, and I would dress most of the time in jeans and a T-shirt.

This sufficed for quite a long time, but then I grew older. Everyone around me seemed to have their style figured out, and I just wanted to fit in. I dressed in different "aesthetics" all the time, wearing clothes from the boys' section, dresses, skirts, and anything else. I wore whatever I wanted, and my hair was always in a poorly done side plait like Katniss.

I thought dressing like this was enough again, but when I got to sixth form, it was not. Everyone was dressed nicely in unique styles, with good hair and good makeup. Every single day. Eventually, I settled on a style. I chose clothes and colours I liked to wear, and things started to fit in. Finally, I figure I want to/need to figure out how to do makeup. I know I need to figure out how to do hair.

My point is, why? Why do I need to partake in all these different aspects as a woman? I do like looking and feeling pretty, but I don't have a passion for fashion like a Bratz doll. I just like looking presentable and wearing something that suits me. That's sufficient, yes. But it feels like there is the expectation to always look beautiful in everything. To cover what you really look like underneath everything, because no one would like that part of you.

You have to be good at makeup and hair and nails and fashion and walking in heels. Everybody I know is amazing at all those things, and I love that for them, but it feels exhausting. Sometimes, it sounds like I'm just submitting to the industry when I play right into their hands with my skin care routines and makeup and wanting to learn how to care for my hair.

It's hard to know how much of the world I know is influenced by what others have dictated about how I should think or feel. Would I have chosen to wear makeup ever if I didn't feel some sort of societal pressure to do so? Would I really care about looking after my hair if there wasn't a voice of constant comparison saying I had to? I'm not sure.

SPOILERS FOR NOLAN'S ODYSSEY

In my previous post, I critiqued Nolan's The Odyssey for creating an Odysseus that is not as cunning as he should be, and pinpointed it to the idea that modern audiences do not find cunning to be a palatable or desirable trait. So what features do we favour that come across in Odysseus' character? And how does this relate to the Odysseus of Homer?

As I was watching Nolan's Odyssey (and eating my smuggled Tesco popcorn), I was struck by the number of objects Odysseus holds on to for safekeeping. Three objects, trinkets essentially, as their value is assigned by characters and not in the material itself, find their way in and out of Odysseus' hands. These objects were: Penelope's pin of Athena, Antinous' short straw, and the clothes ring of one of Odysseus' fallen men. Each of these objects represents one of Odysseus' major defining character traits in this adaptation of The Odyssey.

First, I shall analyse the most easily forgotten one, the clothes ring of one of Odysseus' men. Odysseus picks this up on the floor of the Cyclops' cave and wears it as a ring on his finger. Nolan's Odysseus deeply cares about his fallen men, and he remembers and carries the burden of losing them with him. He thinks as a leader would think about his whole crew, and not solely as an individual. He is grieved by Tiresias' prophecy because he thinks there has to be a way they can all get home. He will do anything to defy the gods and Fates for his men to also reach their homecoming; something which he rationally knows is not possible.

Unfortunately, Homer's Odysseus is not as considerate, when his men are dying at the hands of the Cyclops. He recounts their deaths matter-of-factly:

"...he once more snatched two of us and prepared his supper." - 9.343

And later, he states his full government name and address (practically handing over his Ithaca ID) just so he can boast about outsmarting the Cyclops. When his crew tries to pacify him, and so prevent Poseidon's all-defining vengeance, they fail.

Nolan's Odysseus is struck by the death of his comrades, and chooses to remember the unnecessary death, which was caused by his own folly for trusting that everyone follows "Zeus' law" (Xenia). In an argument with Eurylochus, Nolan's Odysseus gives the clothes ring to him as a reminder that he remembers the unnecessary deaths that have been caused and the need for proper burial rites. When he finds this in Circe's home, he knows for certain his men have been turned into pigs, and retribution must be made. On their own, his men need his direct guidance, and he seems to morph with Aeneas' character in the Aeneid, as a good, pastoral leader of his men. He cannot be selfish and leave them, even though everything he has learnt about Greek heroism goes against this conclusion. Because he cares about his men, he is struck with guilt that makes the process of remembering on Calypso's island all the more painful. We watch on screen a trusted man who failed his men. A man who goes to the gates of the Underworld and sees his fleet. This object has no direct resolution; it falls into obscurity after Eurylochus dies, showing that Odysseus was unable to return his men home.

