Immersion, Identification, andthe Iliad
JONATHANL.READY
GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,OX26DP, UnitedKingdom
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries
©JonathanL.Ready2023
Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted Somerightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,forcommercialpurposes, withoutthepriorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpressly permittedbylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriate reprographicsrightsorganization.
Thisisanopenaccesspublication,availableonlineanddistributedunderthetermsofa CreativeCommonsAttribution – NonCommercial – NoDerivatives4.0 Internationallicence(CCBY-NC-ND4.0),acopyofwhichisavailableat http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthislicence shouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,attheaddressabove PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress 198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016,UnitedStatesofAmerica
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData Dataavailable
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2022950545
ISBN978–0–19–287097–1 DOI:10.1093/oso/9780192870971.001.0001
PrintedandboundintheUKby ClaysLtd,ElcografS.p.A.
LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork.
BridieRoseBridieRose
BridieRose
1 καὶἐμέ. InscriptionesGraecae IV²2,757
Preface
Welabel “multiplecorrespondencesimiles” thosesimilesthatlinkdifferent charactersorobjectsinthenarrativetodifferententitiesinthevignetteinthe simile’svehicleportion(the “ as ” portion).AjaxkillsSimoesiusasamanwho makeschariotscutsdownatreeinamarsh(Iliad 4.482–9).HectorawaitsAchilles asasnakeawaitsaman(Iliad 22.92–6).Thinkingabouthowthesesimilesworkin the Iliad requirestakingastepbacktothinkabouthowtheHomericpoetbrings characterstoourattentionandsetsthemaside.Thatsubjectdirectsoneinturnto thenumerousminorcharacterswhopopulatethepoemandwhoreflectthe challengesthepoetfacesinactivatinganddeactivatingcharacters.So,as I finishedupmydiscussionofmultiplecorrespondencesimiles(Ready2011: 220–58),Ibeganworkonwhateventuatedadecadelaterinanarticleonthe Iliad’sbitplayers(Ready2020).IthoughtIwouldusethatpieceasthestarting pointforabookonminorcharactersinancientGreekliterature.Ihadtucked awayina filingcabinetahardcopyofanoddpaperfromgraduateschoolabout minorcharactersinHerodotus’ s Histories:theexecutionleftmuchtobedesired, butthecorethesisseemedworthresuscitating.AsIcontinuedmysecondary readingoncharacters,Icameacrosstheliteratureonidentificationwith fictional characters.Thebibliographyonidentificationledmetotheliteratureonthestill largersubjectofimmersioninnarratives.
Itbecameclearthattherewasmorethanenoughtosayaboutimmersionand identificationinthecontextofHomericepicandthatIwouldhavetowaityet againtowriteonothergenres.IalsodiscoveredthatIhadunwittinglystumbled intoa fieldofinvestigation howrecipientsofnarrativesareimmersed thata numberofmycolleaguesinclassicalstudieshadjustbeguntowork.This fortuitousoccurrencewasthe firstsuchexperienceinmyscholarlycareer.My previousbookshaveaddressedHomericsimiles,thenatureandhistoryof Homerictexts,andearlyHomericpapyri allsubjectsoflong-standinginterest. Inthoseendeavors,Iofferednewinterpretationsofoldtopics.HereIintervenein discussionsthatclassicistsandHomeristshaveonlystartedtohaveabouthowthe Iliad’srecipients findthemselvesimmersedinthepoem.AnotherpointofdifferencebetweenthisbookandmypreviousworkisthathereIdonotconcernmyself untiltheendwiththecomplexrelationshipbetweenHomericpoetryandoral compositionandoralperformance.Iwillconfesstosomedegreeofreliefinthat regard:perhapsthisiswhatitfeelsliketoworkonGreektragedyorthepoetryof Vergilwhereobsessionsoverauthorship,performancecontext,andtext fixation donotrunonaneternalloop.Still,thereremainsanoticeablethroughline
runningbetweenthisbookandmy Orality,Textuality,andtheHomericEpics:An InterdisciplinaryStudyofOralTexts,DictatedTexts,andWildTexts (Ready 2019a).InPartsIIandIIIofthatbookandhereagainIseektoilluminatehow peopleinteract(ed)withandreact(ed)toHomericpoetry.
Asin TheHomericSimileinComparativePerspectives:OralTraditionsfromSaudi ArabiatoIndonesia (Ready2018)and Orality,Textuality,andtheHomericEpics, Iassembleandputtouseinthisbookanextensivebibliographyfromoutside classicalstudies.Iagainshowmyworkandintroducethereadertothismaterial withfrequentquotationsfromthatliterature.Itendtoavoidparaphraseinlieuof quotationlestIstrayfromtheprecisepointbeingmade.Iagainfollowthepracticeof fieldsoutsideofclassicalstudiesinlimitingthenumberoffootnotes.Forthemost part,Iincludecitationsinthemaintextin parenthesesinsteadofusingfootnotesfor citations:byvirtueoftheirplacementatthebottomofthepageandtheirsmallerfont size,footnotesalwaystosomedegreeoccludetheactualworkonecites.Ido acquiescetothemoreusualpracticeinclassicalstudiesbydeployingfootnotesfor citationalchainscomprisingsixormorereferences.Boththequotationandthe mannerofcitationaremywayofacknowledgingthedegreetowhichIdependon previousscholarshipandmywayofarticulatingtheimportanceofgroupeffortsin advancingscholarship.Onlyahandfulofdiscursivefootnotesappear.Ifapointis worthmaking,itshouldmeritinclusioninthemaintext,andasareaderI findit hardtofollowtheargumentinthemaintextifIamsupposedtotakebreaksalong thewaytoreadparagraph-longfootnoteswiththeirownarguments.
