La 'Ilíada' o el poema de la fuerza

by Simone Weil, María Tabuyo (Translator), Carlos Ortega (Translator)

Simone Weil est née à Paris en 1909 et meurt à Ashford, où elle a rejoint les services de la France Libre, en 1943. Figure sans équivalent dans la pensée française, elle a laissé une œuvre où à un engagement radical du côté du monde ouvrier (elle travaillera en usine en 1934-1935, participera à différentes publications dont La Critique sociale de Souvarine) se mêle une réflexion mystique tout aussi radicale. Ses Œuvres complètes sont en cours de publication aux Éditions Gallimard.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Essays, Classics, Poetry, Literary Criticism, Criticism

76 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1940

About the author

Simone Weil was a French philosopher, Christian mystic, and social activist. Weil was born in Paris to Alsatian agnostic Jewish parents who fled the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine to Germany. Her brilliance, ascetic lifestyle, introversion, and eccentricity limited her ability to mix with others, but not to teach and participate in political movements of her time. She wrote extensively with both insight and breadth about political movements of which she was a part and later about spiritual mysticism. Weil biographer Gabriella Fiori writes that Weil was "a moral genius in the orbit of ethics, a genius of immense revolutionary range".

Reviews

[Hadrian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Force is as pitiless to the man who possesses it, or thinks he does, as it is to its victims; the second it crushes, the first it intoxicates. The truth is, nobody really possesses it.

[leynes · Rating 3 out of 5]

I feel like I'm too stupid to properly get what Weil was communicating? I didn't get everything she was saying but here are some things I wanna look into after having read her essay:

– the dehumanising effect force has on the people who wield it and those who are subjected to it
– "there are no winners" when it comes to war
– the idea of "karma" in the poem (victors become vanquished)
– the concept of "mercy" in the poem (in reference to Book 24 and Achilles giving Priam Hector's body)
– the Greeks and the Trojans being equally innocent (not sure if I agree with that take, the question of Free Will and how much is determined by the Gods and Fate comes into play here as well; in my book, the Greeks are the aggressors)
– the relation between fate and chance
– the indifference (!) of those wielding force towards those they subject to it (in reference to how Achilles treats Hector's body with no respect after he slaughtered him)
– the futility of struggle (as the movie puts it: "You'd let Troy burn for that woman?" And for what? At the end of the day, Troy perishes but so will the Greek empire one day)
– Homer's honest portrayal of force (brutality/violence/etc.); not sugar-coating it but also not glorifying it, just telling it how it is

"The true hero, the true subject, the centre of the Iliad, is force. Force employed by man, force that enslaves man, force before which man's flesh shrinks away. In this work, at all times, the human spirit is shown as modified by its relations with force, as swept away, blinded, by the very force it imagined it could handle, as deformed by the weight of the force it submits to."

I definitely appreciate the essay for determining the core of the Iliad: force. Force is that which turns anyone subjected to it into a thing. Force is dangerous not just to the victim, but to whoever controls it, as it intoxicates, partly by numbing the senses of reason and pity. Force thus can turn even its possessor into a thing – an unthinking automaton driven by rage or lust, senselessly hacking away at one's "enemies".

The essay relates how the Iliad suggests that no one truly controls force; as everyone in the poem, even the mighty Achilles and Agamemnon, suffer at least briefly when the force of events turns against them. Weil says only by using force in moderation can one escape its ill effects, but that the restraint to do this is very rarely found, and is only a means of temporary escape from force's inevitable heft.

Simone Petrement, a friend of Weil, wrote that the essay showed a new light in which the Iliad could be viewed. Whereas previously the Iliad had often been regarded as a stirring tale of heroic deeds, after the essay it could be seen as an accurate and compassionate depiction of how both victors and victims are harmed by the use of force.

Simone Weil's essay is regarded as one of the most iconic and important ones on Homer's Iliad, which is why I picked it up. I don't regret doing so because it's a rather short read and raises many great points but I'm not sure if I get all the "hype".

[Tom · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you want to preserve romantic notions of The Iliad as work exalting Homeric-sized heroes, do not read Weil's book. In a nutshell, Weil argues that the "force" of war turns combatants into "stone." And she backs up that claim, to devastating effect, with a detailed and compelling close reading of The Iliad itself, focusing on patterns of figurative language presenting Achilles, Ajax, et al as everything but human. And though it is very much an "academic" book, Weil writes (at least in this translation)gracefully, even poetically at times.

