We Love You, Lama!

Is there a word that’s a mix between angry and sad

Headcanon: Penelope's Street Knowledge

We know that nobility during the Regency and Victorian era often did charity, such as providing food and clothes for the poor, and generally as an act of benevolence and their "noble duty". We know that this is a thing in the Eorka Empire with Winter. Thus, the illustrious and noble Eckhart family must also do such things from time to time, right?

Originally, they don't bring Penelope because of her horrid personality, thinking that she'd throw a tantrum. However, on one occasion, they begrudgingly bring her. Turns out, she is a great help.

The street children are wary of nobility and for good reason. They've developed a system of code words and hand signals that every child on the streets is intimately familiar with. Only those from the lowest of the commoners have knowledge of them; not even Winter, a noble known for his genteel kindness towards the ill-fated, knows.

In the past when the Eckhart men walk the streets and provide food, not many come, with a handful of the braver and older ones stealing closer. However, with Penelope, things are a lot different. She twists her fingers in a set of gestures, which to them, looks like it's from nerves. However, she's signing something different entirely.

"Safe, Helpful. Green."

"Taken in."

At the same time, she whistles a short tune, which all street children pass on to each other. A series of childish voices whistle back, completing the melody.

Before any of the Eckharts can ask what she's doing, children start flooding out of the dilapidated houses, from alleyways, from broken-down gardens.

Their hunger-starved faces and fearful caution make the Eckhart brothers realize "oh, this was Penelope's reality before she came to the duchy." However, none of the children go near the men, opting to huddle around Penelope, hands clutching at her skirts. They look at her with hope. One of the children taps a short code on Penelope's wrist.

"Safe for you?"

And though she hesitates, she knows that the children of the street will recognize the body language and the attitudes of the Eckharts towards her. So she signs, "Green for you. Yellow for me. Shopped. Replacement child."

Several tiny faces turn dark with bitter anger.

i full on believe clover has accidental rizz.

my fella will stumble onto the best pick up lines out of nowhere. they will enamour anybody by just being a genuine, heartfelt person. they will obliviously lead on someone just to wreck them with a “you’re such a good friend!” by the end of what they thought was a date. they’re a serial menace

when chara enters the convo, however? you bet that rizz is turning OFF. clover will right away start to make a fool of themselves, hyper aware of whatever they’re saying and doing. they’re so painfully obvious frisk is cringing by the sidelines. somehow chara doesn’t notice, but you know they’re doing some mental angst gymnastics to try to justify why clover seems so at ease with everybody else but not with them. do you see the vision.

I love that the internet saw people comparing women and other alienated groups of people and went, “they’re dating,” and, “they support each other.” We’re improving as a society.

I can't believe that this shit has to be said in the year of 2023 but if you have nothing positive to say about any ship then stay the fuck out of their tag.

OKAY I WAS NOT EXPECTING PEOPLE TO LIKE MY RESPONSE TO THE REPOST AND I APPRECIATE IT A LOT 😭😭

Now onto what I want to say, it's about what I stated earlier. There is something I would like to address that I noticed a bit after spending some time in the greek mythology whirlpool of wonderful chaos. Although there really aren't that many, I still want to address how there are people out there who seem to get very confused about Odysseus's character and what's what, and then accidentally say things that never actually happened with his character and then it leaves everyone upset and embarrassed which sucks because it's not really anyone's fault, and not many people are actually explaining it all, so that's what I'm going to do here to hopefully save some people from having to go through everything. I hope this doesn't get buried in the Tumblr algorithm as I'm honestly not doing this for likes or praise or any of that, I really just want this to get out there and help others get a better grasp of it all so everyone can enjoy their greek mythology fun in peace and maybe even help others get into the fun as well! ^^

First off I have to state this:

The only canon Odysseus is in Homer's Odyssey and Homer's Iliad, he was the creator of the character and all the characters within both book series. If the one you are reading isn't authored by Homer then it is an iteration therefore it is not canon to the actual story.

Now with that being said, and before I go any further, this doesn't mean you shouldn't read the different iterations or modern takes on the character, I mean why else do you think aus and fanfiction are a thing as well? (And ones created for this story as well because this fanbase is LIVELY) That's basically exactly what this all is except it's about an ancient story. People create different versions, spread different information which is either not what happened in the canon story or completely taken out of context. And these things happen, it's a story all the way back in ancient times, games like telephone are bound to happen and that's okay, no one should be at eachother's throats about it as it's out of people's control and happens with many and I mean many modern shows and stories as well.

But what I do suggest is just applying basic principles to it like we do now, such as:

*If you read an iteration of the story and you mention something from it, make sure you state it's from an iteration so that way people won't get confused with the actual story

*You don't have to read all books of Homer's Odyssey and the Iliad, but when you hear something from it you should do a quick look up about it to make sure you have all the context and that it was from Homer's story and not an iteration.

*Don't assume anything and make a comment about it immediately. I am sure every single person here did the same about something regarding Homer's Odyssey and Iliad at some point, I can almost guarantee it. If not then great for them ^^. But the point is, if you jump to assumptions and misinterpret something then make a claim about it, unfortunately the results don't turn out in your favor. So it's best to do your own research on it first before taking what is said as fact.