Onacoupleofoccasionsinthisbookaswell,Iwrite “Iliad” and “Odyssey” in romanfont(seeReady2019a:viii).Withthatformatting,Irefertoatraditionof oralperformanceinwhichperformerspresentwhattheythinkofasthesame story. Iliad and Odyssey initalicsrefertothewrittentextsweuse.
Quotationsfromthe Iliad comefromHelmutvanThiel’s2010edition,and quotationsfromthe Odyssey comefromvanThiel’s1991edition.Idonot reproducehislunatesigmas.Inotetheeditorsofotherancientworksonlyif Iquote,andonlywhenI firstquote,fromtheireditions.Alltranslationsaremy ownunlessotherwisenoted.
Referencestocurrenteventsinscholarshipofthissortagebadly.Butsurelyan exceptioncanbemadeforaonceinacenturyglobalpandemic.Ontheonehand, ithasbeenstrangetowriteabookaboutimmersionandidentification essentiallyabookaboutconnecting(orseemingtoconnect)withotherpeople andotherplaces whenonecannotshareaphysicalspaceexceptwiththosein one ’sbubbleandcannotgoanywhere.Ontheotherhand,ifeverpeoplehave cometoappreciatetheirdegreeofimmersioninstoryworldsandofidentification withcharacters,nowmightbethattime.Idonothavetherequisitedistancefrom thisprojecttodeterminehowthosetwofactorshaveshapedit.Oncethisvolume hasbeenabsorbedandisnolongercitedperhapsitwillhaveasecondlifeasa specimenofCOVID-19-erascholarship.
Introduction
1.1.Overview
Section1.2offersdefinitionsofnarrative,storyworld,immersion,identi fication, andrecipient.Section1.3orientsthisinvestigationofHomericimmersionand identificationinrelationtopriorscholarshipinHomericstudies.Section1.4 providesabriefoutlineofthefollowingchapters.
1.2.Terminology
Istartwithsomefraughtdefinitions.Wewillbetalkingaboutnarrative,atricky termtodefineandonethatweperhapswanttobecarefulnottodefinetoo narrowly(Ryan2007).JonasGrethleinpositsthatanarrativeis “therepresentationofatemporalsequenceinvolvinghumanorhuman-likecharactersina sequentialmedium” (2017a:34;cf.Grethlein,Huitink,andTagliabue2020:8). JohnFrowgoesintoabitmoredetail,discerningthreeessentialcomponentsofa narrative(2018:106):
amediumofrepresentation...;aspeakingvoice,orsomecorrespondingenunciativemoment(thecompositegazethroughwhichweviewa film,forexample), whichactivatesthatmedium;andthemovementofpersons,orquasi-persons, throughspaceandtimeandrelationshipsinarepresentedworld.
Butthereareotherwaystothinkabouttheterm.FritzBreithauptproposesthata narrativeisanaccountthataudiencesunderstandasonepossibleversionofwhat happened(2011,esp.109,120).
Letusmoveontoworkingdefinitionsofstoryworld,immersion,andidentification.Wehavegeneralagreementonadefinitionofstoryworld: “Thestoryworld hastwocomponents.First,thereisthesetting,theplaceandtimeinwhichthe eventsoccur.Second,therearecharacters,thehumanornon-humanagentsthat initiateorexperienceevents” (Hogan2018:133);storyworldsare “totalitiesthat encompassspace,time,andindividuatedexistentsthatundergotransformations astheresultofevents” (Ryan2019:63).Immersedrecipientsgetwrappedup inanarrativeandthestoryworlditdepictsandlosetracktosomedegreeoftheir
Immersion,Identification,andthe Iliad.JonathanL.Ready,OxfordUniversityPress.©JonathanL.Ready2023. DOI:10.1093/oso/9780192870971.003.0001
real-worldsurroundings.Identi ficationoccurswhenrecipientsinterpretthestoryworldfromacharacter’sperspective,feelacharacter’semotionsoratleast emotionscongruentwiththoseofthecharacter,and/orrootforacharacterto succeed.Iwillgointothecomponentsofimmersionandidentificationinmuch greaterdetailoverthecourseofthisbook.
Adoptingthesethreedefinitionsandutilizingthesethreeconceptsisalreadyto makechoices,totakeastand,andtomaneuvercarefullybetweenopposed scholarlypositions.Forinstance,Marie-LaureRyanaimstorebutRichard Walsh’sassertions(2017)thattheconceptsofworldandimmersionarenotuseful forthestudyof fictionalnarrative(2018:236–7).Notetoothatmediascholars haveappliedtheterm “immersion” toarangeofphenomenaandexperiences (Nilsson,Nordahl,andSerafin2016)orthatmanypreferadifferentwordentirely, speakingofabsorption,aestheticillusion,enchantment,engagement,engrossment,entanglement,involvement,ortransportation.Or,asa finalexample, observethehedgeinmyformulation “thecharacter’semotions oratleast emotionscongruentwiththoseofthecharacter,” aresponsetoadisputeoverthe natureofouremotionalengagementwithcharacters(seesection2.5,pp.49–50).
Lessfraughtbutworthexplicitconsiderationisthefollowing.Recipientsrespond differentlyto fictionalandnonfictionalnarratives(e.g.,Vaage2016:26–34),but whetheranarrativeis fictionornonfictionisirrelevantwhenitcomestothesethree concepts.Whereasmuchoftheliteratureonstoryworlds,immersion,andidentificationpertainsto fictionalnarrative,itisalsotruethatwecanspeakofnonfiction storyworlds,beimmersedinnonfictionstoryworlds,andidentifywiththecharactersinnonfictionstoryworlds.¹ImakethispointbecauseIwanttoforestallan objectiontomyuseoftheseconceptsbythosewhothinkthatHomericpoetryisnot fiction(seesection2.4,p.34).Thedebateoverthe fictionalornonfictionalstatusof Homericepicdoesnotaffectthisproject(cf.Scodel2021:56–7).
