Why is the Odyssey leaps and bounds better than the Iliad?

Why is the Odyssey leaps and bounds better than the Iliad?

I thought the exact opposite.
Read the iliad in a week, then the odyssey and I was very disappointed with the odyssey, it just didn't do it for me.

Odysseus > Achilles. Simple as that.

Because while the Illiad focuses on philosophy and existentialism, The Odyssey focuses on beauty of life and adventure.

The Odyssey is also not plagued by a large myriad of characters and gods involved in the plot, it is focused on one main character and his plights. And in turn you become more invested and situated in what happens next.

It isn't you fucking brainlet.

/thread

This is so far the only reasoned thing in this thread, and for lack of other arguments, it is the current winner. As of this point, The Odyssey IS better.

This is the plebs opinion, The Odyssey is an improvement on every aspect the Illiad lacked.

They're both integral Hellenistic epics. Everyone go home.

I for one didn't enjoy Odysseus playing undercover boss for the majority of the text. I would have enjoyed it more if it focused on his actual journey for more than the three chapters it took him to tell it.

This is given, now they must fight.

>the Illiad focuses on philosophy and existentialism
what the HELL
it's just a chronicle of dudes mobilizing for and fighting a war lmao

>This is the plebs opinion, The Odyssey is an improvement on every aspect the Illiad lacked.

That's like for only a couple of books, when he gets back home. The rest of the story is him on boats and adventuring.

start with the greeks, my dude.

I did start with the greeks, hence why I'm confident in this opinion. I read the Illiad, there was no fucking philosophy or existentialism. it's just Achilles reeeing, kings being assholes, the gods being smug and a lot of "the night descended over his eyes"

Not even. Books 15 to 24 are all about Odysseus killing the suitors. 9-13 being his quest. The rest being miscellaneous travels and Telemachus' pointless journey

REstart with the Greeks, then.

More adventure than disguises in The Odyssey even still.

>There was no existentialism
Meanwhile, Thetis:
>O my son, my sorrow, why did I ever bear you?
>All I ever bore was doom...

You have to read between the lines, fucking moron.

I prefer the Odyssey too, for the same reasons, but can we really dismiss the Iliad if we haven't suffered the horrors of war? Seems unfair.

Unfair in what ways, could you elaborate? I am curious to hear your thoughts on this intriguing angle of approach.

What are good translations/publications of the two epics? I have the Dover Thrift copies of both.

it's ulysses, retards

no. YOU point the relevant passages

how is this related to existentialism? it's just a reference to her guilt for fucking over the Peleus clan. is guilt exclusively an existentialist subject? get a grip, pal

there is no "between the lines" you utter fagtron. the poem was made to be recited at feasts and shit to entertain, nothing more. on top of that, all we have is translations of whatever the byzantines managed to salvage from centuries-old manuscripts, so we don't even have the whole coherent thing.

What about when Achilleus said, "You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villian."

I liked it better when Antilochus said "They expect one of us in the wreckage, brother"

Fitzgerald translations. Fagles is for high-school kids and I don't know about Lattimore, but I know he's not Fitzgerald.

They're companion pieces, neither is really complete without the other. But the Odyssey has more fantasy and is "lighter," despite the ordeal of Odysseus, so it makes our inner child happier.

Fitzgerald is what would happen if the bad parts of Fagles and the bad parts of Lattimore got together and had a retard baby.

t. guy with terrible reading comprehension, can't understand poetry

They're both just the classical equivalents of shallow superhero comics.