Basically just do your own research first before jumping to any conclusions, besides learning more about something can you discover something you may really enjoy that you haven't thought about before! :D

Now, onto the real elephant in the room, which is Odysseus's character. And we are going to be talking about Odysseus's character in Homer's Odyssey and Homer's Iliad and hopefully this helps to clear some things up for those that both aren't looking to get into the whole story and for those who are, so here we go! ^^

"Odysseus cheated on his wife! He committed Adultery!" : This is the biggest one that I have heard, and it is in fact false. Odysseus is unfortunately a major victim of SA both from Circe and Calypso, and while Circe's was more subtle, Calypso's wasn't as she kept him there for seven years. Odysseus was one of the few men in greek mythology who was 100% loyal and faithful to his wife till the very end and beyond. He didn't want any other woman, he wanted Penelope. He fought for Penelope, he loved Penelope and no one else.

"Odysseus committed mass murder and killed a bunch of people!": If you are talking about what happened with the Trojan horse then yes, you are correct, however this is often taken out of context. The truth of the matter is that is just how war is. During the fight they already lost Achilles (basically their version of a superhero) in battle, and Odysseus being the advisor had to weigh out the options between the two which is either continue as is and risk losing more lives or create the horse and not risk as many lives. It was a desperation move, and all of it was thrown onto Odysseus to take charge, but the situation needed to be done or no one would make it back home alive.

"Didn't he literally throw and kill a baby? What's up with that?": Yes but again, taken out of context, Odysseus was given a vision that the baby would grow older and kill a bunch of innocent people, so he had to make the choice whether he should kill the baby or not. Zeus was standing there like "Yeet the baby, Odysseus, yeet the child." And Odysseus, not wanting anyone he cared for to die, killed the child. It was a tough choice that he was faced with, as it would be for anyone in his shoes.

"Wasn't he overconfident and got in trouble a lot? Didn't his pride cause him to reveal his name to the Cyclops? He really must not be a good person." : Yes for the first part but no for the second part, he was overconfident and that would sometimes get him into trouble, like with the Cyclops. He was young, bold, confident, and although said to be one of the wisest men there was (which is true) he too had to grow and mature out of his own hubris. He wasn't perfect, and neither are we, he made mistakes but nothing outlandish that made him bad, it just showed that he was human and had done his own mistakes in life, just like we have.

There are many other things as well, Odysseus killed one of the kings on the Trojan side of war and took his horses but he did that because he knew one of the only ways they could stand a chance in the war is getting those horses. Odysseus's friend Ajax the greater killed himself after Odysseus defeated him for the armor of Achilles, however what happened after that was none of Odysseus's fault, as Athena decided to be the one to drive Ajax the greater mad and it caused him to kill the sheep and then himself afterwards out of shame. Odysseus's even tried pleading for forgiveness from him in the underworld (even though none of it was his fault) but Ajax the greater refused to acknowledge him and walked off. Then you have Palamedes, in Homer's Odyssey he was sent to bring Odysseus to war, so he decided to put Odysseus's infant son in front of his plow which caused Odysseus to swerve out of the way, and Odysseus was then forced to go to war to protect his son which then later caused all of these things to happen throughout both stories. Odysseus didn't take that well and he cleverly placed a forged letter and gold in Palamedes tent and got him framed for treason, and Palamedes was stoned to death (and honestly he had that coming)

Now, does any of this mean I want you to go and do what Odysseus did? No, please for the love of god please don't. What all of this does mean though, is that Odysseus was not a bad person, but instead a good guy put in some of the worse positions and situations possible surrounded by people who spoke with their fists rather than their heart. In fact, despite his "I'm so balling right now" personality causing him to get into trouble, he was one of the kindest, wisest, loyal and empathetic people you could meet back then which was incredibly rare back in those times. He went to literal hell and back for 20 years just to get to his family again, he stuck by his men despite them screwing things up multiple times over, same situation was with Agamemnon and Achilles as well, so he kind up to a fault. He was kind respectful to his people, he didn't care what status you were or where you came from, you were treated with respect and kindness all the same, and that inspired one of his workers to be the same when he invited a certain beggar in his home, and that act of kindness spread through the heart of Ithaca as a whole, but when he left it was all gone. To have that much of an impact on people because of kindness just shows how good of a person he really was. And with happened to Ithaca when he left it, it also showed how much the world did not deserve that kindness, but it certainly needed it.

So in conclusion, yes Odysseus made mistakes, and he was by no means perfect, but he shouldn't be seen as perfect or expected to be perfect. He is a really good guy dealing with getting screwed over by literally everyone around him. He made mistakes, he broke down, he fell at times, but he got back up, never lost his kind heart or his true self, and in the end made it back to his family and got a happy ending. Odysseus was and always will be the embodiment of what it truly means to be a human being going throw the troubles of life, what if feels like to go through it and how it affects certain actions you take, and to stay true to your heart no matter what, and overall to never give up. And I hope those who are out there who hate his character due to misinformation are able to see his character for what he is rather than what others make him out to be.

