Zack’s Comments (group member since May 25, 2012)

Zack’s comments from the Zack and Steve's Summer Reading Book Group-Thing group.

How are you liking Melville? I know you're going to have to put it down for Morrison, but I'm curious to know 1) if you've gotten a copy, 2) if it's the Norton Critical, 3) where you are in it, and 4) how you like it. Lots of questions!

We're not here yet, but I'm excited about getting to this book!

So tell me what you're thinking about Creeley. I'll admit that my opinion of him fell a little based on that Selected Poems, but I feel like it's probably just a bad selection. I distinctly remember the entirety of his book "The Whip" being phenomenal. He is definitely a unique voice and a minor major (as opposed to a major minor, if you catch my drift) American poet.

Here's where we'll discuss our feelings on Beloved as we read. What I know about Morrison before heading into this is that she's black, well-loved, and that the first paragraph of her book "Sula" is boring. That's literally it.

So, I got through the entirety of Fitzgerald's Illiad translation. My thoughts:

1. First off, Fitzgerald's translation is fantastic. I feel like I experienced the text as I was meant to. Any issues I have with the text are issues with HOMER, not with Fitzy, which is the way a good translation should work. Absolutely excellent work.

2. That said, I have some issues with Homer. How on earth did he decide to focus on THAT portion of the Trojan War? Why end his poem before the war's conclusion? I feel like I must be missing something because I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation for why The Illiad ends with the death of Hector and not the death of Achilles and the fall of Troy. It just seems silly. Likewise, the Judgement of Paris is suspiciously absent from the poem, except for a brief mention. All in all, it seems a very odd piece. Why not address the entire Trojan War? Why leave out so many integral parts of that war narrative and, instead, spend hundreds of pages describing brains being bashed in? I just don't understand Homer's selection process for what he considered worth and not worth inclusion in his poem. If I read a 600-page poem about the Trojan War, I feel like I shouldn't have to consult other sources to figure out major episodes in that war's narrative. If you only read the Illiad, you know practically nothing about the beginning OR end of the Trojan War. That's just weird to me.

3. Of course, it must be kept in mind that Homer kind of also invented the Trojan War, so he is allowed to not have the whole thing mapped out. Apparently recent and not-so-recent studies affirm the historicity of the war itself, but the mythological side (which comprises 80% of our knowledge of the proceedings) is obviously invention. So I suppose it's a bit unfair to criticize a blind guy for not memorizing and reciting another 2,000 lines of poetry to flesh out his story. Still, we could have done with less cataloging and more exposition in my opinion.