Having read multiple versions of The Iliad at different stages of my life, starting with abridged prose editions as a schoolboy, on up through translations by Chapman, Lattimore, Fagles, and Logue (well, Logue's is an "account," not a full translation), I've experienced a variety of reactions, from the naively romantic to the wearily cynical, but throughout I've always maintained a degree of worship for the grand "Homeric hymn" to figures who, to quote Shakespeare, "doth bestride the narrow world like a colossus." Weil makes it damn near impossible to maintain that view after reading her insightful analysis. Though I still my miss my romantic views of the poem (and indulge nostalgic return trips now and then when rereading favorite passages, such as Achilles' horse weeping for Patroclus), I'm grateful to Weil for having opened my eyes to the true meaning of this work. Theodore Adorno once said that "to write poetry after Auschwitz is a barbarism." I wouldn't quite accuse Homer of the ancient equivalent of that literary sin, but Weil's work has made me question the true legacy of this classic epic: "Whatever is not war, whatever war destroys or threatens, the Iliad wraps in poetry, the realities of war, never."

As an added bonus, this particular edition is bi-lingual, including the French, and has a very fine accompanying critical commentary by Holoska.

[Lucy Barnhouse · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a stunning work: lucid, passionate, and provocative. One can hold aloof from Weil's concluding generalizations about culture and literary greatness (though I do agree that the Iliad is a miracle) and still be deeply engaged by her insightful and impassioned interpretation of the poem. I read it first in English, and then in French, and discovered that it loses a great deal in translation... at least in the old Pendle Hill translation I read; perhaps the new NYRB edition is better. Still: it makes a beautiful argument for the Iliad's famous balance of compassion, and a compelling one that it portrays the use of force as an inevitably warping influence on both parties in the relationship. It's particularly moving, of course, because of the context Weil wrote it in, in which abuses of power, and indifference to those abuses, were both all too apparent, a deadening influence on the soul and on society.

[Orestis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Σε αυτο το δοκίμιο η Weil παρατηρεί οτι η Ιλιάδα, είναι πάνω απ'όλα ένα ποίημα για την βία. Ουτε ο Αχιλλέας, ούτε οι θεοί, ούτε κανένας χαρακτήρας δεν υπάρχει σε τέτοια διάσταση σε ολόκληρο το κείμενο. Υπάρχει παντού στο έπος με τον Ομηρο αλλοτε να την εξυμνεί για την πυγμή της και άλλοτε να την αντιμετωπίζει με θλίψη για τα δεινά που προκαλεί. Νοιώθουμε πραγματικά πως ο Ομηρος δεν μπορεί να λάβει μια σαφής στάση απέναντι της.

[Tyrone_Slothrop (ex-MB) · Rating 4 out of 5]

In principio era la forza

In questo breve e compatto saggio, la Weil argomenta in modo molto convincente come il concetto di forza, di supremazia fisica sia il centro dell'Iliade - forza come elemento ampio che soggioga sia il vinto (rendendolo una cosa) che il vincitore (allontanandolo dall'umanità) e il cui potere è quindi quello di trasformare gli uomini in oggetti. In altre parole, il fatto ineluttabile che l'anima umana è subordinata alla materia e al destino.
Strettamente collegato è il concetto dell'abuso della forza (la hybris) di cui gli uomini si macchiano quando tentano di superare i limiti imposti dagli dei: così Ettore soccombe perchè non si è riparato a Troia, così Achille deve morire per gli eccessi della sua ira funesta, così Achei e Troiani sono condannati ad una guerra orribile, accomunati nella miseria di un destino che il vuole carnefici e vittime al tempo stesso (mai come nell'Iliade un massacratore diviene velocemente un massacrato).

La Weil, invece, è meno convincente dove tenta di stabilire una connessione tra questo spirito greco della miseria umana davanti alla Forza con lo spirito evangelico, soprattutto nel passo dove stigmatizza Romani e Ebrei come sottratti alla comune miseria umana (qui si sente l'effetto della volontà apologetica cristiana dell'autrice).

In ogni caso, lettura necessaria e fondamentale per comprendere l'unicità del capolavoro omerico.

