do you think bowser ever gets anxious after kidnapping peach again that he went too far this time and he calls mario up in the middle of the night to make sure they’re still on for tennis and gokarting next weekend
My hope for whoever is reading this is that your life starts making sense and coming together. I hope the good days are right around the corner for you.
noah kahan's the great divide is like. what if you died and came back wrong but the "death" was you leaving your hometown and the "came back wrong" is the change in the way everyone, including your own parents, perceives you even when you do return and the relationships that have been soured by your absence
cats being capable of understanding accidents and even giving you a little head bonk to let you know you're still cool makes it infinitely funnier that they don't understand when you're trying to help them
cats when you step on their tail: i'll admit that was rather ouchie, but given the lifetime of goodwill and trust between us, one must conclude this booboo is but a fluke.
cats when you try to get their claws unstuck from the couch covering: this nefarious bitch has never had a single honorable intention in their dishonest and shameful life, this must be one of their sinister plots or perhaps even an attempt on my life,
Ohkubo didn’t do nearly enough with Kid being 100% Not A Human tbh. Those 9th graders were playing basketball with a sapient fragment of a Cthulhu-esque god-thing and not once did any of them even comment, which I guess is a sweet testament to their friendship, but at the same time if I had homeroom with Wilbur Whateley I think I’d at least want to see him do a magic trick or something
The reason it is bad to remove the questionable fucked up things that Odysseus does is because it reflects the actual journeys people go through, especially in fucked up situations. Odysseus is put in a shitty situation and what does he do? He lies, he distrusts people, he is prideful and arrogant, he pisses off people, he makes hard decisions and has to live with them, and he does questionable shit. That's what people do. Real actual people. And guess what? His actions have consequences, ones that he has rightly earned. He learns. He adapts. He realizes who can trust, who he needs to appease, were he needs to be cautious, and when to shut up. He fucks up and learns. He learns to trust the people who love him, despite all his bad decisions and how long it took him to get there. He learns to take advice. And at the end of all of this he hasn't been redeemed of what he's done. His men are still dead. He is haunted by the past. But he gets to go home. Because people are not morally perfect. They make questionable desicions and have to try again and again through one crazy adventure after another. That's the point of a journey. To fuck up and learn and try again and eventually you get to find your home. Despite Odysseus' lies and questionable decisions, he gets to go home. That is why Odysseus being a prideful, questionable asshole is important.
I would say though that the opposite is also wrong. Like I would have been a millionaire every time someone says that "Odysseus lies" as if that is the only thing he does while arguably he is honest and sincere much more often than what he lies
Plus it sounds sometimes like all Odysseus does when he is in a tough situation is to lie but ironically it isn't. Sometimes he does when he has no choice. Other times he persuades and other times he fights back. His adaptability is not only based on deception or indirect ways but also on what you would expect your average hero to do.
It is good to support a hero's wrongs in the narrative but not by forgetting his rights.
Odysseus is definitely a figure that can do things that he has to when others don't. He is the one that is more likely to use words to resolve something while others wouldn't and yet he is also fighting first line. One must never forget he is the man that was a protagonist at the war not just in diplomacy but also in battle. He also took some of the riskiest missions such as taking the Palladium out of enemy territory. He was the one that got wounded while protecting Achilles's body. He is the one that left without protection to an unknown territory and went to save his men from a goddess-witch and the one that stood with two spears ready to face an immortal six headed dragon
Is good to always remember that he is capable of indirect ways but not by forgetting that this is not the only side of his or that it is even the primary side of his. Part is his complexity is exactly why he is a hero of myth in the first place; because he is not just one side.
I did not say he never did anything right or even ignoring why he does them. Yes, he is complicated and complex. This post is not denying that. I am arguing against modern tendencies to erase the bad things he does. This is my second post I made on modern audiences erasing the bad things Odysseus does and in that one I reiterated that Odysseus is an extremely complex character and that it is not a good thing to sanitize him. This posts specific purpose is meant to explain WHY his failings and questionable choices are important to the story. I do not feel the need to reiterate the good he does, because modern audiences already values those things and are well aware of the arguements for them. The compulsion, for lack of a better word at the moment, people have to explain the goodness in Odysseus' actions is exactly WHY I wrote this. I am not arguing that he is a horrible, evil character who does nothing good.