Finally,Ihighlighthereatthestarthowtheword “recipient” thatIhavealready usedseveraltimescontributestothepresentation.Ithelpsoneavoidthecumbersomephrase “hearer,viewer,orreader,” but,moreimportant,itscapaciousness signalsmyconcernwithfeaturesofimmersionandidentificationthatdonot dependonaspecificmedium.Nodoubtthenatureofimmersionandidentificationvarydependingonmedia(e.g.,Grethlein2017a),butItargetcomponents ofthoseexperiencesthatarisewhetheroneiswatching,reading,orlisteningtoa tale(e.g.,Carpenter,Green,andFitzgerald2018:231;cf.Budelmann2000:15–16; Lovatt2013:21).OnlyinChapter9doIponderhowlisteningtoandwatching anoralperformerofHomericepicshapedtheaudience’sexperienceofthe storyworld.
¹Chen,Bell,andTaylor2016;2017;FitzgeraldandGreen2017:56;Roberts2018;R.Allan2019b; 2020;Ryan2019:62–3,66;AlamandSo2020;Fernandez-Quintanilla2020;Maloney2020;Tyrell2020: 48;Grethlein2021a:49,55–6,264;GoffinandFriend2022:135.
1.3.PreviousScholarship
A1947articlein ClassicalJournal concludeswithachartpurportingtoshowhow theaudienceexperiencesvaryingdegreesofemotionalintensityoverthecourse ofthe Iliad (Ingalls1947).ThemajorityofHomericscholarshipinthesecondhalfof thetwentiethcenturyhadconcernsotherthanthinkingabouttheaffectivedynamicsofthepresentation.Withattentiondirectedtohowandwhenthe Iliad andthe Odyssey werecomposed,energywentintodetermininghowbesttointerpretthem inlightofthosecompositionalmechanisms(cf.Hutchinson2017:145).Eventhose whodidnotworrysomuchaboutthegenesisofthepoemssawtheirjobasasking afterthemeaning(s)orargument(s)ofthepoems(e.g.,Redfield1975:ix).
Occasionally,explorationsofwhatcriticstermed “pathos” appeared some longer(e.g.,M.Scott1974;Griffin1980,esp.104–5),someshorter(e.g.,Glenn 1971:170;MartinMueller2009[1985]:e.g.,55;Davies2002:29).Suspense receivedafairamountofattentiontoo(Rengakos1999;cf.Liotsakis2021:6), andElizabethMinchinconsideredsomeotherwaysthe Iliad poetsought “tokeep usinvolvedinhistale” (1999:64).Typically,however,scholarlyprotocolsallowed foronlybriefacknowledgmentsoftheexperienceofhearingorreadingthe Iliad andthe Odyssey andoftheimpactthepoemscanhaveonrecipients.Forexample, the Iliad poet’sdetaileddescriptionsofhorrificwoundssuggestthat “heandhis audienceenjoythesceneenormously,” andthevarietyinthesedescriptions “ never boresus” (E.Vermeule1979:96–7).Inmomentsofembeddedfocalization the narratorgrantsaccesstoacharacter’spointofvieweventhoughthecharacterisnot talking—“theaudienceisbroughtintoaclosersympathywiththecharacter,and henceintocloseremotionalinvolvementwiththetale” (Edwards1991:4;cf.2002: 36).AninvestigationofTrojanpoliticsstartsfromtheobservationthatthepoet wantsaudiencestosympathizewiththeTrojans(Sale1994:7–13).Whenthe Odyssey poet “transformsfolkloreandanecdote,” heproduces “situationsofprofoundhumanmeaningthatleadusbacktothepoemagainandagain” (Segal1994: 194).Achillesundergoes “anevolutioninhischaracterwhichisbrilliantlyconceived,intuitivelyplausible,andprofoundlytragic” (Most2003:75).JamesRedfield relegatespersonalreflectionstotheprefaceofhisbookonHector(1975:ix,xii):
Thepresentbookthusgrewoutofaninterestin,andevenperhapsan identificationwith,onehero ....I developedtheanalysisbecauseIcareabout the Iliad ....Wecarrywithusinoursolitudethese fictionsthepoetshaveleftus, webroodovertheirmeanings,feeljoyandsorrowattheevents,makeofthe charactersourfriendsandenemies,and findourselvessomehownourishedby theexperience.
Conversely,NancyFelsonsavesforthepenultimatepageofherbookonthe Odyssey thefollowingcomment: “Iconcludebydepictingtheeventsthatoccur whenI asareader envisiontheactionofthepoem....Iamlulledtosilentaweand
complacentsatisfactionthatthecharacterswhohavebecomemycompanions have finallyreachedhome....Aprovisionalsatisfactionovercomesme... ” (1994: 143,emphasisinoriginal).The finalsentenceofLeonardMuellner’s1996bookon themeaningof mēnis alsostandsapartintenorandpointfromwhatcomes before: “Achillesbequeathstoustheself-perpetuatingartisticrepresentationofan idealistic,disturbing,andconsolingdefinitionofthehumancondition” (175).
