Scan barcode
sweetcuppincakes's review against another edition
5.0
Beautiful. This was a requirement for a freshman seminar at my university, and I just reread it now after 19 years, after rereading Fitzgerald's translation of the Iliad, also assigned at the time. It made me wonder why a faithful-ish movie adaptation had never been properly made, because with all the super hero flashiness from comic book adaptations as of late, an updated clash of Akhaians and Trojans, with those tricksy and conniving Olympians butting in, would make for a spectacular movie, or TV series. Then I reread Logue's retelling, and the visuals - and cuts! - of the possible movie that had played in my head are all there. Its cinematic language jumps out of every page!
If the Iliad is the ode to rage, and force, War Music has that in spades - but it also nails the opposing force of reconciliation, between Achilles and Agamemnon, beautifully well:
We could all do with some soft air.
If the Iliad is the ode to rage, and force, War Music has that in spades - but it also nails the opposing force of reconciliation, between Achilles and Agamemnon, beautifully well:
Ever since men began in time, time and
Time again they met in parliament,
Where, in due turn, letting the next man speak,
With mouthfuls of soft air they tried to stop
Themselves from ravening their talking throats;
Hoping enunciated airs would fall
With verisimilitude in different minds; soft air
Between the hatred dying animals
Monotonously bear towards themselves;
Only soft air to underwrite the in-
Built violence of being, to meld it to
Something more civil, rarer than true forgiveness.
No work was lovelier in history;
And nothing failed so often: knowing this
The army came to hear Achilles say:
"Pax, Agamemnon." And Agamemnon's: "Pax."
We could all do with some soft air.
felixculpa's review
adventurous
dark
emotional
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
ktoumajian's review
5.0
"Hard to say who is who: the fighters, the heroes,/
Their guts look alike." (194)
Sublime. Genius. Many more superlatives…If you have ever felt intimidated by the unending columns and lists of other translations of Homer's Iliad, give this one a whirl. Logue uses modern verse and contemporary imagery to tell Homer's classic story of Helen's abduction and the resulting war between Greece and Troy. The language, the structure, the breaks, the cadence..everything sweeps you along and puts you under some kind of poetic spell that perfectly captures the wide scope & movement of armies at war as well as the small, tedious, personal moments:
"They rise!--the Greeks with smiling iron mouths.
They are like Nature; like a mass of flame;
Great lengths of water struck by changing winds;
A forest of innumerable trees;
Boundless sand; snowfall across broad steppes at dusk.
As a huge beast stands and turns around itself,
The well-fed, glittering army, stands and turns.
Nothing can happen till Achilles wakes.
He wakes." (213)
Their guts look alike." (194)
Sublime. Genius. Many more superlatives…If you have ever felt intimidated by the unending columns and lists of other translations of Homer's Iliad, give this one a whirl. Logue uses modern verse and contemporary imagery to tell Homer's classic story of Helen's abduction and the resulting war between Greece and Troy. The language, the structure, the breaks, the cadence..everything sweeps you along and puts you under some kind of poetic spell that perfectly captures the wide scope & movement of armies at war as well as the small, tedious, personal moments:
"They rise!--the Greeks with smiling iron mouths.
They are like Nature; like a mass of flame;
Great lengths of water struck by changing winds;
A forest of innumerable trees;
Boundless sand; snowfall across broad steppes at dusk.
As a huge beast stands and turns around itself,
The well-fed, glittering army, stands and turns.
Nothing can happen till Achilles wakes.
He wakes." (213)
bookherd's review against another edition
5.0
I accidentally got the shortened version of War Music that covers only Books 16-19 of the Iliad, so that's what I am reviewing here. On the strength of this small part of the book, I am going to buy myself a copy of the full version. It is gorgeous. Full of phrases to treasure, like:
"Or those with everything to lose, the kings,
Asleep like pistols in red velvet."
"Noon. In the foothills
Melons emerge from their green hidings.
Heat."
There is a wonderful balance of still moments like these above, and momentum in action scenes, and both are captured in beautiful phrases. I was sceptical about Logue's declining to use the famous stock phrases like "rosy fingered dawn" and "wine-dark sea," but he is so good at making his own descriptive phrases that I didn't miss those familiar ones. Judging by these three Books, this version of The Iliad is modern and ancient, readable and brilliant. I can't wait to read the whole thing.