Although, many of the things you listed I would argue are not nearly as good natured as you argued. Yes he took on the dangerous mission to get the Palladium, however he also contemplated stabbing Diomedes in the back so that he would be able to take all the credit. He framed Palamedes for treason in the middle of the war for calling him out for trying to evade his oath and refused his greiving father, ultimately endangering all of the lords going home. I also would also argue that for all his grand acts, he is actually a rather poor leader and military commander. He has grand actions and gets himself a lot of glory but treats his men poorly, recklessly, and dismissively, often putting their lives in danger in favor of his curiousity and ambition and often leads them without communication or clarity. I'm not suprised they acted out so much. But all of that is because Odysseus is so complex. Most of the people on Tumblr already want to make him a saint, I don't need to argue that side. I am saying 'I know the audience wants to make everything he does good, but this is the other side of Odysseus and why it is important to not erase the questionable things he does.'
You didn't. I am adding it because there were many takes over the time that led to this so I do like to add this from time to time. And I have seen way too many modern tendencies to actually overly focusing on the bad things he has done to the point of ironically not following the sources at all. They prefer to just randomly say "he is horrible" than follow the source. Even if they even start from a sanitized version (see for example the take of the musical) they seem to turn to the whole "oh yeah he ended up terrible anyways" which is why I add it. I have seen more modern takes of his denying his good sides in the end. Even by people that claim to appreciate his character.
Ironically the stabbing thing was firstly memorized at a Roman source of Connon. A mythographer of Augustean times. The framing for murder was also added to sources like Hyginus and later both were mentioned by later sources at the times of Apollodorous or Pausanias or later than that by people who look back at these sources. I have seen people treat the palladium heist as the sole source there is because "Odysseus is terrible" but the connon version is also adding some questions as to how things went there because both Odysseus and Diomedes were seen as hostile to each other even if most indirect sources that we have on epic cycle.
I have seen more people speak on the Hyginus framing story because again "Odysseus is terrible" than let's say Pausanias who claims another version that Palamedes was killed at a fishing expedition which could even indicate a crime of passion than the lethal and amazingly terrible mastermind that is playing around with people's lives Hyginus is projecting. They do not even choose the version of murder that is somewhere in-between, the well murder where both Diomedes and Odysseus (people also casually ignore Diomedes from the equation and when they add him of course it is only the fault of Odysseus because he is the only one with bad influence and no one else. The rest are just heroic except for the Atreides. These two are devils too lol) because again "Odysseus is terrible"
People are way too keen on focusing on one or two versions of the worst versions of Odysseus that oftentimes are mostly rescued from later sources or unique sources than do the same with his good side. For instance for Palamedes death all know about the framing to the point of it being the only version there is. No one takes the version rescued by Pausanias that could as I said even indicate a crime of passion or the well that could also paint Palamedes as a silly and easily fooled man but instead they recognize only the version that makes Odysseus the criminal mastermind (even some mythographers add characters like Agamemnon to the mixture by the way)
For the palladium heist is always Odysseus being betraying Diomedes. Never the versions that could also indicate that Diomedes was not there (Like potential Odyssey or Euripides Hecuba) or indicate other possibilities for the phrase "diomedean necessity". People always use alternatives of sources that make Odysseus have a worse light but for some is more possible that they will ignore the good ones
Not to mention Astyanax death. Astyanax being killed by Odysseus is briefly mentioned to be part of the original epic cycle by a much later phililogist, Proclus. Most sources and art dictate the death of Astyanax coming from Neoptolemus and yet I have seen more people not only be certain that Odysseus did but also that he felt nothing and that he just throws babies off towers in a normal Tuesday. At best they recognize Trojan Women and Odysseus being the mind behind it.