Aristotle’sattentioninhis Poetics topity,fear,andcatharsisasessential componentsoftheaudience’sreactiontoGreektragedycreatedapermission structurefortwentieth-centuryscholarshipinthatsubfieldtoattendtothe audience’saffectiveengagement,discussionsthatpointupbywayofcontrast thegeneralocclusionofsuchmattersinHomericstudies.²ButHomericstudies hadgoodcompany:wittinglyornot,itjoinedotherbranchesofliterarystudiesin limiting,evensuppressing,ifnotexiling,discussionsofhowreadersrespond, especiallyemotionally,toandbecomeimmersedinnarratives.³
Fittingly,then,weweretoldthattoconsideraudienceresponsetotheHomeric epicsproperlyoneshouldaskafterthe “assumptionsandresponseswhichthe worksthemselvesseemtoexpect” asopposedto “theassumptionsandresponses whichwe,ascontemporaryreaders,tendtoprovide” (Gill1990:8).Ourown reactionsaretobesegregatedandthen(presumably)ignored.Oronecould recognizethatthecharactersprompt “oursympatheticinterest” (Gill2002:97), our “sympatheticengagement” (99),and “oursympatheticinvolvement” (105), butthisconnectionarisesasaresultof(“isareflectionof” (105), “inheresin” (152))thecarefulandrigorousintellectualanalysisthattheycompelusto perform:webecome “engagedintheirreasoning ” (117;cf.105,152,172–3)as theywrestlewith “certainfundamentalissuesofhumanlife” (119)and “withthe questionsor ‘problems’ whichthepoemasawholeexplores” (97;cf.173). Aclinical,rationalengagementisallowed.Thosemorewillingtoexplorehow theepicsgeneratearangeofaffectivedynamicsoftenviewedsuchdynamicswith suspicion.ConsiderLillianDoherty’sassessmentoftheendofthe Odyssey: “Ihave notstoppedtakingpleasureinthereunionofOdysseusandPenelope;rather,my pleasurehasbecomeinfusedwithanawarenessthatitinvitesmetobereconciled toanandrocentricviewoftheworld,aviewinwhichPenelope’shappinessis subordinatetoandindeeddefinedbythatofOdysseus” (1995:40;cf.192).
Inkeepingwithbroadertrendsinsideandoutsideofclassicalstudies,⁴ priorities haveshiftedinthesubfieldofHomericstudies.JonHeskasksustoconfront “the
²E.g.,Stanford1983;Heath1987;Griffin1998:54–61;1999:91–2;Griffith1999b:e.g.,43; Budelmann2000:e.g.,23,91;cf.Wohl2015:12,168n.6.
³M.Smith1995:188–9;Robinson2005:143;Davis2007:20;Felski2008:54;2015:12–13,54; 2020b:30,62;Ryan2015a:107;Grethlein2017a:4,123;2021a:154;2021b:228;Douglass2018:112; Hogan2018:4;Plantinga2018:211;KuzmičováandBálint2019:430;Knox2021:12;cf.Sedgwick 2003:144,150.
⁴ Inside:e.g.,Wohl2015:28,106–9,135–6;CairnsandNelis2017:10–11;Olsen2017;Meineck 2018;Weiss2020:333;deBakker,vanderBerg,andKlooster2022:10–15.Outside:e.g.,Robinson 2005;Plantinga2009;Hogan2018;Grethlein2021a:103.
difficultissueoftheaudience’spleasure” andhowthe Iliad “deliver[s]prurient thrillsandentertainingformsofterror” (2013:33;cf.43).LynnKozak’ s ExperiencingHektor exploreshowandwhy “the Iliad hascaughtmewithits Hektor” (2017:1) thatis,howandwhythepoemenablesaudiencemembersto connectwithandcareaboutitscharactersandengagewiththetalemoregenerally.Kozakattendstoanumberoffactorsthatbring “pleasure” torecipients,from achallengetotheirexpectations(119),toaresolutionofastoryline(121),toa “callback” (cross-reference)toanearlierepisode(130),totheirrecognizingthe typicalpatternofabattlescene(137).KozakintroducestoHomericstudies thenotionof “allegiance” whereinrecipientsjudgethecharactersandexperience likeordislikeasaresult(5–6,8;cf.section7.3,p.211).Thisexperienceisone manifestationofour “engagement” withthecharacters(62,111,157;cf.22).They alsodeploythenotionof “melodramaticalignmentstructure” whereinrecipients “knowmorethananyonecharacterknows” (6;cf.,e.g.,Rengakos1999:323on dramaticirony).Thisknowledge “increasesemotionalinvestmentandanticipationoftheeventstocome” (Kozak2017:92;cf.100,137–8,140–1,151,170,198). AndKozaktracesstillotherwaysinwhichthepoembuildsanticipation,suspense, curiosity,andevenanxietyinitsaudience(8–9,27,29,31,82,95,102,115, 143,147,195,218).Focusingonthe Iliad’sdivineapparatus,TobiasMyers queries “theemotionalimpact[ontheaudience]ofthedevastationatTroy,” “theintensityoftheir[theaudiencemembers]experienceastheylistento thetelling,” andhow “thepoetunderstandshimselftobehookinghislisteners” (2019:3,33,175).Hewrites, “Whilethe Iliad respondswonderfullytoanalysis, itisaimednotatanalyticalcriticsbutataudiencesreadytobesweptawayby wonder,pleasure,terror,andtears” (59;cf.91,93).Atthesametime,Myers argues,the Iliad poeturgeshisaudiencetoconsidertheiremotionalreactionsto thetale(124,210).RachelLesserdiscernsatriadofdesiresfeltbythe Iliad’ s audience(2022,esp.12–22).Theyexperiencenarrativedesire(wantingtolearn howthestorywillturnout),sympatheticdesire(feelingforacharacterandhoping allgoeswellforthem),andempatheticdesire(takingonacharacter’ s “ urges, wishes,andlongings” (18)).Theaudiencecansympathizeandempathizewitha rangeofcharacters Chryses,Achilles,Hera,Helen,Menelaus,Agamemnon, Odysseus,Andromache,Patroclus,Priam,Hecuba;theycansympathizeand empathizewithaspecificcharacteratonemomentbutnotatanother(178,189, 213,228).Sympatheticandempatheticdesirescangohandinhandwithandeven enhancenarrativedesire(21,30,107,189,195,200,203,215,221,229,241),or theycanconflictwithit,causingattimesfeelingsofdissonanceorevendread (99,128,153,178,181,199,215).LiberatingtooisJoelChristensen’sstudyofthe therapeuticworkafforded(ornot)bystorytellingtothecharactersandexternal audiencesofthe Odyssey (2020;cf.Grethlein2017b:118,271–82).Homerists, then,haveansweredGregoryHutchinson’scallfor “thinkingmoreabouthowthe poemaffectedlisteners” (2017:168).