"Or those with everything to lose, the kings,
Asleep like pistols in red velvet."
"Noon. In the foothills
Melons emerge from their green hidings.
Heat."
There is a wonderful balance of still moments like these above, and momentum in action scenes, and both are captured in beautiful phrases. I was sceptical about Logue's declining to use the famous stock phrases like "rosy fingered dawn" and "wine-dark sea," but he is so good at making his own descriptive phrases that I didn't miss those familiar ones. Judging by these three Books, this version of The Iliad is modern and ancient, readable and brilliant. I can't wait to read the whole thing.
spacestationtrustfund's review
3.0
This book is rather controversial, primarily because it isn't a translation but really more of an adaptation or even a reimagining, since Christopher Logue did not know Ancient Greek. It's more of an unintentional study on the pop culture understanding of Homer than a study on the Iliad itself.
Notes: NYT; stage.
Notes: NYT; stage.
notwellread's review
2.0
2.5 stars.
I feel I should start out by saying that this book is not for me (in the most literal sense): this isn’t ‘for’ classicists, but is rather a foray into Homer for the uninitiated (though, having said that, I’m not sure whether Christopher Logue intended it for people who have actually read the Iliad or not). As a result, some of my criticisms are probably informed by my classicism, but I can only be myself and review according to my own judgement of the book.
Some issues I had are in comparison to the Iliad itself: I was happy when I could recognise passages that are clearly lifted directly from Homer’s original, but I also feel that some details are misused – I’m fond of Homeric epithets and would rather see them included than excluded, but there are almost none here apart from the odd passing reference to them (‘lake-eyed Hera’ being basically equivalent to ‘ox-eyed Hera’, and references to Zeus as the storm god). Yet, bizarrely, Apollo is referred to as ‘Mouse God’ more or less every time he’s mentioned (from p.10 onwards), when he’s only addressed as such once in the Iliad: I thought this was odd as it’s a pretty obscure reference that even most classicists would not immediately recognise (and not really relevant to Apollo’s more well-recognised theological identity) and seems to make a very commonly known god an oddity. I’m also not sure why Athena talks to her father like a baby (pp.120ff.) – she does sweet-talk Zeus at one point in the original, but with a much more rational tone (more believable since she’s the goddess of wisdom). The book isn’t intended for classicists, and yet there are a lot of references that non-classicists won’t get.
(On top of this, there are some references that I didn’t, and still don’t understand – I have no idea who ‘Thoal’ is supposed to be, though he’s referenced quite a few times and seems to be an important lord of some kind. There’s no character in the Iliad by this name. There are a few other references like this that seem inexplicable, and my searching hasn’t yielded results.)
By extension, the experimental style is what makes this book unique, but some decisions made didn’t quite work for me, though I suppose they keep the reader awake. We also have to deal with very odd ‘blurrings’ and made-up portmanteaus of words (‘Snowcragbackfastnesses’ p.107; ‘smoothdownsideways’, ‘imparadised’ p.115), alongside weird, jarring modern synonyms (we all own a pair of ‘sparkling clogs’, I guess). This gives the poem an engaging and experimental style, but at times the references can ruin immersion. I understand wanting to make the Iliad feel more relevant, but I’ve found Lombardo’s translation achieves this aim without breaking faith with Homer.
Some prize questionable words and phrases:
• “O cheesy Lung” (p.22 – meaning unclear)
• “This womb is now a wife” (p.23 – horrible)
• Not a god’s god, I know. But curved. (p.40) (What is this supposed to mean?)
• It was so quiet in Heaven that you could hear
The north wind pluck a chicken in Australia. (p.41)
• “Do you accept this womb…as your wife?” (p.85 – belabouring the horrible point)
• “Go. You are his. Obey him.” (p.85 – some might argue this is accurate to Iliadic culture, but it’s certainly not phrased this way in the text.)
• “Napoleon’s Murat had 50 hats
And 50 plumes each 50 inches high
And 50 uniforms and many more
Than 50 pots of facial mayonnaise
Appropriate to a man with tender skin” (p.94 – still not sure what ‘facial mayonnaise’ is)
• “Palookaville” (p.95)
• Now dark, now bright, now watch –
As aircrews watch tsunamis send
Ripples across the Iwo Jima Deep,
Or as a schoolgirl makes her velveteen
Go dark, go bright (p.97 – the schoolgirl thing is too jarringly modern)
• “Make sure my pubic jewellery is on top.” (p.126 – again, perverse, and not at all faithful to the Iliad)
• The whole scene where Aphrodite forces Helen into the bath and sends her to Paris is too horribly misogynistic for me to type out (p.127-129)
• The scene where Menelaus’ pubis is injured is also really lewd (p.129ff. – his injury is true to Homer, but not the way it plays out)
• Molo the Dancer from Cymatriax
Tugs at his penis as he squeaks (p.182 – not sure what this is about).