I am not saying that none of the above is part of the sources. They absolutely are. But what I mean is that I see more people speak on these that paint Odysseus more negatively than those that paint him more positively. The same way I see more people deny Odysseus being raped by Calypso or coerced by the situation with Circe. Are there versions where he is willing not only with them but also with other women? Yes. Do I still see people treat it as if Odyssey version doesn't exist? Also yes. In fact I have seen people more willing to read the Odyssey like a fun time for Odysseus with Calypso and Circe and still will find ways to declare it negatively.
As for his father I am not sure what you mean. Laertes was sick. He was possibly turning mad. Odysseus had to test him as per the Odyssey that called him wise for that. In other words he needed to...shake him up to make sure that he is still in there. Yes Odysseus is not a certified psychologist so I am not sure why people expect him to act like one. He took no amusement or pleasure seeing his father in that condition so I am not sure why people act as if him lying to him to test him did.
Honestly I couldn't disagree more with what you said. Odysseus is arguably one of the good leaders who treats his men much better than your average king. He was so careful with them at war that he lost no ships and he had people that govern them which means he suffered the bare minimum losses. He is told that he governed his people like a father would and his men had enough cheek with him to even openly deny his orders as it happens on multiple occasions in the Odyssey. He also stays back in battle till the perfect moment arrives so he and his army would suffer the bare minimum losses. During the events of the Odyssey he advised his men to leave Ismarus immediately which they deny. Odysseus instead of leaving them there and leave with his own ship to safety he stuck around and fought. He put himself in danger to save his men from Circe and even stayed there till his men were ready for return (both for himself and for them)
During Cyclops incident he had made sure the majority of his men were saved and placed somewhere safely. His own ship also placed at a safe location and only he and a handful of men went to explore. The exploration itself might seem unnecessary to a modern person but trust me it speaks great deal in antiquity. What is more he himself then went to Aeolus without risking anyone else and made the deals with Aeolus again for the best of his men. If he didn't want that he would have sailed on his own a long time prior
Yes he definitely withheld part of information from them such as Skylla incident because how exactly do you tell to people that 6 of them at least would perish and would have no choice? That would cause chaos to the ship. In my opinion there was no other way in that context. As for the sack of winds he never mentioned it but guarded it. It was a mistake but at the same time his men acted greedy and wanted to see what was in it and potentially claim it for themselves which was placed in the Odyssey as a warning against greed or potentially against mutiny. And people often speak on Eurylochus incident but honestly placed the way it was was presented almost like a mutiny and mutiny in ancient War contexts even now that is was punishable by death. Also the fact that Odysseus heard his companions and stopped speaks volumes to me when I read it
I think people see the part of Skylla for instance or the sack of winds and see it like Odysseus never spelled out anything to anyone which is not true in my opinion. For most part of the Odyssey he tells them step by step when time comes what needs to be done (see for instance the sirens) so yes I disagree with this take
Odysseus made countless mistakes or rather one big one which was his hubris that ended up to be the doom of his fleet and partially himself. That would be because in ancient texts it was also presented that the leader is responsible for everyone beneath him so anything bad the leader does reflects on his people. Which is why Polyphemus curses Odysseus by claiming that his men would perish. Not himself. Because he would have to live with the consequences that a hubris by a leader affects others not necessarily the leader himself.
As a warlord he also did most of parts himself which was also another reason why he suffered bare minimum losses at war and no ships. He started with 12 and he left with 12 which means he also leads with prudent mind and plans ahead for the future and made sure that most of his men would survive the war and have a mean of transport to leave.
So no as far as Odysseus leadership goes of course he has flaws like any other leader does but is far from making him this atrocious leader. In fact the fact that so many people still followed or waited for him says a lot on his leadership and how beloved he was to his people and even his men at war while others spread nasty rumors or speak badly about him.