WOW THAT WAS A LOT OF WORDS, I was not expecting to type that much but I really needed to get this out there. I hope all you greek geeks have a lovely day and night and I'll see you next time! ^^

I gotta take a nap after all of that ^^"

Found the Cards

Madeline Miller has every right to write books like "Circe" and draw inspiration from Greek mythology but sometimes I want what she smokes... Like, I can't believe that with her studies and experience she looked at one of the most beloved heroes of the Greeks for millennia and she went "the gods are 'sociopathic narcissists' in our modern standards, Odysseus is full of himself and probably shittier than he presents himself to be because patriarchy".

I am mostly paraphrasing, and the quotes are below. Yes, Greek societies have been patriarchal for a long time, yes Odysseus is the main narrator so of course, we see the story from his point of view, yes he is a trickster character and not perfect, no that doesn't automatically make him a bad person who overshadows other characters so he can elevate himself. If he had lied or hid something when he narrated his story, it would be there in the text, as in every other occasion Odysseus tricked someone.

I find it very hard to accept that with her Classics background she characterized the Greek gods in such a simple way, letting out all their magnificence, generosity, and kindness.

I understand what she wants to say here but the phrasing is weird. What do you mean by "push back" against the mythology? This makes it seem like her works are equal to the mythology texts and she is able to "push back". (She says in the article that her works are not equal to the Homeric pieces, but phrases like this makes it seem so)

These statements of the interviewer don't help much either... In a formal article, please don't characterize gods of other cultures and religions as "stupid" and similar things. You wouldn't call a person that in such a context, and you call the Greek gods stupid? Also... we are so sorry for our hero who tells his own story, I guess?? And sorry that our important ancient texts made you sad as a kid???

This statement alone might not seem like much but in the general spirit of the article, it adds up to the notion of Odysseus isn't that deserving after all and we should stop giving him that much attention in the name of social justice. For example, later in the article, we meet this statement from Miller. (I understand she doesn't outright call Odysseus a narcissist and what she says is that there is some material on the text she can use to play with this theme.)

The whole piece might leave the impression to a portion of readers that Odysseus wasn't actually that great and was praised in the context of a patriarchal society because he was a male hero. I can't help but feel this removes some agency from the Greek people who have kept Odysseus in their hearts and tradition for thousands of years, up to this day.

I analyze her and the writers of multiple articles stance exactly as deep and with the same stretches as the article writers praise Miller's work. She made the powerful witch Circe a rape victim and Odysseus a liar from a few hints (not even) in the original text. And I cannot meta-analyze her work from a cultural, intersectional scope? Yes, "it's not that deep" but since the articles are making a fuss out of a singular recent book and analyze it to death, I believe I am allowed to go a bit deeper in my commentary.

So, their stances remind me of the old theme of the "enlightened, educated foreigner" who "knows better" the native heroes than the natives of a land and sees how "problematic" the culture and the heroes themselves are, and the culture wasn't "feminist enough" to give the female heroes voices.

It all ties to the sense of ownership the West has with the Greek myths and characters. This is a formal interview/article and yet they talk about the heroes like they are their cousins or like they discuss in a bar about heroes of their own culture. One says that the Greek gods are essentially pricks and the other moans because we mostly follow Odysseus in... "Odyssey", as if the text came out yesterday in their local newspaper.

Like, I thought we would get a respectful and serious approach from people who know what they are talking about, but apparently, I was too optimistic.

The funny thing is, while misogyny was/is a thing, it's not because of the lack of feminism that Circe wasn't so important. She was merely the "bad witch" of the story. As it often happens in folk adventure stories, side characters - bad witches included - don't have a deep background story. To claim that the misogyny of Greeks was the reason Circe didn't get much "screentime" in another hero's story (!!!) is a stretch. There are multiple male characters in Odyssey who don't get that much time because they are side characters.

I can't believe I am saying this but... Miller and the writers of the articles give me so many "white feminism" vibes. Greece societies had/has issues with women's representation and yet they chose one side female character who matters as much as the male side characters in the text and go "now THIS is a problem we need to talk about for the next five years! We will do the subversion of the century and we will open people's eyes to neglected women by making a beloved hero a prick!! Oh, also Circe is now a rape victim to show how cruel the men were back then!"

Here is the full article. Most of it is pleasant and insightful and then there are... these statements that made red flags arise in my mind. I am not saying that Madeline Miller is trash, or that she doesn't know anything, or that she deserves any type of harassment. I just think some commentary is needed when such proclamations of hers are published and end up adopted by many who don't have the time to cross-reference.

Neuvillette x Evermore from Beauty and the Beast focallette au. That’s it. That’s all I can think about.

The Telegony goes against what the Odyssey tells us not only because of Tiresias' Prophecy but also because Odysseus' family line only has one son each.

Zeus made our line a line of only sons. Arcesius had only one son, Laertes, and Laertes had only one son, Odysseus, and I am Odysseus’ only son. He fathered me, he left me behind at home, and from me he got no joy.

(Book 16, Fagles)

Telegonus can't even realistically BE Odysseus' son as he already has Telemachus. The Only son