Epic heroes

I'll start with Achilles v Odysseus, because it's an obvious dichotomy: the star of the Iliad v the star of the Odyssey, Homer's two central heroes (I didn't say Homer's two greatest heroes, because the loser Hector makes a strong case for being the noblest of them all; but Achilles and Odysseus are more straightforward to evaluate, as Homer's two central Greeks). If this was Mortal Kombat, obviously Achilles wins, with his divine endurance, quickness, strength, armor, etc. But this isn't Mortal Kombat; we're wondering who's the better hero. Plato discusses this very dichotomy in Hippias Minor, in which Hippias casts Achilles as brave and straight-shooting while Odysseus is wily and false. That's a very Gryffindor v Slytherin way of seeing things, and I don't see it that way at all. Both of these heroes are Gryffindors. They're brave, strong, and true, or at least as true as the ancient pillagers get. To me, the answer is actually obvious, in an intuitive way: while Achilles is the greater warrior, he's possessed by rage; Odysseus on the other hand knows love and wisdom, and throughout his story he shows up as a consummate leader. Achilles just keeps raging and fighting, Odysseus sees the world and suffers all it has to offer, emerging on the other side victorious and loyal and humble and just - and by the way he won the war for Achilles using his intelligence. I don't like hearing Odysseus associated primarily with words like "wily" and "crafty" and "cunning." Let's respect Homer on this: Odysseus is "godlike", "resourceful", "noble", "thoughtful", "great-hearted"... and yes, I'm sure Homer calls him crafty too at some point, but that certainly isn't the predominant adjective like it is in other scholarship on Odysseus. Odysseus isn't defined by wiliness, he's defined by being a great all-around hero who also happens to be more strategic than the rest. He's remembered too much for his Trojan horse; before that ever happened -- indeed, in the entire Iliad -- he's a great and loyal warrior, very wise, who (if I remember right) doesn't even engage in much deception. He's just a model Greek. I hear that Virgil really leans into Odysseus as deceiver; I don't remember that from the Aeneid, probably because I knew Sean Bean played Odysseus, so I had no interest in trusting Virgil's characterization; and I was right to doubt, because supposedly the Romans were too narrow-minded about such things. As they say, all's fair in love and war, and I don't condemn Odysseus for the deception of the Trojan horse, nor for the trick of "Nobody", nor any other strategic victory. He's fighting for his life, for the lives of his comrades, and for his nation, and I don't recall any of his stratagems ever preying on innocents. So let's move away from the slithery Slytherin adjectives ("cunning" etc) for Odysseus, and recognize him as a model Greek Gryffindor, if there was such a one in Homer. He's Homer's "many of many turns", and he's a more well-rounded hero than Achilles. If physicality is your only metric, Achilles is your man; but Odysseus is the better man.

What's more interesting is Ned Stark v Odysseus. While Odysseus gloats over Polyphemos and the suitors, Ned never has a moment of unchecked pride - he's always right in the golden zone where humility and love coexist. While Odysseus murders a bunch of people outside the scope of war - including some housemaids - Ned only kills to disseminate an understanding of justice, or to protect the realm. Ned's sense of justice is incredibly refined relative to Homer's - indeed he comes centuries later. So Ned is certainly the nobler and more virtuous heart, and the more sophisticated mind. Odysseus is a brilliant tactician, but he can't see beyond his immediate mission (win the war, then get everyone home), unless it's to keep the gods happy; I'm sure Ned, even when at war, couldn't help but feel haunted by his values, and those values were intrinsic, not god-flattering. Ned is obviously the moral man here, with an abstract system of ethics, while Odysseus applies his mind to literal matters. That's the advantage of centuries of civilization that Odysseus didn't get to see. Actually, the more I think about this, the less I'm sure why I called this debate so interesting in the first place; I came up with it weeks ago, but it seems so obvious now: Ned is the nobler man. Perhaps, though, I saw something cold and pious and frail about Ned. Perhaps I admired Odysseus' strength, and assertive action, and glory. Ned is so grim and unsatisfying and humble; he's such a hard case; you can never be better than him, nor will he ever be happy with himself. Perhaps I enjoyed Odysseus' warmth, like the sun shining over the story: we're basking in Odysseus' exaggerated greatness. Ned is much more reserved. I bet there's something else I'm missing that originally caused me to set up this debate... but suffice it to say that Ned is the nobler man, while Odysseus is more glorious.