First off, I did not and do not intend to get into an arguement with you over the reception of Odysseus over the different sources. (I am simply not a person who enjoys debating.) I do see how many tend to over correct on Odysseus, either favorably or unfavorably. Anything I mentioned was merely to point out he can be interpreted differently and it leads to his credence as a complicated character. Many of the instances I did not bring up because I never intended to argue on (Astynax, Calpyso and Cerce, etc...). (Also by "his father" I was refering to Nauplius, Palamedes father, not Laertes.) However, I have no intension of arguing the details of these events further other than, they can, in fact, be argued either way. Such is the nature of Odysseus, which is what makes him such a fascinating character. I personally do not wish to condemn or praise it and will leave it at that.
The nature of my post was and still is meant to demonstrate the value in retaining the unfavorable side of Odysseus' actions. I am aware that there are sections of the populace that can lead hard into focusing solely on his unfavorable reception. I very carefully tried to lean away from doing so and I post this on Tumblr because this is one of the sites that tends to lean much further favorable to Odysseus. All of these were made with intention so I still so not budge my stance of my post.
Lastly, I interprete Odysseus as a poor military leader becuase while I am educated on Classics and study this deeply, my highest education is in military strategy and diplomacy. (I am not a soldier just to clarify lol.) I do not see him as a good military leader. Perhaps this is my instance of holding characters to modern ideals, but I quite commonly evaluate the effectiveness of military and diplomatics strategies and Odysseus does not hold up to military ideals I have been taught or believe. On this we will have to merely agree to disagree with the acceptance on my part that I may have been influenced by modern ideals.
This has been a fascinating discussion, so I thank you.
The reason it is bad to remove the questionable fucked up things that Odysseus does is because it reflects the actual journeys people go through, especially in fucked up situations. Odysseus is put in a shitty situation and what does he do? He lies, he distrusts people, he is prideful and arrogant, he pisses off people, he makes hard decisions and has to live with them, and he does questionable shit. That's what people do. Real actual people. And guess what? His actions have consequences, ones that he has rightly earned. He learns. He adapts. He realizes who can trust, who he needs to appease, were he needs to be cautious, and when to shut up. He fucks up and learns. He learns to trust the people who love him, despite all his bad decisions and how long it took him to get there. He learns to take advice. And at the end of all of this he hasn't been redeemed of what he's done. His men are still dead. He is haunted by the past. But he gets to go home. Because people are not morally perfect. They make questionable desicions and have to try again and again through one crazy adventure after another. That's the point of a journey. To fuck up and learn and try again and eventually you get to find your home. Despite Odysseus' lies and questionable decisions, he gets to go home. That is why Odysseus being a prideful, questionable asshole is important.
I would say though that the opposite is also wrong. Like I would have been a millionaire every time someone says that "Odysseus lies" as if that is the only thing he does while arguably he is honest and sincere much more often than what he lies
Plus it sounds sometimes like all Odysseus does when he is in a tough situation is to lie but ironically it isn't. Sometimes he does when he has no choice. Other times he persuades and other times he fights back. His adaptability is not only based on deception or indirect ways but also on what you would expect your average hero to do.
It is good to support a hero's wrongs in the narrative but not by forgetting his rights.
Odysseus is definitely a figure that can do things that he has to when others don't. He is the one that is more likely to use words to resolve something while others wouldn't and yet he is also fighting first line. One must never forget he is the man that was a protagonist at the war not just in diplomacy but also in battle. He also took some of the riskiest missions such as taking the Palladium out of enemy territory. He was the one that got wounded while protecting Achilles's body. He is the one that left without protection to an unknown territory and went to save his men from a goddess-witch and the one that stood with two spears ready to face an immortal six headed dragon
Is good to always remember that he is capable of indirect ways but not by forgetting that this is not the only side of his or that it is even the primary side of his. Part is his complexity is exactly why he is a hero of myth in the first place; because he is not just one side.