Calling absolutely all the female characters ‘shes’, making no distinction between free women and slave women, and underlining all of this with uncomfortably invasive references to the female characters’ bodies (“The sweat was running down between my breasts”, p.103 [women never say this]; “Her breasts alert and laden with desire”, p.127 [this is just voyeuristic]; “Her breasts so lovely that they envy one another”, p.203 [perverted]) makes for pretty unpleasant reading, and I worry it shows an unhealthy attempt to make the Iliadic culture more ‘barbaric’ than it appears in the text. The important female characters (Helen, Andromache, Briseis), who are not treated insultingly by Homer, have heavily diminished roles. Homer treats the culture as a fact of life, while Logue almost seems to be condoning the misogyny, which is far more pronounced in his interpretation, even though he’s chosen to modernise everything else. This is accompanied by strange attempts to exoticise the Trojans (Priam is never described as ‘indigo skinned’ in the Iliad and this doesn’t make sense in Turkey; saying the Greeks will become ‘Panther meat’ is also inaccurate [if we’re making up words now: ‘anageographic’, like ‘anachronistic’]). I understand that this is a book ‘adaptation’, not a translation, but an adaptation should always be faithful to the general ‘feel’ and tone of the original, and in many aspects this is not.
On the other hand, there are also some variations or interpretations that I thought were powerful, not least:
• “If ever she sees Ilium again
She will have empty gums.” (p.11)
• And then,
And then again, but with a higher note, that note
Instantly answered by the snarl of silk
As Asia stands for Laomedon’s son, (p.102)
• They smile. They are the gods.
They have all the time in the world.
What science knows, they know. (p.115)
• “His curls
Bursting around his head like sunlit frost.” (p.133)
• (p.165)
• (p.179)
• (pp.208-209).
It’s a shame that these are so diminished by the bizarre and odd poetic decisions and prejudices that belabour the rest of the book.
I think he wanted to take what’s timeless in the original and apply it to a ‘universalised’ view of the historical timeline (almost like all the events and settings he references are all ‘alive’ at once), and I can appreciate the concept even if it’s sometimes jarring and therefore ineffective. (Again, I feel Lombardo’s subtler approach is more successful.) I was also relieved that he uses this sparingly, and seems to get the key moments towards the end right without too much tampering (particularly the emotional highs that don’t need a historical context). I think the Patrocleia book generally outshines the rest and has few to no questionable phrases and poetic decisions, so it saves the book overall for me.
I realise that the author/poet passed away in 2011, but I feel like he would not have cared much about my criticisms, since he seems strangely dismissive and somewhat derogatory towards classicists in the introduction. (I was surprised to learn that he was reluctant to begin the project because of his lack of Greek.) I also realise that this book is highly praised, but I can’t really see why people are so blown away by it – it has its moments, but anyone can write a bizarro version of a classic work. Despite my issues, though, the book is still preferable to some people to reading a more mundane translated version, and I acknowledge that it was written to put the Iliad in a new light, and perhaps to a new audience. At the very least, for people who are put off by the length or the obscurities of Homer, maybe this will do it.
I feel I should start out by saying that this book is not for me (in the most literal sense): this isn’t ‘for’ classicists, but is rather a foray into Homer for the uninitiated (though, having said that, I’m not sure whether Christopher Logue intended it for people who have actually read the Iliad or not). As a result, some of my criticisms are probably informed by my classicism, but I can only be myself and review according to my own judgement of the book.
