Well, after reading The Grandson of Perseus and A Hero Must Be Alone, it was finally time to reread the third book in Henry Lion Oldie‘s Achaean cycle, Odysseus, Son of Laertes. This book chronologically concludes the story of the Heroes, descendants of the Olympian gods, although it was written second, long before The Grandson of Perseus. And in my opinion, it differs significantly from the other two books in how the authors approached the narrative.
As much as I enjoy A Hero Must Be Alone, this book, both the first time I read it many years ago and now, turned out to be challenging to get through. Especially in the beginning, I found myself frequently pausing and then forcing myself to continue. For me, there were too many metaphors, too much emphasis on beautifully crafted language and unspoken meanings, to the point where I started losing track of the main plot. And the plot itself is quite fragmented here, constantly interspersed with flashbacks and memories from other times.
To understand certain things, you need to have a solid knowledge of both mythology and the story of Odysseus (outside of this book). Only then can you compare and grasp some of the nuances in the narrative. Otherwise, you’re left with even more questions. Some parts are direct references to A Hero Must Be Alone, not just to the myths about Heracles but specifically to their interpretation in the previous book of the cycle. Of course, as the book says, “answers are the killers of questions.” But it feels unsettling when you have more questions than understanding. I know many people love Oldie for these hidden meanings, but for me, this was more of a drawback.
Odysseus is primarily known for his role in the Trojan War and the long story of his return home from that war (ten years is no joke). However, we see almost nothing of that famous journey here. Instead, we are shown how the war began in the first place, why everyone became so fixated on Helen of Troy, and why the gods needed the war in the first place.
Read more