[Steven R. Kraaijeveld · Rating 4 out of 5]

"In any case, this poem is a miracle. Its bitterness is the only justifiable bitterness, for it springs from the subjections of the human spirit to force, that is, in the last analysis, to matter. This subjection is the common lot, although each spirit will bear it differently, in proportion to its own virtue. NO one in the Iliad is spared by it, as no one on Earth is. NO one who succumbs to it is by virtue of this fact regarded with contempt. Whoever, within his own soul and in human relations, escapes the dominion of force is loved but loved sorrowfully because of the threat of destruction that constantly hangs over him."

[Valéria · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great analysis of power, not as something that the individual human being is capable of utilizing for his own advantage, but rather as a force beyond human manipulation, an entity whose fate is blind to man, a potency that crushes both what we percieve to be the weak and the strong.

[Michael Perkins · Rating 5 out of 5]

link...

http://biblio3.url.edu.gt/SinParedes/...

[Viktor · Rating 3 out of 5]

moi j’ADORE les livres avec préface plus longue que l’essai même :D

[Peter Hyllested · Rating 4 out of 5]

Came across Simone Weil in a podcast the other day, and her ideas and philosophy resonated a lot with me. Borrowed the only book the library had by her - albeit in a Danish translation, a language in which I’m—shame to admit—woefully unversed. Nevertheless, it did not disappoint and complemented my reading of the Odyssey beautifully, as it was essentially an analytical meditation on Homer’s Iliad. I definitely need to get my hands on more of her works.

[Davide Emanuele · Rating 5 out of 5]

Phamplet da leggere assolutamente.
La Weil ci dice che sulla terra siamo tutti miseri uomini, in guerra siamo tutti misere cose.

[Isabelle · Rating 5 out of 5]

a masterpiece, a miracle

[Chiara]

based

[Hinch]

Really beautiful essay. One day I’ll read the actual Iliad in full.. I promise..

[Kenny · Rating 4 out of 5]

This volume provides an excellent foreword, translation, and commentary on Weil's justly-celebrated essay 'The Illiad, Or the Poem of Force'. As someone working on Weil's works in an academic capacity, it always surprises me how, in this work, Weil reconciles both her ardent humanism (her unbearable suffering on behalf of the afflicted) with her bizarre antihumanism, inherited directly from Spinoza (on this see her journals). The content of this antihumanism is best summarised when she comments that the only force operative in the universe is force itself. It is not wielded by us; we, our bodies and minds, are its dire armaments.

It was disappointing for me to see that the commentary included little critical appraisal of Weil's views, although the editor's specialisation is clearly in classics and not in philosophy which might explain this. There is certainly quite a bit that Weil gets wrong. If we cannot control force, why not give up? What grounds for hope are there in a better future? Yet Weil does distinguish a fleeting glimmer of hope in the possibility of the birth of saint-like figures, like Patroclus in the Iliad, but also Jesus of Nazareth. The hope here, placing Weil in the company of the post-1968 French political theorists, is that of the roll of the dice: it is the hope of chance, or of the aleatory.

It also stuck out to me that the 'great' authors whom Weil names, and who for her have succeeded in maintaining the spirit of Attic tragedy are all white men: Villon, Shakespeare, Cervantes, Moliere, and Racine. This issue is complicated when we look at her later The Need for Roots, where she describes the need to exagarate education in schools of the 'greats'. It would be wrong to hold Weil to account for not having anticipated insights which only arose 40-50 years after her death, but Linda Nochlin's 'Why are there no great woman artists?' seems a relevant piece of literature to consider when reading Weil's comments. I believe the problem Weil is describing is not with the abandonment of the truly great authors (i.e. those who follow Homer), but with the idea of artistic greatness itself.

[Karl Hallbjörnsson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reading these essays at the same time as I've begun reading the Iliad. Extremely well written. Weil is a brilliant writer, Bespaloff as well. It's a shame they both died so young.

[Victoria Foote-Blackman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Perfectly ordered in its overall aims, though a bit sloppy in the details, this remarkable essay by Simone Weil essentially pronounces--with many compelling arguments--Homer's "The Illiad" as the greatest western epic of all time to denounce the horror of war. She does not call it 'war,' focusing instead on its more profound entity, that of "force." Though she alludes to the forces of nature as well, her interest here is in the use of force between men, and here most especially in times of war. In her 74-page essay, quoting widely from The Illiad, she cites the numerous examples of battle, death, and the nature of humans when confronted with the chance to spare lives, punish, and terrorize. Probably intentionally, she all but leaves out the names of the characters who are speaking, though within the context of the dialogues we do hear the names crop up of Achilles, Priam, Hector and Agamemnon. This is surely to indicate that 'who' the characters are ( whether Greek or Trojan) little matters, in who the speaker is exactly who refuses to spare the life of his enemy.

