The Coens' Critique

I think that most of us will agree that O Brother, Where Art Thou? was packed with very clever and well-thought out comedic moments as well as some good ole’ fashioned slapstick. All this on top of the Coen brothers’ intriguing and very unique re-staging of a classic hero’s journey made for a very enjoyable film experience. Furthermore, there seems to be a level of judgment and commentary from the Coen brothers regarding a question which has been very popular in our class: is Odysseus as great as everyone makes him out to be?

Any reader of the Odyssey knows that Odysseus is far from perfect. Strong, cunning, and handsome? Undeniably. But he is in equal measure prideful, unfaithful, and selfish. And any viewer of O Brother, Where Are Thou? could make similar observations about Ulysses Everett McGill: he’s suave and has a pretty rockin’ voice, but he’s a criminal, a conman, and the list goes on. I think the Coen brothers intentionally created Everett’s character with amplified versions of some of Odysseus’ flaws in an effort to inject their personal opinions about Odysseus into the film.

First off, what has been the general consensus as to Odysseus’ greatest flaw? Everyone say it with me: Pride. Odysseus screws up tons of stuff because he’s prideful, two main examples being the loss of much of his crew to Polyphemus and then his pissing off Poseidon by hurting the cyclops.  All this could easily have been avoided. And if you were to choose a single object to associate with Everett McGill? Dapper Dan. Everett is so vain that his first concern after his encounter with the sirens is the appearance of his hair.

But the Coen brothers don’t stop at vanity. Everett is also prideful in tons of ways in the film. When Pete and Delmar get baptized, Everett does not, calling himself a man of reason and science as opposed to his easily satisfied, simple-minded companions. In addition, despite declaring himself the leader of the trio and calling himself “the tactician” pretty early on, Big Dan lures Everett and Delmar to the picnic super easily. Everett doesn’t even retaliate when Big Dan whacks Delmar with a branch, but instead goes for a “What’s going on, Big Dan?” And finally, when Everett is about to hanged, he cries out to God for mercy and forgiveness, and expresses his desire for more time with his children… but then immediately retracts these sentiments when he’s safely floating on the lake, claiming he knew all along that the valley was being flooded, and that this was presumably his plan? I don’t think so.

We also discussed in class that a possible parallel to The Odyssey’s Aeolian winds incident was Everett basically ruining Pete’s life by convincing him to escape with only two weeks left on his sentence. Pete was so close, but was then driven so far away by someone else’s actions/motives. But in the film, it’s flipped from The Odyssey. The main character is the one who ruins it for his crew instead of the other way around. Finally, the plot of the film is fundamentally driven by the fact that Everett is a criminal, as opposed to Odysseus’ struggles tracing back to his heroism at war.

So, it seems that the Coen brothers agree with the majority of us – Odysseus isn’t as great as Homer makes him out to be. Their exemplification of the same flaws Odysseus has, along with more flaws to further undermine Everett’s initially heroic image suggest that the Coen brothers could be critiquing The Odyssey in their film instead of simply recreating it in a very different setting.

Loyalty in The Odyssey

Before the satisfying and somewhat shocking rendering of the suitors’ fates, there was quite a lot of dramatic and plot-driving build up in the form of Odysseus testing everybody’s loyalty. Despite numerous reports he had from seemingly trustworthy sources, Odysseus wanted to test every person’s loyalty. If this extensive and taxing corroboration doesn’t highlight the importance of loyalty to the Greek culture in which The Odyssey takes place, I don’t know what does. Except maybe all those other times we’ve seen loyalty as absolutely paramount.

Even starting with the Telemachiad, we saw how important loyalty is to these Greeks. Penelope’s cunning in weaving and unweaving her burial shroud is portrayed as one of her best qualities in Homer’s storytelling. And this cunning is just Penelope’s way of being loyal to Odysseus. On the other hand, Homer portrays the suitors not only as greedy, selfish, and disrespectful of the customs of hospitality, but also disloyal to their king*. This latter trait, we saw towards the end of the epic, was really the one which sealed their fates for them. 