Some issues I had are in comparison to the Iliad itself: I was happy when I could recognise passages that are clearly lifted directly from Homer’s original, but I also feel that some details are misused – I’m fond of Homeric epithets and would rather see them included than excluded, but there are almost none here apart from the odd passing reference to them (‘lake-eyed Hera’ being basically equivalent to ‘ox-eyed Hera’, and references to Zeus as the storm god). Yet, bizarrely, Apollo is referred to as ‘Mouse God’ more or less every time he’s mentioned (from p.10 onwards), when he’s only addressed as such once in the Iliad: I thought this was odd as it’s a pretty obscure reference that even most classicists would not immediately recognise (and not really relevant to Apollo’s more well-recognised theological identity) and seems to make a very commonly known god an oddity. I’m also not sure why Athena talks to her father like a baby (pp.120ff.) – she does sweet-talk Zeus at one point in the original, but with a much more rational tone (more believable since she’s the goddess of wisdom). The book isn’t intended for classicists, and yet there are a lot of references that non-classicists won’t get.
(On top of this, there are some references that I didn’t, and still don’t understand – I have no idea who ‘Thoal’ is supposed to be, though he’s referenced quite a few times and seems to be an important lord of some kind. There’s no character in the Iliad by this name. There are a few other references like this that seem inexplicable, and my searching hasn’t yielded results.)
By extension, the experimental style is what makes this book unique, but some decisions made didn’t quite work for me, though I suppose they keep the reader awake. We also have to deal with very odd ‘blurrings’ and made-up portmanteaus of words (‘Snowcragbackfastnesses’ p.107; ‘smoothdownsideways’, ‘imparadised’ p.115), alongside weird, jarring modern synonyms (we all own a pair of ‘sparkling clogs’, I guess
Spoiler
p.127, and no, we don’tSome prize questionable words and phrases:
• “O cheesy Lung” (p.22 – meaning unclear)
• “This womb is now a wife” (p.23 – horrible)
• Not a god’s god, I know. But curved. (p.40) (What is this supposed to mean?)
• It was so quiet in Heaven that you could hear
The north wind pluck a chicken in Australia. (p.41)
• “Do you accept this womb…as your wife?” (p.85 – belabouring the horrible point)
• “Go. You are his. Obey him.” (p.85 – some might argue this is accurate to Iliadic culture, but it’s certainly not phrased this way in the text.)
• “Napoleon’s Murat had 50 hats
And 50 plumes each 50 inches high
And 50 uniforms and many more
Than 50 pots of facial mayonnaise
Appropriate to a man with tender skin” (p.94 – still not sure what ‘facial mayonnaise’ is)
• “Palookaville” (p.95)
• Now dark, now bright, now watch –
As aircrews watch tsunamis send
Ripples across the Iwo Jima Deep,
Or as a schoolgirl makes her velveteen
Go dark, go bright (p.97 – the schoolgirl thing is too jarringly modern)
• “Make sure my pubic jewellery is on top.” (p.126 – again, perverse, and not at all faithful to the Iliad)
• The whole scene where Aphrodite forces Helen into the bath and sends her to Paris is too horribly misogynistic for me to type out (p.127-129)
• The scene where Menelaus’ pubis is injured is also really lewd (p.129ff. – his injury is true to Homer, but not the way it plays out)
• Molo the Dancer from Cymatriax
Tugs at his penis as he squeaks (p.182 – not sure what this is about).
Calling absolutely all the female characters ‘shes’, making no distinction between free women and slave women, and underlining all of this with uncomfortably invasive references to the female characters’ bodies (“The sweat was running down between my breasts”, p.103 [women never say this]; “Her breasts alert and laden with desire”, p.127 [this is just voyeuristic]; “Her breasts so lovely that they envy one another”, p.203 [perverted]) makes for pretty unpleasant reading, and I worry it shows an unhealthy attempt to make the Iliadic culture more ‘barbaric’ than it appears in the text. The important female characters (Helen, Andromache, Briseis), who are not treated insultingly by Homer, have heavily diminished roles. Homer treats the culture as a fact of life, while Logue almost seems to be condoning the misogyny, which is far more pronounced in his interpretation, even though he’s chosen to modernise everything else. This is accompanied by strange attempts to exoticise the Trojans (Priam is never described as ‘indigo skinned’ in the Iliad and this doesn’t make sense in Turkey; saying the Greeks will become ‘Panther meat’ is also inaccurate [if we’re making up words now: ‘anageographic’, like ‘anachronistic’]). I understand that this is a book ‘adaptation’, not a translation, but an adaptation should always be faithful to the general ‘feel’ and tone of the original, and in many aspects this is not.
On the other hand, there are also some variations or interpretations that I thought were powerful, not least:
• “If ever she sees Ilium again
She will have empty gums.” (p.11)
• And then,
And then again, but with a higher note, that note
Instantly answered by the snarl of silk
As Asia stands for Laomedon’s son, (p.102)
• They smile. They are the gods.