Thisbookbuildsontheseinterventionsaswellasonadditionalscholarshipby investigatorsoftheancientworld bothinGreekstudiesandRomanstudiesand inbiblicalstudies thatstartsfromtwofactsnowwell-establishedindisciplines outsideclassicalstudiesdevotedtotheexplorationofnarrative.Whenpeopleread astoryorwhentheywatchaplay,movie,ortelevisionshow,many findthemselvesimmersedinthetaleanditsworldandmanyidentifywiththecharacters (cf.deBakker,vanderBerg,andKlooster2022:15–17).Morethanthat,many consumemediainordertoimmersethemselvesinthetaleanditsworldandto identifywiththecharacters:they “choose” and “allow” themselvestheseexperiences(Plantinga2018:195,249)and “strivetobeovercomebytheobjectsoftheir passion” (Felski2020b:65).Wecanshiftprioritiesandthinkaboutnarrativesas morethanaseriesofpuzzlesforthecritictosolve.
Onecan findthesepropositionsintraditionalsitesofliterarycriticism.From herperchinEnglish,forexample,RitaFelskipointstothenecessityoftaking seriouslythemajorityofreaderswhoreadinanapparently “unseemlyorinappropriatefashion identifyingwithcharacters,becomingabsorbedinnarratives, beingstruckbymomentsofrecognition ” (2015:29;cf.191;2008:14,17–18; 2020b:25;Moi2019:59).Wecritics,shewrites,shouldovercomeourfear “of beingcontaminatedandanimatedbythewordsweencounter” (2015:12),and whereasourtrainingpromptsustoaskcolleagues, “‘Butwhataboutpower?’ , ” we shouldnowask, “‘Butwhataboutlove?’ Or: ‘Whereisyourtheoryofattachment?’” (17–18).DrawingespeciallyonBrunoLatour’sactor-networktheoryto arguethattexts “makethingshappen” (168,180;cf.2020b:21–4),Felskiproposes a “postcriticalreading.” Thisapproach “treat[s]experiencesofengagement,wonder,orabsorptionnotassignsofnaïvetéorusererrorbutascluestowhyweare drawntoartinthe firstplace” (2015:180).Itasks, “Howdoworksofartmoveus, andwhy?Arecertainfeaturesoftextsmorelikelytotriggerempathyorrecognition,absorptionordisorientation?Whatdoesitmeantotalkaboutidentifying withacharacter?” (181;cf.AnkerandFelski2017;Felski2020a).
Felski’scleararticulationsofthematterathandandofitsstakesinspire (cf.Docherty2021),butIconcentrateforthemostpartonotherresearchin communications,literarystudies,mediastudies,andpsychologythatprovides accessibleandprecisedefinitionsandmodelsofimmersionandidentificationas wellasactionable findingsonhowimmersionandidentificationcomeabout.This projectrepresentsthe firstbook-lengthapplicationofthatresearchtothe Iliad.It therebyhelpsexplainwhypeoplecareaboutthisepicpoemanditscharacters(cf. B.Vermeule2010)andhowtheyactuallyrespondtothepoem.Putdifferently, thoseofusinHomericstudieswhowanttothinkaboutnarrativeimmersionand identificationshouldtakeasourguidesresearchersinthoseaforementioned fields whostudynarrativeimmersionandidentificationandespeciallythoseresearchers whodosoinanempiricalfashion.Byempirical,onereferstocontrolledexperimentswithresultssubjecttofalsi fication(HakemulderandvanPeer2016:192; differently,Margolin2008:9).