As she points out Homer waxes poetic in the few references to places where peace still exists, but pulls no punches when describing the physical wounding and method of dying of the vanquished. Weil focuses also on the continuous back and forth on which forces are in power, at one moment the Greeks, at other the Trojans, in a continual see-saw of temporary wins and incomparable losses.

What sets apart The Iliad from all other epics before or since, for Weil is the tone of voice. Neither Trojans nor Greeks are held up as heroes; in fact there are no heroic beings, the only hero being Force. There is no triumph in this endless push-pull of murderous energy, just death and dying, pleas and enmity. Though she provides brief examples of love within families and between spouses, there is only once exception to the lack of nobleness and reasoning that might raise man above himself and his condition. And about this state of affairs, gruelingly depicted, Homer shows his great sorrow and bitterness, and a vast pity for the idiocy of men on both sides. As Weil explains, the attacker and the attacked--both victims of their blood lust and false pride--are of course being manhandled by the ever capricious and mean-spirited Gods. Today we would call those Gods our inherited reptilian mind, and Darwinian survival run amok.

Weil concludes that The Illiad has no equal. The Odyssey, also by Homer, is a pale imitation, in her eyes. The Aeneid she calls "brilliant, cold, and judgemental." She berates Roman and Hebrew writing as too much in the service of self-importance, unable to address the suffering of man.

In Weil's opinion, only Athenian tragedy operates on the same register as the Illiad, and there is nothing more like it until the New Testament, with the appearance of Jesus Christ and his message of love and forgiveness, empathy for all mankind, and redemption through grace. Yet as she points out, the meaning of Christ's self-sacrifice is lost historically in the centuries of the Christian church's forced and violent conversions. Leap forward a number of centuries and Weil similarly dismisses the French Medieval chansons de geste for doing the usual: taking sides.

As to later writing, there is a sprinkling that addresses the destructive power of force, and the anguish of mankind, but the suffering allowed for tends to be in romantic contexts rather than political!

To conclude it is fair to say, in our modern words, that for Weil "The Illiad" is the greatest anti-war masterpiece ever written, the first and the last of its kind.

[Claudia]

bellissimo

[Ian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantástico, sagaz y profundo - de los mejores textos que he podido leer

[Brian · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am in the middle of reading The Iliad itself (Cowper's translation), but I dived into reading this because I love Simone Weil's writings and wanted some "live commentary" of a sort on what is kind of a boring book (boring, probably, because of the translation I chose to read). Weil's little book is essentially a book review of the Iliad, but it is one that deserves its own place in the literary canon, so beautifully is it written. She wrote it during WWII, when the use of force was terrifying the world, again. It is hard not to think of Fascists and Nazis (particularly the ones carrying out the murder of Jews, including women and children) when Weil describes how the perpetrator of violence is no longer a person, but a thing, no more human than the weapon he wields: "the conquering soldier is like a scourge of nature. Possessed by war, he, like the slave, becomes a thing, though his manner of doing so is different - over him too, words are as powerless as over matter itself. And both, at the touch of force, experience its inevitable effects: they become dead and dumb". We must examine force and reject it in the realization of what it does to our souls: "only he who has measured the domination of force, and knows how not to respect it, is capable of love and justice". See it for what it is, and *not* to respect it, she says. The Iliad helps us to see it for what it is, helps us to be like Patroclus, "who 'knew how to be sweet to everybody,' and who throughout the Iliad commits no cruel or brutal act". Patroclus respects life, not "force", unlike the other warriors in Homer's epic poem, who commit brutal acts described in gory, Hollywood-style detail. But where some readers see in the Iliad only the glorification of violence - a celebration of force from a primitive time in Western history - Weil sees a purposefully clean distinction between Homer's depictions of warriors at battle versus those same warriors as fathers, husbands and sons, at home in peace with their wives, children and parents, or grieved by them in death. Of this distinction, Weil says "Whatever is not war, whatever war destroys or threatens, the Iliad wraps in poetry; the realities of war, never." The Iliad is indeed full of such happy moments, among my favorites is when Hector, in full war regalia, reaches to pick up his baby son, who then screams and cowers back into his nurse's arms. Hector and his wife laugh, and he takes off his plumed helmet and tries again, this time kissing him and playing "coochy-coo". After this he prays to the Gods to let his son become a great warrior like him! For the most part, The Iliad is not easy reading, but Weil's review is encouraging me to finish it. Her concluding opinion of the Iliad as a whole is a little surprising and would by itself serve nicely as a book-jacket endorsement for Homer's epic poem: "...nothing the peoples of Europe have produced is worth the first known poem that appears among them. Perhaps they will yet rediscover the epic genius, when they learn that there is no refuge from fate, learn not to admire force, not to hate the enemy, nor to scorn the unfortunate".