They have all the time in the world.
What science knows, they know. (p.115)
• “His curls
Bursting around his head like sunlit frost.” (p.133)
•
Spoiler
Patroclus’ death scene, which I won’t de-contextualise•
Spoiler
your death is nearer than your nose•
Spoiler
The final scene when the immortal horses remind Achilles of his own mortality, and that he will not be there to call them negligent when they leave his body behind; “I know I will not make old bones.”It’s a shame that these are so diminished by the bizarre and odd poetic decisions and prejudices that belabour the rest of the book.
I think he wanted to take what’s timeless in the original and apply it to a ‘universalised’ view of the historical timeline (almost like all the events and settings he references are all ‘alive’ at once), and I can appreciate the concept even if it’s sometimes jarring and therefore ineffective. (Again, I feel Lombardo’s subtler approach is more successful.) I was also relieved that he uses this sparingly, and seems to get the key moments towards the end right without too much tampering (particularly the emotional highs
Spoiler
of Patroclus’ death and burialI realise that the author/poet passed away in 2011, but I feel like he would not have cared much about my criticisms, since he seems strangely dismissive and somewhat derogatory towards classicists in the introduction. (I was surprised to learn that he was reluctant to begin the project because of his lack of Greek.) I also realise that this book is highly praised, but I can’t really see why people are so blown away by it – it has its moments, but anyone can write a bizarro version of a classic work. Despite my issues, though, the book is still preferable to some people to reading a more mundane translated version, and I acknowledge that it was written to put the Iliad in a new light, and perhaps to a new audience. At the very least, for people who are put off by the length or the obscurities of Homer, maybe this will do it.
emmkayt's review against another edition
3.0
A modern verse 'account' of portions of the Iliad, rather than a translation. Ferocious and energetic, sometimes a bit wearyingly male. Lots of claiming of rights of rape and conquest, splitting of skulls, etc, leavened - of course - by homoeroticism. Wonderful images, and pithy, caustic lines. I haven't read the Iliad before, and had a difficult time keeping track of all of the characters. Between that and the verse, it was a challenging read with a fair amount of 'wait, what just happened?'
richardwells's review
5.0
Christopher Logue has a lot of guts. He's gotten into the ring with the likes of Fagles, Lattimore, Fitzgerald, and most courageously, Homer himself - and acquitted himself well. Mr. Logue has pulled "The Iliad," into the 21st Century with less a translation than a re-write. It appears there are numerous volumes containing sections of Mr. Logue's work, and it's a little hard to keep track, but two editions offered on Amazon.com's website, "War Music," and the wondrously titled, "All Day Permanent Red," seem to contain it all.
Mr. Logue writes in a robust verse form that retains the epic language while exploring possibilities for a cinematic look on scenes and situations, as well as opening the field to modern metaphor. Unlike Barry Unsworth's interpolations in "The Songs of the Kings," Mr. Logue's don't jar, but rather deepen. A sample line, "Ajax, grim underneath his tan as Rommel after `Alamein..." lifts the story from some mythical past to something that is played out continually. A great device considering "The Iliad" is arguably the blue-print for every war story ever written.
When "War Music," opens outside the actual text of "The Iliad," and introduces us to Achilles - angry, petulant, bent on revenge, summoning his mother and whining about Agamemnon - Mr. Logue provides character depth missing from the original, and immediately lays out his plan to re-write and enrich rather than re-tell. His plan unfolds magnificently through both books.
Mr. Logue writes in a robust verse form that retains the epic language while exploring possibilities for a cinematic look on scenes and situations, as well as opening the field to modern metaphor. Unlike Barry Unsworth's interpolations in "The Songs of the Kings," Mr. Logue's don't jar, but rather deepen. A sample line, "Ajax, grim underneath his tan as Rommel after `Alamein..." lifts the story from some mythical past to something that is played out continually. A great device considering "The Iliad" is arguably the blue-print for every war story ever written.
When "War Music," opens outside the actual text of "The Iliad," and introduces us to Achilles - angry, petulant, bent on revenge, summoning his mother and whining about Agamemnon - Mr. Logue provides character depth missing from the original, and immediately lays out his plan to re-write and enrich rather than re-tell. His plan unfolds magnificently through both books.