Tobesure,severalrelevantcontributionsinclassicalstudiesthataddressissues ofimmersionand/oridentificationdonotchoosethisroute.Studying “imagesof song ” foundwithintheHomericepics,StephenHalliwellnotesthepoems’ concernwithanaudience ’ s “intenseabsorption,”“raptconcentrationandengagement,” and “totalimmersion” (2011:45;cf.Liebert2017:48–62;Ready2018: 170–84;Giordano2022:177–83).Inanearlierintervention,Halliwelladdresses Plato’ s Republic:performersexperience “self-likening,absorption,andidentification” and “fullpsychologicalimmersion ” withcharacters(2002:54,79)whereas audiencemembersexperience “‘sympathy’ ratherthan ‘identification’” (81;cf. 93).NancyFelson’sinfluentialarticle, “VicariousTransport:FictiveDeixisin Pindar’ s Pythian Four,” finds “Pindarusesdeixiswithexpertiseandsubtlety, primarilytomakehisaudiences ‘travel’ acrossspaceandtime ....He transports themalongcarefullydemarcatedpathways” (1999:5;cf.Sobak2013:111n.10, 115n.21;Weiss2016:250;NeerandKurke2019:37,204,276).PaulineLeVen querieshowTimotheus’ s Persians “immersesitsaudience” suchthatit “isbrought tothescene” (2014:201–2)andexperiences “mentaltransport” or “mental displacement” (217–18;cf.242).Adeicticshift(seesection6.3,p.188)enacted bytheuseoftheimperfecttensecontributestothiseffect(197–204).Whatis more,intertextualcitationsinthedirectspeechofcharactersendowthecharacters with “fictionalweight” (216)andmakethemintoentities “whomtheaudiencecan notonlyobservedirectlybutalsoprojectinto,in[a]formofwish-fulfillment fantasy” (209;cf.232).JonasGrethleinarguesthatancientprosewriters Thucydidesinhis HistoryofthePeloponnesianWar,Xenophoninhis Anabasis, Plutarchinhis Alexander,Tacitusinhis Annals,Polybiusinhis Histories,and Sallustinhis TheWarwithCatiline deployarangeoftechniquesthatmakeus feelasifweexperiencethenarratedeventsorasif figuresfromthepastcome beforeus(2013).Theuseoftheimperfecttenseandthehistoricalpresent “letthe readerfollowthebattleasifitwasunfoldingrightbeforehereyes” (34;cf.63). Internalfocalizationrenderstheaction “present” (34),givestherecipient “ asense ofwitnessinghistoryasitunfolds” (36),and “putsthereaderrightonthespotof theaction” (56;seesection6.3,pp.182–7).Speechesbycharacterssuggest “unmediatedaccesstothepast” (36)and “contributetomakingthepastofthe narrativepresent” (64;cf.section6.3,p.190).Techniquesforcreatingsuspense (seesection7.2)helpusfeelwhat “thehistoricalagentsmusthavefelt” (44). “Sideshadowing” raisesthespecterofsomethinghappeningthatdoesnotultimately transpire,andthesepotentialitiesputusintheshoesofthecharacterswhodonot knowwhatthefutureholds(14,45,69).Whenarecipient fillsin “blanks” aboutwhat happenedtoacharacter,thisactofsupplementing “deepenstheimmersionofthe reader” (88).Second-personaddresstotheimpliedreader “deepenstheimmersive quality” ofapassage(99;seesection6.3,p.187).A “spatialdeixis” thattracksthe movementofacharactercanmake “thescenehighlygraphic” (122).Highlighting ambiguitiesanduncertaintiesregardingcauseandeffectandthecourseof eventsrecreatesfortherecipientwhatitfeltliketolivethroughthenarratedperiod
(154–6,165–7).Recipientscanfeelthemselvesaddressedwhenacharacteraddresses intheimperativemoodaninternalaudience: “theblendingtogetherofinternaland externalaudiencesraisestheimmediacyofthenarrative” (260–1).Aconclusionthat resistsclosure “bindsthereaderintotheworldofthenarrative” (303).
Wecanapproachthetopicsofimmersionandidentificationinvariousways. Nevertheless,Itakemyinspirationfrom:MichaelPower’s2006doctoraldissertation, TransportationandHomericEpic,whichemploysRichardGerrig’smodel oftransportation(1993)andMelanieGreenandTimothyBrock’sexpansionsof thatmodel(2000;2002)toexplorehowrecipientsrespondto Odyssey 9and,more precisely,tothe “ambiguous” characterizationofPolyphemusandOdysseus;from RutgerAllan,IrenedeJong,andCasperdeJonge’s2017articleontheHomeric epics, “From Enargeia toImmersion:TheAncientRootsofaModernConcept,” whichlookstoRyan’s2001book, NarrativeasVirtualReality:Immersionand InteractivityinLiteratureandElectronicMedia (cf.Clercx2018);andfrom five piecesbyRutgerAllanthatdeployarangeofresearchonimmersionfromoutside classicalstudies theworkofRyanfeaturesasdoesthatofGreenandBrock,of KaitlinFitzgeraldandGreen(2017),ofAnnekedeGraafetal.(2012),andof WernerWolf(e.g.,2013) toexploreimmersion(andidentification,toalesser extent)inancienttexts,includingtheHomericepics: “ConstrualandImmersion: ACognitiveLinguisticApproachtoHomericImmersivity” (2019a); “Herodotus andThucydides:DistanceandImmersion” (2019b); “NarrativeandImmersion: SomeLinguisticandNarratologicalAspects” (2020),whichstudiessomepassages inthe Iliad andinThucydides’ s HistoryofthePeloponnesianWar; “Metaleptic ApostropheinHomer:EmotionandImmersion” (2022a);and “Persuasionby Immersion:The narratio ofLysias1, OntheKillingofEratosthenes” (2022b).
IalsotipmyhattoJonasGrethleinandLuukHuitink’sarticle, “Homer’ s Vividness:AnEnactiveApproach.” TogetathowHomericepic “transports listenersandreaders,”“captivatestheaudience, ” andcastsits “spell ...on listeners ” (2017:83–4),theyleavethefriendlyconfinesofclassicalstudiesandutilizean enactiveapproachfromcognitive(literary)studies(ormoreproperlyanapproach fromthebranchofenactivismcalled “sensorimotorenactivism” (Ward, Silverman,andVillalobos2017:370–2)).Inhis2021book,Grethleinusesthe sametoolstoilluminatetheimmersivepotentialofthe paedagogus’sfalsereportof Orestes’sdeathinSophocles’ s Electra (2021a:53–67).Finally,Isingleouttwo monographsinbiblicalstudies.EricDouglass’ s InterpretingNewTestament Narratives:RecoveringtheAuthor’sVoice (2018)constructsanidiosyncraticbut detailedmodelofidentificationthatoverlapsinseveralofitsparticularswiththe empiricalstudiesofidentificationIwilluse.DouglasscitespublicationsbyKeith Oatley(1994)andJonathanCohen(2001),twoscholarswhoseextensivebibliographiesfeatureprominentlyinmyownpresentation.In Identifikationspotenziale indenPsalmen:Emotionen,MetaphernundTextdynamikindenPsalmen30,64, 90und147 (2019),SigridEderalsointeractswithearlyformulationsofWerner
Wolf(1993)andOatley(1994)andmakesuseofresearchfromstillotherscholars whoseworkwillappearinwhatfollows,suchasEdTan(1994),DavidMialland DonKuiken(2002),andSuzanneKeen(2007).
