Carl Jung's Odysseus: An Epic Hero

The character of Odysseus is often used by scholars to help define an epic hero, with many arguing that he is the classic representation of the archetypal hero as described by Carl Jung and expanded by Joseph Campbell. Jung created the concept of the archetype and the collective unconscious to explain the unity of images within different people’s dreams. Jung believed (1990: p. 64) that individual and social behaviours originate from a shared tableau of characters that the mind preserves from early consciousness. According to Jung, the archetypal hero is representative of the mind’s search for individualism, the process making each consciousness unique. Joseph Campbell expanded upon this, encompassing all of the world’s mythologies, discovering

that there were common links among them, including the archetype of the hero. Campbell believed that mythology is the ‘song of the universe’ (Campbell 1949: p. 27) unifying mankind through his common search for meaning and truth. Thus, Campbell defined archetypes as the search for ‘the commonality of themes […] pointing to a constant requirement in the human psyche for a centering in terms of deep principles.’ (Campbell, et al 1988: pg 46) Both Jung and Campbell felt the experience of being human is a collective one, and that our commonality can be traced back to ‘the most primitive origins of the human consciousness’ (Taheri & Jalaly 2013: p. 247) from which archetypes originated.

The heroic archetype can be traced back to ancient Greece, based on folktales linked to the Gods and ancestors. The basic characteristics of the archetypal hero traditionally includes strength both physically and of moral character, special fighting or intellectual skills, and a sense of resourcefulness while doing the right thing. Through this definition it is easy to see why ‘resourceful Odysseus’ (Homer 1946: p.23) is considered the prime example of the hero. He fits the traditional template, being of royal birth, Odysseus’ position as king plays a prime role in The Odyssey. He possesses great strength and talent in wielding his bow that no other man is able to use with the same skill he has. Odysseus’ hamartia also helps define his heroism, as one essential weakness is considered a heroic trait in order to fix the hero within a sense of reality. Odysseus’ hubris is both his downfall and his saviour, despite being the cause of his suffering and the loss of his men, his excessive pride helps him in allowing him to learn humility through his grief and hardship.

Archetypal images encourage the reader to participate ritualistically in basic philosophies, reservations and anxieties of their age, forcing a rehearsed response that exists within the collective unconscious of that era.

In light of this, Odysseus may be considered a traditional hero, however his heroism does not extend to the contemporary audience, bound by the restraints of the ancient Greek ideals in which he is situated. Irrespective of how well Odysseus fits the classical criteria for heroism, to a modern reader, Odysseus is the antithesis of what a contemporary hero should be. To many, Odysseus is ‘the self-serving liar, the brutal murderer, the indulgent adulterer’ (Howell 2012: p. 62) that modern audiences

detest.

Odysseus’ lack of respect for the Gods, his people, his crew, his wife and his noble name makes a contemporary reader question why this man is defined as one of the greatest heroes in literature. When the reader first encounters Odysseus in book five, he is in the arms of Calypso, supposedly ‘[out] of necessity’ (Homer 1946: p. 67) A modern audience views Odysseus as an adulterer, ignoring the sanctity of his marriage to Penelope. However, this view is a reflection of our society as in Homeric Greece, male chastity was not required. In this respect, the modern reader holds Odysseus up to twenty-first century ideals of love and marriage rather than within his own setting of Ancient Greece where his unfaithfulness would not have put his heroism into question. Thus, Odysseus may exist as a hero within the realms of one era but not the other, proving heroism to be a transient state.

Though considered a classic heroic trait, Odysseus’ hamartia costs him the lives of his men, suggesting he is a selfish, individualistic person and not a hero. Odysseus lacks a sense of responsibility, instilling in his men his own sense of morality – or lack of it – and thus his fatal flaw is modelled to them as well. Odysseus let his men create chaos, enjoying their spoils in the village of Ismarus but he is unable to control them when he decides it is time to leave as they have learned selfishness from their leader. Ultimately, it is Odysseus’ men who pay the price for their leaders’ insatiable curiositas when Odysseus insists on provoking the Cyclops, Polyphemus. Many praise Odysseus for his wit and ability of getting his men out of perilous scrapes such as this, however it cannot be overlooked that he is the one who invites trouble in the first place, never at any cost to himself, only to his crew. This blatant lack of care for anyone but himself cannot be considered the trait of a true hero.

So, if Odysseus is not the hero of the epic, then who is? Heroism may easily be defined in The Odyssey by lesser, overlooked characters such as Penelope, Telemachus and even Eumaeus.
Penelope is the truest example of fidelity and faithfulness, teaching that true heroism lies in patience and remaining devoted no matter the circumstances. Although the Homeric audience may not have valued women as we do today, it is clear to the contemporary reader that Penelope is just as intelligent as her husband and possesses the quality that Odysseus lacks – loyalty. She uses her intelligence and determination to fool the suitors by concocting the shroud trick and later the challenge involving the arrows and rings to fend off the suitors until her husband returns. Though Penelope remains faithful, whether her steadfastness is due to romantic love for Odysseus is questionable, as she may merely have been adhering to Greek ideals. She is not independent as she must obey Telemachus, remaining his property until Odysseus’ return or she is married off to a suitor. In this respect, she loses some of her power as a hero to a modern reader, however she remains a symbol of great resilience, stopping at nothing to preserve her family.

More remarkably perhaps, is the heroism portrayed by Eumaeus of the servant class. His heroism is demonstrated through his integrity – doing the right thing even without recognition. Through examining the differences between the two minor character Eumaeus the loyal swineherd and Melanthius, the disloyal goat herder, the reader learns that Eumaeus is a true hero – remaining loyal and true even when faced with temptation and suffering – tending to his daily tasks and praying for Odysseus’ safe return. In contrast to this, Melanthius takes advantage of his masters’ absence and allies himself with the suitors in the hopes that he will gain power and wealth, all whilst grossly abusing xenia. When Odysseus appears to Melanthius as a homeless wanderer, he attempts to knock the beggar from the path, insulting him. Eumaeus, however, treats the masquerading Odysseus with great respect and kindness, proving his strength of moral character. Throughout the Odyssey, Eumaeus proves himself loyal, not only to Odysseus and his family, but also to his own values including his work ethic.

It is indisputable that our definition of a hero today is vastly different from that of Homeric Greece.

We do not worship the Gods of pantheon nor do we live by the warrior code. But, has humanity evolved so much that our archetypes have evolved beyond recognition? I think not, perhaps there is a subtext to the Odyssey suggesting that there is a very real reason why the reader questions the heroism of Odysseus – because we are supposed to. Odysseus is used as a covert warning of hubris, forgetting where you came from and the wrath of the Gods. I believe that Homer wanted us to question Odysseus, thus championing the underdog, allowing us to see the hero within the common man, not only within Ancient Greece, as his muse ‘[sings] for our time, too.’ (Homer, 1946: p.

1)