Odysseus’ loyalty while away from home is also a very important point to consider, and a less straightforward one at that. While our class has pretty much condemned Odysseus’ personal defense regarding his sleeping around while he was away from Ithaca (i.e. that the women never won him over in his heart), it is nevertheless a fact that this is how Homer chose to write the story. Rather than leave the narrative at the face value of his physical disloyalty to Penelope, he did include that Odysseus claimed never to have been won over by the women in his heart. This inclusion could suggest that Homer still viewed Odysseus as loyal, or at any rate, more loyal than we think he is. So even if Odysseus’ stark loyalty isn’t what we’re meant to take away from his unfaithfulness while at sea, perhaps it is simply meant to bring the issue of loyalty to our attention.

The reunion scene between Argos and Odysseus is another poignant scene that drives home the emphasis on loyalty. This scene contains one of two times that I remember Odysseus crying (I could be forgetting something though…) and the other was his reunion with his son. The fact that the emotional connection Odysseus has with his dog Argos is almost on the level of connection he has with his own family speaks volumes. Homer goes into detail about how Odysseus trained Argos as a pup. Having built this bond at a young age, showing that each of them cares so much about the other, even 20 years later, shows that their loyalty to each other was not lost with all Odysseus’ time away from home.

Homer really, really seems to like his recurring themes, huh? How does this theme compare with the others people have posted about?

*I recognize the differentiation between the translated term “king” appearing in the Odyssey and our conventional English definition of the same, but this distinction doesn’t take away from the fact that Odysseus held a position of power and respect in Ithaca which should have commanded a certain level of respect from all these suitors. In violating this level of respect by courting Penelope improperly, they are being disloyal to Odysseus in my eyes.  

Because you asked about the line between heroism and the humdrum

Cultures change. Big-time. Of course, this isn’t new information to anybody, but the implications of such a commonplace fact could certainly be lost on an unobservant audience. However, we, the Uni High Hero’s Journey scholars are no such audience. In discussing George Saunders’ “Victory Lap,” we quickly identified that a clear act of heroism for Kyle was simply leaving his yard (well, for starters). This highlights the clear distinction of Kyle’s family as compared with a more typical American family; with such overprotective parents, violating tons of “directives” takes a lot of courage on Kyle’s part, whereas for other children raised differently it might be second nature to do as Kyle did. So we have no problem in saying that even in the same broad cultural context, heroism looks different for all.

So let’s expand the comparison. In The Odyssey, even though we technically haven’t gotten there yet, we all know that the main hero’s journey is Odysseus’ return home. Now, what about this journey makes it heroic? First of all, he was a hugely important hero in the Trojan War, so his homecoming should be a big deal. Second, he has to overcome all kinds of obstacles on his way home, many of which are supernatural beings pitted against him in the context of Greek mythology. Few would argue that Odysseus is a hero. But if someone nowadays were to do as Odysseus did, would it be heroic?

The short answer is “yes.” If anyone played as important a role in a war as Odysseus played in his, and faced obstacles comparable to those which Odysseus faced, the public would be hard-pressed to not consider that person a hero. But a less extreme version of this return home wouldn’t be treated in the same way then and now. Like I said, cultures change. With little knowledge of the culture at the time, I still think it's safe to assume that any person returning from a cross-ocean voyage would be welcomed home with joy and celebrations and praise to the gods. That is in stark contrast to present, with multitudes crossing oceans safely every day and resuming their normal lives with little to no fuss over their safe return. Naturally, their loved ones are still thrilled to see them safely at home, but nonetheless do not view them as any kind of hero for having kept safe on the flight home. The reason for this change is obvious: the differing states of technological advancement in the two cultures.

Societal development has killed the heroism of previously heroic acts. There is something intrinsically brave and daring in crossing the violent and untamed ocean on a floating construction of wood, and something intrinsically not brave and daring in being carried over an ocean at hundreds of miles per hour. By taking so many of the unpredictable factors out of the equation (or at least vastly reducing the time they have to screw things up), modern technology has taken the need for bravery and heroism out of tons of activities.

But on the other hand, modern technology has created a new kind of heroism. Significant advancements in any field of science are now awarded with honors and praise – they are heroic achievements. Technology has taken advanced scientific principles out of the realm of the supernatural, as they were for ancient cultures, and now hails them as important and heroic advances for the general good. So, because you asked about the line between heroism and the humdrum (shout-out to Majerus’ poetry class XD), the determining factor seems to be technology. (Which seems to be the answer to a lot of questions about why our culture is how it is, does it not?)