Iwouldurgestickingtotheworkofresearchersinnarrativestudies.Ina chapterthatculminatesinananalysisofHermes’sarrivalonOgygiain Odyssey 5(2019a),R.AllanturnstoRolfZwaan’ s “ImmersedExperiencerFramework” (2003;cf.Grethlein2021a:102;2021b:226–7).AsAllanstresses,Zwaanaimsto explainhowwecomprehendlanguage:hedoesnotaimtoexplainnarrative immersion(2019a:66).ThisfeatureofZwaan ’smodelpresumablyjustifiesits applicationtothestudyofnarrative:iflanguagecomprehensionisamatterof immersionandwearestudyingimmersioninnarrativesthatinvolvelanguage comprehension,thenweshouldbelookingatresearchonlanguagecomprehensionasimmersive.Igrantthatthestudyofliterarytextsbenefitsfromthe applicationofembodiedtheories,suchasZwaan’s,ofhowoneprocesseslanguage. Inthiscase,however,Iworrythatifwefocusonhowlinguisticactivitywritlarge involvesimmersion,welosesightofwhatisdistinctiveaboutrecipients’ immersioninnarratives:asWolfopines usingaestheticillusion,hispreferredtermfor whatotherscallimmersion—“thereisaspecialrelationshipbetweenaesthetic illusionandnarrative” (2014:section3.4).Towit,theimmersedreaderunderstandsthatthestoryworldisnottherealworld;this “bifurcation ” (Felski2008:74) or “twofoldness” (Plantinga2018:31)doesnotconcernZwaan’simmersed experiencer.
Thisattributeofimmersioninnarrativeshasimportantimplications.For example,onecanspeakoftemporalimmersion.Temporallyimmersedrecipients attendtoacharacter’spast,present,andfuture:theyfocusontherelationships betweeneventsinthecharacter’spasttotheirpresentcircumstancesandbetween eventsintheirpresenttopossibleoutcomesinthefuture(Ryan2015a:99–106).In keepingwiththeideathatnarrativeoffersasafespaceforemotional(Oatley2012: 51,140;Menninghausetal.2017;cf.OatleyandGholamain1997:267)and empathetic(Keen2006:220;Caracciolo2016:42–3,45;Lesser2022:20) engagement anideaventuredbyPlato(Republic 605c9–606c9;Halliwell2005: 400)anddiscernableineighteenth-centurywriterstoo(Gallagher2006:351) Grethleinreflectsontheattractionoftemporalimmersion(2017a:52–3;cf.56):
They[readers]confronttimeinthesamewayasintheeverydayworld,however, withoutanypragmaticstrains.Asintheirownlives,readershavere-and protentionsandharbourexpectationsaswellasmemories.Yet,thememoryof whathashappenediswithouttheweightithasinreallife,theanticipationof whatwillcomewithouttheanxietyofeverydayexpectations.Narrativepermits ustoundergoanexperiencewithoutbeingdirectlyaffectedbyit.Itallowsusto experiencetheforceoftimeandsimultaneouslykeepsitatasafedistance.... Narrativesubjectsusto,andsimultaneouslyletsusovercome,theforcetowhich
weareexposedintheeverydayworld....Readersexperiencetimebutfreefrom itsreal-lifeimplications,notablydeath.
Temporalimmersionbringsthesebenefits.Thatrecipientsarenotactuallyinthe storyworldandknowthattheyarenotenablesthemtoprofitfromtheexperience oftemporalimmersion.
1.4.OutlineofChapters
Thisbookcontainstwoparts.PartIaddressesidentification.Istartwithidentificationbecauseidentificationgoeshandinhandwithimmersionandbecausethe discussionofimmersioninPartIIatacoupleofpointsbuildsexplicitlyonthe findingsinPartI.This firstpartcomprisesChapters2through4.
The firstlengthysectionofChapter2,section2.2,usestheaforementioned 2017articlebyAllan,deJong,anddeJongetobeginexploringthecomponentsof identificationwithcharactersinanarrative.Itdirectsattentiontothecapacious butgranularmodelsofidentificationcraftedbyresearchersoutsideofclassical studies.Section2.3delvesdeeperintothefactorsthoseresearchersseeoperating astriggersforidentification,suchasthedegreetowhichrecipients findcharacters similartothemselvesandthedegreetowhichtheydeemthenarrativerealistic. InvokingancientwritersandcommentatorsfromGorgiastoAristarchus,section 2.4investigatesthenumerousprecedentswe findinancientscholarshipfora studyofidentification.Section2.5explainswhyIamcomfortablewiththeterms “character” and “emotion,” whyIspeakofmodernrecipientsexperiencing “ emotionalidentification” withHomericcharacters,andwhatImeanbyemotional identification.
Chapter3initiatesourstudyofthe Iliad andlaysthegroundworkfortheclose readingspresentedinChapter4.Section3.2reviewsninefeaturesofthepoemasa wholethatpromptidentificationwithitscharacters,fromtheprevalenceof laudatoryepithetstotheabundanceofwell-knowncharacters.Section3.3examineshowHomericcharactersenabletheirinterlocutorstoidentifywiththe charactersinthestoriestheytell:thismoveonthecharacters’ partreflectsthe poet’sowneffortstoencouragetheexternalaudiencetoidentifywithhis characters.