[Amelia Orr · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a great critical interpretation of The Iliad, but more significantly it is a fantastic condensed presentation of Weil’s philosophy as a whole. I would absolutely recommend this as a primer for her longer and more complex works and as a great follow up and insight for those who have read more from her. The application of her ideas on spiritual gravity and the possibilities of grace to a more familiar and tangible piece of writing provide a strong access point into her broader and more abstract thought.

[Al Maki · Rating 5 out of 5]

For me, Weil's essay is deeply moving and has what I can only call a moral urgency.

[ιφιγένεια παπούλη · Rating 5 out of 5]

«η ψυχή υποφέρει από τη βία καθημερινά. κάθε πρωινό η ψυχή ακρωτηριάζει τις φιλοδοξίες της, γιατί η σκέψη αδυνατεί να ταξιδέψει στο χρόνο χωρίς στη διαδρομή να σκοντάψει στην ιδέα του θανάτου.»

[Vite da Lettore]

Il 24 agosto 1943, in un sanatorio inglese muore una donna di trentaquattro anni, una moderna Antigone il cui pensiero è irriducibile ad un’esistenza compiutasi tanto brevemente. L’interesse di Simone Adolphine Weil per la letteratura greca risale alla sua giovinezza, ma è solo dopo la sua prima esperienza mistica nel novembre del 1938 che inizia a guardare l’antichità alla luce del cristianesimo. Fuggita a Marsiglia con i suoi genitori a causa dell’occupazione tedesca di Parigi, per rispondere a una delle domande più pertinenti del suo tempo, vale a dire le ragioni della guerra, Weil si rivolge ai classici, questa volta agli scritti omerici. Come nell’Iliade, il destino francese si compie, emule di quello troiano. Nonostante la paura della Weil per la sofferenza che attende i suoi connazionali, ella intravede le possibilità di risveglio e conversione che le dinamiche belliche offrono. Verità riguardanti la natura della forza, il destino, la percezione della propria e altrui esistenza.

Sebbene L’Iliade ou le poème de la force non riguardi il poema epico stesso, è interessante se posto in contrasto con i principi espressi dall’autrice sul ruolo e sulla responsabilità degli intellettuali durante il conflitto ostile. Il pacifismo sembra essere la risposta al problema e Simone Weil lo abbraccia con tutto il cuore per molti anni prima di rimproverarsene amaramente. Ne La Source Grecque della Weil, i Greci sono a conoscenza degli orrori e della colpa belligerante: “L’histoire grecque a commencé par un crime atroce, la destruction de Troie. Loin de se glorifier de ce crime comme font d’ordinaire les nations, ils ont été hantés par ce souvenir comme par un remords. Ils y ont puisé le sentiment de la misère humaine.” Nessun popolo a suo dire esprime una simile amarezza della miseria umana, poiché rispettare il proprio nemico, essere rattristati dal destino umano e dalla sua sottomissione alla forza che oggettiva sia la vittima che l’oppressore, è il segno di compassione e di nobiltà.

Che si descriva la natura della rabbia di Achille, la colpa di Agamennone, la responsabilità di Elena nel ciclo troiano, la forza, scrive Weil, trasforma l’umano in oggetto in tre modi: attraverso la morte, l’imminenza di questa e la schiavitù. Se ne assapora tutta l’amertume, l’amarezza priva della consolazione dell’immortalità, della gloria o del patriottismo. Questo stato, si potrebbe pensare sia una dichiarazione indiretta della distanza tra l’Iliade e le fondamenta del cristianesimo presentato dall’autrice, laddove ai lettori viene data da bere l’amara coppa dell’animosità in tutto il suo orrore, partecipando all’esperienza catartica della Croce. Così la forza appare nell’Iliade, allo stesso tempo, come la realtà suprema e massima illusione esistenziale. Omero, deifica la sovrabbondanza di vita che esplode nel disprezzo della morte, nell’estasi del sacrificio e denuncia la fatalità che la trasforma in inerzia: quella spinta cieca che la conduce alla fine del suo sviluppo, sino all’annullamento di se stessa e dei valori che ha generato.