Secondly, we come to Antinous's lot straw, which he gave to Sinon in an act of cowardice. While Sinon is still alive, he gives the object to Odysseus, who vows to return it to Sinon's father and embellish the stories of his son's prestige in battle. At this moment, the object characterises Odysseus' compassion for his citizens. He has complete trust in Sinon's character integrity and pities his father's situation, so, like a good king, he vows to return the straw as proof of Sinon's greatness. The price of embellishing stories is a worthy one to pay. Odysseus LOVES telling a good story; let's be honest with ourselves.

But when he runs into Sinon in the Gates of the Underworld, the significance of this object shifts. Sinon's father died in poverty, not looked after by Antinous as promised. Sinon himself died from Odysseus' lie, and obligates Odysseus to return the shame to Antinous by giving him the short straw back. The tone of the object shifts suddenly, not from one of care or duty but of revenge. This is one of Odysseus character traits that comes across very strongly in adaptations of Homer's poem. However, in Nolan's adaptation, his revenge seems less self-focused than in the original. He kills the suitors because of how his household, wife and son were treated, and he kills Antinous specifically to avenge Sinon. His need for revenge culminates in a rage, where he allows nobody but himself to kill the suitors.

This object also meets a resolution as it is returned to Antinous, the original owner. First, Odysseus offers it up to him as a beggar named Sinon. Antinous denies any recollection of this object, and Odysseus takes it back. However, in an act of pure wrath as he is killing Antinous, he tells him to share a message to Sinon's shade in Hades, that he has returned his shame. He shoves the lot straw into Antinous' mouth and kills him. Although we do not see this object reach Sinon, we feel the revenge Odysseus has done on another's behalf as a merit to his character, and a necessary aspect of his own.

Last, but most certainly not least, Odysseus is shown as a loyal husband through Penelope's Athena pin. We see Penelope give Odysseus the pin at the start of the film as a method of ascertaining if someone has seen him. Odysseus, in the early parts of his travels, when luck is still on his side, holds tightly to the pin, riddled with the desire to go home and see his wife. Unfortunately, he meets many hardships along the way and is thrown off course, doomed to arrive home late. On Calypso's island, before he is unknowingly disloyal to his wife, through the invitation of the pleasantries of another woman, he holds the pin tightly in his comatose state. As the effects of the lotus wear off, the pin reminds him of his purpose in returning to his family, bringing memories of them to the forefront of his mind. This is enough to grant him the motivation to brave the journey home.

Of course, the pin is not just of anything; it is the pin of Odysseus' patron goddess, Athena. She is the first person he sees when he washes up on the shore of the island of Ithaca. The pin thus symbolises protection, wisdom, and godlike qualities in Odysseus and Penelope. Although we do not see much of Athena, we see a lot of Athena's character in Odysseus. Her straightforward attitude, calm under pressure character, and propensity for deep emotion are reflected in the character of Odysseus.

Upon arriving, he proves to Penelope that he knew Odysseus by discussing the pin, and makes her cry by revealing that he never took it off. Odysseus' loyalty is the biggest divergence from the original poem. Although he says that he wishes to go home to his wife, Homer's Odysseus cheats on her repeatedly. It seems in the original text that Odysseus is more concerned with just being in his own house:

"I long to reach my home and see the day of my return. It is my never-failing wish."

But the Odysseus of Nolan is invariably loyal (when conscious of it) and determined to return to Penelope, not just return home. It is this love that he has for Penelope and Telemachus that guides his attitude towards his homestead, and strengthens his resolve in revenge.

This object is seen returned to its rightful owner, as Penelope wears the pin when they sail West, into the prevailing sunset, with her husband at her side.

I don't think we necessarily always pause to reflect before our reactions and subconscious takes over.

I think we are afraid to admit that we regurgitate what we are served, and re-served, until one day someone points out that what we are eating is no longer appetising.

I don't think you realise how easily you can slip into my words and agree with them, if I phrase them in such a way.

SPOILERS AHEAD FOR CHRISTOPHER NOLAN'S ADAPTATION

Tell me, Muse, if the ever-wily Odysseus will ever be portrayed well by modern media. Tell us if there is a correct depiction of his cunning trials, and start at whichever point you will.

I watched Christopher Nolan's adaptation of 'The Odyssey' today, and I enjoyed it. I went in with an open mind, but did not expect to enjoy it half as much as I did. However, I wish to truly archive my thoughts before they are changed by those of peers, and online reviewers. I am writing this short article as a form of praise, criticism, and a piece of my initial thoughts.