Chapter4studies firstidentificationwithmortalcharactersinfourdiscrete episodesinthe Iliad (4.2)andthenidentificationwithdivinitiesinthe Homeric HymntoDemeter (4.3.1)andintwoepisodesinthe Iliad (4.3.2and4.3.3).These detailedanalysesbringoutthevariouswaysinwhichthe Iliad cuesidentification withitscastofcharacters.Section4.4considersfactorsthatinterrupttheexperienceofidentificationorevenimpedearecipient’sabilitytoidentifywitha character.Thesebreaksandobstaclesallowtherecipienttorechargeforanother
roundofidentification,ataxingendeavor.Section4.5roundsoffthechapterand PartIbyqueryingthepoliticsofidentification:itcritiquesidentification’scritics anddefendersandaskswhatrecipientsgetoutoftheexperience.
PartIIonimmersioncomprisesChapters5through8.Chapter5providesa pointofentryintothesubject.Section5.2chartshowancientauthorsandcritics, fromHesiodtoLonginus,talkedaboutwhatwecallimmersion.Section5.3offers anintroductiontoresearchonimmersionin fieldsoutsideclassicalstudies, stressinghowinvestigatorsteaseoutthedistinctcomponentsofthephenomenon.
Chapter6beginsbyexploringspatialimmersion:theinvestigationlooksatthe Iliad’ssettings,thepoem’smoveableobjectsandpeople,andhowithandles switchesinlocation(6.2).Thissectionconcludeswithanexplorationofhowthe poem ’snumerousplacenameshelpestablishthestoryworld.Section6.3examines spatio-temporalimmersion.Ittacklesthemotorresonancetriggeredinrecipients bydescriptionsofcharacters’ actionsanddescriptionsoftheactionsoftheobjects thecharactersuse;momentsofinternal(embedded)focalization;inclusiveforms ofaddress(suchas “ you ”);similes;anddifferentformsofspeechpresentation, includingspeechintroductions.
Chapter7considersemotionalimmersion.Section7.2investigatessuspense.It laysouttherelevanceofdifferentkindsofsuspense(how-,when-,what-)tothe Iliad andthenaskswhatmakesthoseofuswithpriorknowledgeofwhatwill happenfeelsuspense,pointingtoourattachmenttocharacters.Thesection continueswithadiscussionofdiegeticversusnon-diegeticdelayasmechanisms ofsuspenseandconsiderssimilesfromthatangle.Itcloseswithabriefcomment onso-calledmetasuspense,whereinarecipientwondershowthetellerwillkeep thestoryonitspropercourse.Section7.3studies firsthowthe Iliad promptsusto feelarangeofotheremotionsbytriggeringourpropensitytojudgepeople(and characters)andsecondhowthepoemcangetustofeelemotionsforourselves, “notforothers” (Ryan2015a:108),suchasdisgust.
Chapter8attendstomattersofcontentandform.Ontheonehand,the Iliad immersesusbytakingusintotheinnerlivesofitscharacters(8.2).Ontheother hand,the Iliad immersesusbecauseitpromptsustothinkaboutourselvesand bringstomindpersonalmemories;recipients’ familiaritywiththepoet’ scompositionalmechanismsalsoaidsimmersion(8.3).Indeed,immersioncanarisenot onlywhenweareenmeshedinthe Iliad’sstoryworldbutalsowhenweattendto theformalfeaturesofthepoetry(8.4).
TheconcludingChapter9beginswithcaveatsandspeculation.Anarrative neithercontinuallyimmersesrecipientsnorcontinuallydemandsthattheyidentifywiththecharacters,andrecipients’ owntraitsandattributesinfluencetheir degreeofimmersionandidentification.Wecanmakeinformedguessesabout howtheHomericpoet’soralperformanceaffectedrecipients’ experienceof immersionandidentification.Aboutothercomponentsoftheseexperienceswe canbemoreconfident.Immersedrecipientstendnotto findfaultwiththetext
(counterargue),andimmersionandidentificationhavetheabilitytoinformone’ s ideasandevenactionsafterthereadingorviewingexperienceends.Ireflecton howthesefactorsshape(d)responsestothe Iliad andthenconcludebyurging teachersofthe Iliad todiscussimmersionandidentificationwiththeirstudents.
Peoplehavebeenlisteningtoandreadingthe Iliad forover2,500years.What exactlyenablessuchpersistencerequiresattention(cf.Dimock1997;Felski2008: 10–11,115;2015:154–5,169).Thepoweroftheinstitutionsunderwhoseauspices recipientstendtoencounterthe Iliad fromthePanathenaicfestivalinancient Athenstodepartmentalcurriculainmodernuniversities andtheinertiaofthose institutionscanonlyaccountforsomuch.NoramIfondoftheideathatthe Iliad containsasetoftimelesslessonsthateverygenerationneedstolearn.Rather,the Iliad’sabilitytoimmerseitsrecipientsandprompttheiridentificationwithits charactersprovidesabetterexplanationofitsdurability.
Withthatdurabilityinmind,Isometimestrytoreconstructanotionalarchaiceraaudiencemember’sreactiontotheHomerictextandIsometimesposit atranstemporalreaction.Itogglebackandforthbetweentheseendeavors (cf.Budelmann2000:e.g.,7,64,157;Griffith2015:27,48n.113).Thereisequal valueinconsideringhowthe Iliad resonateswithancientandmodernaudiences.