Se la reazione di una persona è quella di allontanarsi dall’insopportabile sofferenza, proiettando il proprio sguardo verso elementi glorificanti, in tal modo non può esservi contemplazione della miseria umana nella sua verità se non alla luce della grazia. Non è da ciò che dice un autore su Dio che si conosce dove quel che trascende si scorge, sostiene Weil, piuttosto è il modo in cui parla del mondo naturale, fisico, che rivela la sua posizione reale, così come la fede di un giudice non appare nel suo atteggiamento verso la Chiesa, ma in quello rivolto alla corte. Allo stesso modo, la maniera con il quale Omero parla della sofferenza umana lucidamente, senza perdere la serenità, rivela come le realtà carnali siano il criterio di quelle spirituali.

Questo approccio getta una luce interessante sul metodo dell’autrice. Simone Weil a rivela il suo punto di vista sul soprannaturale indirettamente, attraverso l’interpretazione dei classici greci, preferendo parlare del mondo naturale o dell’arte, entrambi rivelatori di un nuovo aspetto se visti attraverso il discernimento della fede, piuttosto che proclamare e difendere apertamente il cristianesimo stesso. È così che l’Iliade diviene ode unica, per questa amarezza che procede dalla tenerezza e che senza mai abbassarsi alla lamentela, diffonde il suo lume sull’intera umanità. La giustizia e l’amore che difficilmente possono avere un posto in questo quadro di estremi e violenza ingiusta lo lambiscono senza mai essere sensibili se non per accento. Il non cercare la fuga nel mondo onirico della realizzazione dei desideri o sfogando la propria sofferenza su un capro espiatorio, significa riconoscere il fatto che, in un modo o nell’altro, tutti gli esseri umani sono soggetti alla force, prerequisito necessario all’agápē, amore disinteressato, coraggio. Questo, il significato implicito del poema epico e fonte unica della sua bellezza.

Citare l’epopea nel parlare della natura e del significato della sofferenza, mostra nuovamente l’importanza che l‘Iliade ha per Weil. Le sue parole offrono un’ammirevole lezione ai suoi contemporanei che solo se disposti ad ascoltare e comprendere meglio l’opera omerica; essi riconosceranno nei tempi epici “le plus pur des miroirs“, facilitando così una valutazione obiettiva. Weil desidera che si adotti lo stesso atteggiamento compassionevole e oggettivo di Omero verso i Greci e i Troiani, nei confronti della propria situazione. La guerra può paradossalmente insegnare la vera caritas: per essere giusti, bisogna conoscere l’imperare della forza senza esserne sedotti. Come nel Vangelo lo spirito di giustizia e compassione che permea l’epopea nella sua rappresentazione della sofferenza umana è per l’autrice, cristiano.

Si potrebbe pensare che sarebbe più facile comprendere qualcosa di distante nel tempo da qualcosa di analogo che è più vicino al presente, eppure, in certi momenti si è troppo prossimi a una situazione per percepirla sine ira et studio, senza animosità e simpatia.
È κλέος (kléos), la gloria che gli eroi epici si sforzano di raggiungere. Tuttavia Simone Weil non afferma che i guerrieri stessi nella loro miseria di eroi siano santi nello spirito, ma che Omero li abbia rappresentati da quella che sarebbe divenuta una prospettiva cristiana. Questa tensione tra la forza, la miseria dell’essere e il lamento della loro sorte, e d’altra parte la gloria delle loro gesta leggendarie, sarebbe quindi al centro del poema epico, contribuendo a un drammatico cambiamento di valori in una società come quella ellenica.