I did not say he never did anything right or even ignoring why he does them. Yes, he is complicated and complex. This post is not denying that. I am arguing against modern tendencies to erase the bad things he does. This is my second post I made on modern audiences erasing the bad things Odysseus does and in that one I reiterated that Odysseus is an extremely complex character and that it is not a good thing to sanitize him. This posts specific purpose is meant to explain WHY his failings and questionable choices are important to the story. I do not feel the need to reiterate the good he does, because modern audiences already values those things and are well aware of the arguements for them. The compulsion, for lack of a better word at the moment, people have to explain the goodness in Odysseus' actions is exactly WHY I wrote this. I am not arguing that he is a horrible, evil character who does nothing good.
Although, many of the things you listed I would argue are not nearly as good natured as you argued. Yes he took on the dangerous mission to get the Palladium, however he also contemplated stabbing Diomedes in the back so that he would be able to take all the credit. He framed Palamedes for treason in the middle of the war for calling him out for trying to evade his oath and refused his greiving father, ultimately endangering all of the lords going home. I also would also argue that for all his grand acts, he is actually a rather poor leader and military commander. He has grand actions and gets himself a lot of glory but treats his men poorly, recklessly, and dismissively, often putting their lives in danger in favor of his curiousity and ambition and often leads them without communication or clarity. I'm not suprised they acted out so much. But all of that is because Odysseus is so complex. Most of the people on Tumblr already want to make him a saint, I don't need to argue that side. I am saying 'I know the audience wants to make everything he does good, but this is the other side of Odysseus and why it is important to not erase the questionable things he does.'
The reason it is bad to remove the questionable fucked up things that Odysseus does is because it reflects the actual journeys people go through, especially in fucked up situations. Odysseus is put in a shitty situation and what does he do? He lies, he distrusts people, he is prideful and arrogant, he pisses off people, he makes hard decisions and has to live with them. He does questionable shit. That's what people do. Real actual people. And guess what? His actions have consequences, ones that he has rightly earned. He learns. He adapts. He realizes who can trust, who he needs to appease, where he needs to be cautious, and when to shut up. He fucks up and learns. He learns to trust the people who love him, despite all his bad decisions and how long it took him to get there. He learns to take advice. And at the end of all of this he hasn't been redeemed of what he's done. His men are still dead. He is haunted by the past. But he gets to go home. Because people are not morally perfect. They make questionable desicions and have to try again and again through one crazy adventure after another. That's the point of a journey. To fuck up and learn and try again and eventually you get to find your home. Despite Odysseus' lies and questionable decisions, he gets to go home. That is why Odysseus being a prideful, questionable asshole is important.
I will never understand modern audiences' obsession with arguing Odysseus being morally upright according to modern standards.
(First off, this is Greek Mythology. Please stop trying to push modern morality onto it. These stories are thousands of years old and from a completely different culture than your own. The standards of what is right and wrong will be different. Arguing differently is delusional.)
But seriously, why Odysseus??? Odysseus is one of the single most complex characters in history and you want to sanitize him. The fact that he does so many questionable things is the entire point!
But also, there are easier characters if all you want is a fav that you can support. Orpheus just wanted his wife back. Orestes was born into a generational family curse and was damned no matter what he did. Perseus killed Medusa, but he mainly was just trying to save his mom and even saved a princess on the way. Hercules was essentially being tormented by his stepmom, went mad, and tried to redeem himself. Hell, I literally would have an easier time arguing in the favor of Achilles!
every march 15 in rome they restage the assassination at torre argentina. you know. the literal ruins of the curia of pompey. the exact place where it actually happened in 44 BCE.
and then they put his body on a litter and do a whole funeral procession through the city. with professional mourners and everything. they literally blocked traffic for this.
like imagine missing your bus because rome decided to re-kill julius caesar today.
note: i tried to show in the video how huge the crowd was because there were SO many people. also the last part of the video shows the roman forum, where caesar is actually buried. people still leave flowers there.
tangentwithtanner
janainaart
jbbartram-illu
discoholicmusic
pixelskylines
ellievsbear
kianamaiart