If you seek a review of several different inconsistencies, look elsewhere. I used to be a person who enjoyed very nitpicky reviews, but I no longer do. Nolan's Odyssey was never going to be the same as Homer's Odyssey because it's an adaptation, and one made to suit a completely different time period. It was never going to have all the aspects that the original poem had. And yes, I did miss certain episodes, such as Nausicaa, the lotus eaters, and Hermes (seriously, where was Hermes?) However, I still thought Nolan had captured the essence of the story.

Yet, I feel as though I keep seeing modern adaptations miss a crucial part of Odysseus: his cunning. If Helen was known as the most beautiful woman, then Odysseus was clearly known as the most cunning one. In Nolan's Odyssey, people around him talk about how Odysseus tried to be the smartest in the room, when he knew he would not be the strongest one. Yet, what were his great intellectual feats? The Trojan Horse was certainly one, but near the end of the movie, he undermines himself in that front. He turns up at the palace as a beggar, but not by his own thought, only by the direct advice of Agamemnon. Sure, he orchestrates all this, but the only thing that comes through is that he is resourceful and good at planning, not incredibly cunning. There are important missing moments, such as telling the Cyclops his name is Nobody, which means that his quick thinking is undermined. Plus, by being force-fed lotus fruit, Odysseus's entire character is sabotaged by forgetting his past. If Odysseus was constantly trying to escape Calypso, gathering material to make a raft in secret, manipulating her with kindness, because he knew she could easily overpower him as a goddess, this would have been more cunning.

But these are standalone moments; Odysseus' cunning should come through in every action that Odysseus chooses. He makes efforts out of empathy and care for his men, certainly, but he is a strategist above all else. It's why he didn't tell his men about Scylla, it's why he wanted Sinon to believe his lie rather than tell him the truth. However, what I fault the adaptation for is that he is too pensive. He looks back on his actions, and he regrets them. Book/Poem Odysseus wouldn't have. He would have assumed that the action he took was right, no matter the outcome, because he always kept moving forward. He is the most cunning man alive; why would he distrust his decisions?

However, this issue does not solely resonate with this adaptation of 'The Odyssey'; I also saw a similar issue with Epic the Musical. Again, I must preface this by saying, I love Epic. I think it's great. I know a lot of the songs, and Jorge was once my most listened to artist. However, I don't think the musical and the fandom got Odysseus' character. Instead, his character became a caricature of a silly, confused guy, who was sort of simultaneously infantilised and sexualised by some people within the fandom. Odysseus was never fun and silly, but Jorge, who played him, is. That meant that a lot of the promotional videos of the songs looked fun, even though Odysseus is a more serious character.

Epic is not as serious as Nolan's Odyssey; that's not necessarily a bad thing. It can bring the Odyssey to a wider range of audiences and allow classic myths to be consumed in a fun way. But the message and Odysseus' character were misconstrued. As stated above, Odysseus is not as cunning, and instead of relying on his wits, he is made to rely on his strength and ruthlessness. Although all his actions point towards a wiser Odysseus (one who knows to strike in the darkness, to light torches for Scylla, and many other things), the way Jorge chooses to portray this as a result of ruthlessness and not cunning, means it is not as effective as the original.

Odysseus also looks for Athena to be his friend, but why? Any version of Odysseus would know the separation between gods and humans, but this Odysseus prioritises friendship, not using Athena to his advantage. Seriously, he was a bit too chill about losing Athena as a Patron when he knew she was the only reason he had gotten so far.

What I mean to say is that Odysseus' character is difficult to grasp in an adaptation. When I studied it, we got into debates on whether he was truly a good leader who cared about his crew or was just in it for himself in the end. But one of the things we always agreed on was his cunning. Odysseus never stopped lying, cheating, deceiving, and making up plans on the fly. He didn't necessarily make wise decisions that considered the wrath of the gods or the well-being of his companions, but he made cunning decisions. Although it's morally ambiguous, it's what got Odysseus home. Not his love for his men, not his pity for those he had lost, just pure manipulation.

I started the book from a very judgemental stand point. I didn't like Charlie as a character, he was annoying, creepy at times, and self-centred. But as I went through the book I started to like him more as a protagonist. He was self-centred in the way teenagers are, where they think their personal world is the only world which exists (I'm still a teenager and can vouch for this).

Yet, Charlie as a character is aware that so many other worlds outside his own exist. He seems almost overwhelmed by this possibility. He knows everyone is equally as complex as him, and struggles to cope with this reality. He deeply understands people around him because he understands the depth of his own emotions.

He looks for beauty in the world, even though it has brought him a great amount of pain. That's highly admirable. And he stands up for others, even if he doesn't stand up for himself, because he cares.

I am planning to change this house and remodel but I wanted to show the joy, craze and whimsy of a literal child designing their safe place.