Si potrebbe dire lo stesso dello scritto dell’autrice? Simone Weil cerca di educare i suoi tempi, di rappresentare la guerra e il potere a beneficio di un mondo tormentato da entrambi e quindi aiutare a ripristinare la scala di virtù solidali. La compassione spiega la prospettiva soprannaturale di Omero da cui è percepibile le verità sul conflitto, forza e destino umano. È la prospettiva che rende queste autenticità soprannaturali anche se non si relazionano direttamente con la trascendenza di tal regno, poiché non potrebbero essere adeguatamente comprese da nessun altro punto di vista. Weil ha sostenuto il pacifismo affermando che la natura umana è sufficiente per far fronte all’ostilità, belligerante, mentre pochi anni dopo sarebbe stata la natura umana a cercare di evitare la questione religiosa, suggerendo che solo un’accettazione di Dio avrebbe potuto impedire alle ideologie di esercitare il proprio regno del terrore.

Cercare di ispirare un paese è difficile, poiché intento prossimo alla pratica di propaganda dei tempi che furono e sono, in cui l’arte della persuasione, costituisce l’equivalente moderno del luogo del pensiero. Al contrario, l’ispirazione, si potrebbe aggiungere, apre l’anima al trascendente e ai valori reali, come la verità, la bontà e la rettitudine, vero compito dell’intellettuale e dell’apologista. Eppur non è possibile ricreare componimenti pari all’Iliade: la grazia del rapsodo, di scrivere e narrare con tale estro è all’umanità negata, perché per troppi secoli dimenticatasi d’essere giusta. Non più coscienti nel descrivere la forza, perché finemente, e senza voler riconoscerla, ci si pone al suo servizio.

[Diane · Rating 5 out of 5]

Simone Weil offre un regard différent sur l'Iliade. Intellectuelle et féministe de gauche issue d'une famille parisienne bourgeoise, elle a consacré sa vie à la lutte pour la justice sociale au sens le plus large (droits des travailleurs, droits des femmes, liberté religieuse, liberté politique...). Pacifiste, elle n'a pourtant pas hésité à combattre, arme au poing, pendant la Guerre d'Espagne. Elle a également rejoint la Resistance pendant la 2eme Guerre Mondiale.

Dans cet essai, elle nous propose de voir l'Iliade comme un long poème dont le vrai héros ne serait ni Achilles, ni Hector, ni Agamemnon, ni Pâris, ni les Troyens, ni Les Achéens, mais plutôt la Force "qui est maniée par les hommes, la force qui soumet les hommes". La qualité particulière de cette force c'est qu'elle tue tout le monde, le fort et le faible, l'oppresseur et l'opprimé: aux premiers elle enlève la vie ou la liberté, aux seconds elle ôte l'humanité et la raison.

“Du pouvoir de transformer un homme en chose en le faisant mourir procède un autre pouvoir, et bien autrement prodigieux, celui de faire une chose d'un homme qui reste vivant. Il est vivant, il a une âme ; il est pourtant une chose.”

Bref, à la guerre, tout le monde est perdant, comme l'illustre bien l'Iliade (et la suite qu'on en connait): Agamemnon tue sa fille, sa femme plus tard le tue. Hector tue Patrocles, Achilles plus tard le tue, et est lui-même tué par Pâris... Ulysses erre pendant 10 ans et perd toute sa flotte, tous ses hommes, et ce n'est que de justesse qu'il évite de perdre sa femme et son royaume...

Selon Weil, l'Iliade s'évertue à exposer l'universalité de la condition humaine que les deux camps, Achéens et Troyens, partagent. D'ailleurs, Weil ajoute, on pourrait difficilement dire si l'Iliade est conté par les Grecs ou les Troyens car il n' y a pas d'un côté les bons et de l'autre les méchants. Au contraire, l'histoire est contée avec une incroyable impartialité.

La morale de l'histoire, s'il en est une c'est d'utiliser la force avec modération, de résister à la tentation de l'excès même si elle semble irrésistible. Après les premières batailles gagnées dans l'Iliade, les Achéens auraient pu proposer les termes raisonnable d'une paix. Mais la force les avait complètement enivré.

“Aussi impitoyablement la force écrase, aussi impitoyablement elle enivre quiconque la possède, ou croit la posséder.”

Alors les Achéens décident plutôt de rechercher la victoire totale. En effet, il leur est intolérable que les efforts énormes qu'ils ont fait n'apporte qu'un profit nul ou limité.

“Qu'on n'accepte à présent ni les biens de Pâris,
Ni Hélène ; chacun voit, même le plus ignorant,
Que Troie est à présent sur le bord de la perte.”

Mais Troie n'était pas sur le bord de la perte. Et de toutes façon la victoire ne sonne pas la fin du cycle de la force.

