This volume is A.’s follow-up to her 2000 book on para-narratives in the Iliad. A. calls ‘para-narratives’ those stories which suspend the ‘main narrative action’ of the Odyssey (p. 1) or, as she puts it in her earlier book, a narrative that is ‘alongside’ the main narrative. Rather than probing theoretical concerns about the nature of narrative or seeking to make assertions about the nature of Homeric composition, this endeavour is largely dedicated to providing a typological catalogue of the subsidiary narratives that make up an impressive part of the Odyssey. After an introduction, which provides an overview of different types of para-narratives, A. organises the discussion into chapters on ‘Para-Narratives of Return’, the repeated narrations of the Odyssey and stories around and by Penelope, Telemachus and Odysseus (three chapters), with a final three chapters on the songs of Demodocus, the Cyclops episode and first-person narratives.
As a former book review editor, I ushered through one review of this book already (A. Loney, CJ 2018.08.05), and during the process I struggled to characterise the book in a satisfactory manner. It is not a monograph: it does not provide an argument or attempt to persuade its readers of something about Homer or the Homeric Odyssey. Instead, it functions as an argument in meticulously recording and discussing the many different ways in which the Odyssey uses narratives which appear not to be central to the plot. Because of my initial uncertainty, I delayed writing this review until after I had used the book on several occasions in research and writing on the Odyssey. As a research tool, it is superior to most commentaries: it is concise; it provides a deep bibliography with minimal editorialising; and it is fairly exhaustive in its isolation and discussion of narratives in the poem. The sections on the Oresteia and the Cyclops, especially, will be essential starting points for future scholarship on the Odyssey’s use of this material.
On the first page A. makes a crucial point, namely that the stories presented within the Odyssey take various shapes and ‘may be understood differently by different audiences and not all members of the poet's audience will interpret them in the same way’ (p. 1). Such an assertion should function as well to anticipate scholarly reception of A.’s efforts to explain how these stories relate to their immediate context. The simplicity of some explanations and the absence of an overall sense of how Homeric composition relates to stories that come from non-Odyssey traditions will frustrate some readers.
My initial dissatisfaction is with the terminology ‘para-narrative’. The conceptualisation of the stories inset within the Odyssey as existing in some way ‘alongside’ or parallel to the ‘main story’ posits a hierarchical relationship that may distort how this particular Odyssey came to be. This also runs the risk of leaving the impression that these stories are ornamentation or additions to an essential and hitherto unrecognised narrative core (thus verging closely on presuppositions of the old Analysts). In both cases we may find ourselves a bit misled. In the first, can we imagine any Odyssey of worth without what others have called ‘digressions’? For the second, how can we trust that we know what the ‘core’ narrative is when this particular Odyssey probably developed over countless retellings with the input of multiple audiences and performers over generations?
This is not to say, of course, that A. is neither asking nor answering important questions. On the contrary, my quibble is with the implicit metaphor she uses to conceptualise epic poetry. Her questions circle one of the most important issues of Homeric scholarship – i.e. the relationship between these particular poems and their ‘traditions’. A para-narrative implies something added, appended, merely there or in some way not integral. I am nearly certain that A. does not mean this, but the result is to frame the relationship in a particularly rigid way. Another metaphor that I find useful is that of DNA – these stories represent combinations and recombinations of essential types of narratives. By observing their individual morphologies and the expression of certain traits in certain environments, we can come to appreciate more deeply the features of the poem as a whole.
A. does treat some of these issues in a slightly disjointed way in the introduction, but from the first chapter onwards, the collection of detail might have benefited from a more unified approach or a commitment to a particular way of reading. Nevertheless, the first chapter's overview of nostos variations is a testament to what the book does best: it digests and rearranges the material of the epic and provides extensive references to prior scholarship. As a result of the atomistic treatment of the theme of return, the organisation is again at times distracting; some sections are sharper and more effective than others. For example, Chapter 3 presents the most extensive collection of references to the story of Orestes currently available in print and, by tracking the use of the narrative over the course of the epic, presents nice close readings of how the meaning of the story changes depending on different speakers and audiences. While A. moves sensibly between observations of narrative detail and lexical signals, she does not offer summative comments to explain what the deep and changing engagement between the narrative traditions might mean.
The chapter on Penelope (4) is at times strong, especially in discussion of prior scholarship, and at times confusing: she starts with sections on women in the text who might provide parallels for Penelope (e.g. Megara and Epicaste, p. 106). These parallels are offered with rather limited discussion and with an insufficient exploration of how a different narrator (here, Odysseus) may operate in comparison to the ‘Homeric’ narrator. Discussions of Penelope's actions in the text and her speeches of dreams etc. will prove indispensable for readers either just beginning to try to figure out the epic's presentation of Penelope or those who have long been part of the debate. As in earlier chapters, one would wish for more of a final argument or assertion about what the marshalling of data might mean.
Subsequent chapters are a mixed bag. The Telemachus chapter is split into slightly odd units with distracting titles (e.g. 4.2: ‘Is This Credible?’), and the chapter on Odysseus seems underwhelming when compared to the insights of earlier chapters. Chapter 7's readings of the Songs of Demodocus provide a pointed and much needed re-evaluation of the group closing with a really strong segment on why Odysseus weeps. This chapter, too, suffers from a lack of engagement with broader issues. A. does a fine job of laying out thematic anticipations for the Cyclops narrative at the beginning of Chapter 8 and presents a discussion of each element of Odysseus’ Apologoi in sequence. This outline includes as well a discussion of Odysseus as a Cyclops himself (pp. 246–53). This is one of the most effective parts of the book, and I am certain to return to it again and again.
The final chapter, ‘The First Person’, provides a discussion of the tales that Odysseus tells to others, including together his lying tales before and after he returns home. This collocation itself is an important contribution (since the ‘Cretan’ tales after Book 13 are usually treated as an independent group). The book ends with a selection of tables on narrative patterns and an extensive bibliography but no conclusion. There is also a very useful index locorum. In between various chapters A. quotes from some of Michael Longley's poems about the Odyssey (‘Homecoming’, ‘Tree House’, ‘Argos’ and ‘Laertes’). Their engagement with the book's content is rather incidental.
Even as I write this review, I find myself hard-pressed to explain in full how much this book is both a gift and a challenge. A. has masterfully collected the stories told within the Odyssey and supplemented them with extensive and pertinent scholarly references. But each chapter ends without a conclusion, and the book itself makes very few clear assertions about what these intricate patterns mean. It is almost as if A. has marshalled the core material for the articles and books of others. And yet, this text will certainly remain on my shelf as one I use nearly every time I write about the Odyssey. In a way, its bewitching, complex frustration is an echo of the epic's own character.
