Aristos Achaion: examining the contemporary Achilles through his romantic relationships
Adaptations of Achilles are widespread in western literature and culture, to the extent that his character has transcended its original context. As such, there are great disparities in portrayals of Achilles, as exemplified by Madeline Miller’s 2011 novel The Song of Achilles, and Pat Barker’s 2018 novel The Silence of the Girls. Whereas Miller’s Achilles is idealised, Barker’s Achilles is dehumanised, presented as practically a monster. My project for Classical Receptions and Contemporary Cultures tackled these two interpretations of Achilles through a comparison of his romantic relationships with Briseis and Patroclus.
In regards to The Silence of the Girls, Barker’s Achilles is portrayed with such negative characteristics because Barker’s novel is an exploration of oppression. As Wilson has argued, the fall of Troy for women in the Iliad was the ‘start of new horrors,’ and Barker clearly agrees with this interpretation in her depiction of Briseis. She twists the memorable line from Book 24 of the Iliad — ‘I have endured to do what no other mortal man on earth has done — I have brought to my lips the hands of the man who killed my child’ — on its head: in response to Priam, Briseis’ thinks ‘and I do what countless women before me have been forced to do. I spread my legs for the man who killed my husband and my brothers.’ The polarity between these statements is what makes Barker’s words so impactful. While Priam acts of his own volition, Briseis has no such choice; while Priam is a free agent in his grief, Briseis is a slave, a possession. Achilles is portrayed as inhuman in The Silence of the Girls because of how he strips Briseis’ of her humanity.
To keep up this analogy, Barker has to write Achilles as cold and ruthless. She emphasises this brutality through Briseis’ confession to being raped by Agamemnon. Instead of concern, Achilles responds, not to Briseis, but Odysseus, saying ‘tell [Agamemnon] he can f**k her till her back breaks. Why would I care?’ The language here is extremely graphic and, said in Briseis’ presence, shows how little Achilles’ cares for her feelings. In fact, by ignoring her and responding to the admission by talking to Odysseus, Barker highlights how Achilles views Briseis as nothing but a spoiled prize. While there has been some criticism of feminist reception theory in recent years, Zajko has argued that in regards to feminism and classics ‘there is a need to listen to unfamiliar voices … in order to open debates about new modes of thinking,’ and this is exactly what Barker has put into practice with her novel. It is by portraying Achilles as inhuman, that Briseis’ can portray him as a symbol of oppression. As such, viewing him through Briseis’ gaze solidifies Achilles role in the narrative as a villain because of how he abuses her.
In fact, Achilles’ establishment as an antagonist allows Barker to explore modern day sexism. Take the colloquial language used by Achilles upon receiving Briseis as a spoil of war; ‘Cheers lads … She’ll do.” The word choice here is so out of place for its setting that it breaks the immersion. As such, the reader is encouraged to view the behaviour of Achilles in a 21st-century context. Similarly, this is also done through Briseis’ addresses to her invisible audience. Graziosi points out that ‘we are never told … to whom [Briseis] is telling her story,’ concluding that Briseis may be talking only to herself. While logical, this argument defeats the purpose of the novel, which is to give Briseis’ a voice to be heard. There would be no narrative value in Briseis defending her actions to herself. Rather, I would argue that Briseis is talking to us, in the present. Richardson has rightly explained that classical reception is ‘what takes place around you, what is done by you and what is done to you,’ and by Barker relating Briseis situation to the modern day, the reader can further understand their own experiences with sexism and oppression. This is exactly why Achilles is portrayed with such negative characteristics in The Silence of the Girls. In a narrative that exposes the horrors of oppression, Achilles is one of the stories key oppressors, and for Barker’s novel to make its desired impact, Achilles must be portrayed as a villain to overcome.
Do you have a suggestion for a future topic? Do you have an idea to share with your friends? Send us a message and follow the Durham University Classics Society on Twitter (@DUClassSoc) and Facebook (@DUClassics Society) to keep up with this blog and our other adventures!