L'Iliade n'est donc pas une ode à la guerre ou à l'héroïsme des guerriers, mais plutôt une sorte de longue lamentation sur “la subordination de l'âme humaine à la force”.

Selon Weil, les Grecs dans ce récit ont eu le courage et l'honnêteté de reconnaitre que la misère humaine est commune à tous, et c'est cette misère commune qui forme les bases de l'égalité de tous.

"Le sentiment de la misère humaine est une condition de la justice et de l'amour. Celui qui ignore à quel point la fortune variable et la nécessité tiennent toute âme humaine sous leur dépendance ne peut pas regarder comme des semblables ni aimer comme soi-même ceux que le hasard a séparés de lui par un abîme."

Maintenant que j'ai lu un peu son histoire personnelle, je me rends compte que Weil la militante sociale voit dans l'origine des systèmes et régimes d'oppression de son temps un refus de reconnaitre cette commune condition humaine.

D'ailleurs, elle va plusieurs siècles en arrière et s'attaque à l'Empire Romain et aux Hébreux:

“Les Romains et les Hébreux se sont crus les uns et les autres soustraits à la commune misère humaine, les premiers en tant que nation choisie par le destin pour être la maîtresse du monde, les seconds par la faveur de leur Dieu et dans la mesure exacte où ils lui obéissaient.

Les Romains méprisaient les étrangers, les ennemis, les vaincus, leurs sujets, leurs esclaves ; aussi n'ont-ils eu ni épopées ni tragédies. Ils remplaçaient les tragédies par “les jeux de gladiateurs. Les Hébreux voyaient dans le malheur le signe du péché et par suite un motif légitime de mépris ; ils regardaient leurs ennemis vaincus comme étant en horreur à Dieu même et condamnés à expier des crimes, ce qui rendait la cruauté permise et même indispensable. [...]

Romains et Hébreux ont été admirés, lus, imités dans les actes et les paroles, cités toutes les fois qu'il y avait lieu de justifier un crime, pendant vingt siècles de christianisme.”

Je comprends Weil, mais je crois qu'elle n'est pas assez généreuse. Pourquoi se limiter aux Romains et aux Hébreux? Quel peuple n'a pas fait preuve de la même arrogance? N'est-ce pas vrai que même les Grecs dont elle aime tant la sagesse ont eu un grand conquérant: Alexandre? Ils traitaient peut-être les peuples vaincus mieux que les romains, mais ils leur faisaient tout de même la guerre dans le seul but de les assujettir.

L'histoire de toutes les civilisations, empires, pays, jusqu'à un passé récent, c'est l'histoire des guerres entre peuples, les plus forts cherchant à conquérir de nouveaux territoires, imposer leur culture et dominer les plus faibles.

On devrait plutôt reformuler sa déclaration ainsi: "Tous les groupes humains qui ont eu un certain pouvoir se sont crus les uns et les autres soustraits à la commune misère humaine; ils ont conclu que le destin leur a donné toute licence, et aucune à leurs inférieurs et ont ainsi justifié leurs crimes."

À ceux-là, l'Iliade montre que la force est équitable: elle tue ceux qui tuent.

[ebag · Rating 4 out of 5]

Incredibly written analysis on Iliad— these two excerpts in particular:

“But the auditors of the Iliad knew that the death of Hector would be but a brief joy to Achilles, and the death of Achilles but a brief joy to the Trojans, and the destruction of Troy but a brief joy to the Achaeans.

Thus violence obliterates anybody who feels its touch. It comes to seem just as external to its employer as to its victim.”

I ought to revisit Homer sometime.

[Francesca Paleari · Rating 4 out of 5]

La mia edizione prevedeva anche altri due saggi, su Antigone ed Elettra. Tre brevi - ma potentissime - riflessioni di Simone Weil che bisognerebbe leggere fin dal liceo. Parole molto molto belle; soprattutto una lettura diversa del grande poema omerico, con legami sempre strettissimi con il presente.

[Francisco Javier · Rating 5 out of 5]

Un rotundo diez, una obra breve pero muy sugerente, compuesta por reflexiones de la autora entorno al poema griego bajo la sombra de las guerras del siglo XX. Muy recomendable, se que es el libro que releeré con frecuencia.

[Connor Peppard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Emily wilson was spittin, i disagree almost entirely with the point weil is trying to make about the Iliad. However this is exceptionally written and a great analysis that probably plays much better with more antiquated translations