MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205653210 · doi:10.1353/phx.2018.0046

Homer and the Poetics of Hades by George Alexander Gazis

2018· article· en· W4205653210 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stamatia Dova

Bibliographic record

VenuePhoenix · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClassical Antiquity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoeticsLiteratureScholarshipPoetryContext (archaeology)George (robot)ArtNarrativePhilosophyArt historyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 363 Homer and the Poetics of Hades. By George Alexander Gazis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2018. Pp. xi, 253. George Alexander Gazis's book is a welcome addition to the growing scholarship on the ancient Greek Underworld. It is based on the author’s doctoral dissertation at Durham University and consists of seven chapters organized in two parts. Through close readings of most Homeric passages pertaining to Hades, Gazis looks within the tradition of the Iliad and the Odyssey to identify a poetics unique to Hades, governed by its impenetrable darkness and informed by the experience of heroic afterlife. Gazis introduces opposing pairs, such as Muses/Hades and light/darkness, as structural elements of this poetics and argues that Hades, as a poetic domain inaccessible to the Muses and to all Olympian gods, provides an alternative context where “the mainstream epic tradition can be discussed, re-evaluated, and recast as the shades of the dead reflect upon their story and relate to us their own very personal experience of the epic past” (13). The Introduction offers a comprehensive overview of the concept of Homeric enargeia in ancient and modern scholarship. This thorough presentation of Homeric vividness and its incompatibility with darkness also serves as a theoretical basis for the subsequent discussion of the invisibility of Hades, on which Gazis places special emphasis. After connecting the Homeric narrative about the cap of Hades (Il. 5.844–845) and the etymology of Hades as A-idēs to poetic attestations of the utter isolation of the Underworld, the author proceeds to explore Hades’ presence in the Iliad. In Part 1, Chapter One argues that the Iliad, despite its focus on light and brightness, keeps Hades in the background as a prerequisite to kleos. Nevertheless, Hades’ associations with glory are notably absent from Patroclus’ address to Achilles during the latter’s dream in Il. 23.59–107, which is discussed in Chapter Two. Gazis reads the dream scene as a poetic (and metapoetic) statement on the relationship between the two heroes as they interact for the last time in the Iliad, asserting that their conversation “across the divide of the living and the dead” (48) allows internal and external audiences of the Iliad a precious glimpse into Achilles’ acceptance of his own mortality through the death of his nearest and dearest. According to Gazis, this acceptance also entails a distinct reformulation of the heroic experience, centered on emotion and detached from warlike splendor. Part 2, Chapters Three to Seven, delves into the Odyssean Underworld, viewing it as a space where conventional poetic vision, traditionally granted by the Muses, is no longer acting as a source of bardic inspiration. Gazis’s argument for a poetics of Hades is made most compellingly here as he explores the “experimentation with voice and genre which is made possible by the Underworld setting of Odyssey 11” (83), as well as the performative possibilities of Hades. As a poetic resource, the Underworld has a liberating effect on both context and content, giving the poet the freedom to experiment with un-epic sentiments and lyric overtones evoking Sappho or Stesichorus. Gazis revisits all of Odysseus’ encounters in the Nekyia against the backdrop of an antagonism between a poetics of vividness, portraying the world of the living, and “a poetics of darkness, which favours inwardness and personal experience” (102). This tension is illustrated in the death narratives of Elpenor (102–108) and Agamemnon (167–181), where the shade’s perspective comes into stark contrast with the version provided by an external source. The author skillfully demonstrates that this contrast evolves into a powerful display of personal feelings in the “Catalogue of Heroines” and into passionate 364 PHOENIX revisionism in the “Catalogue of Heroes,” examined in Chapters Five and Seven respectively . Chapter Five offers an in-depth analysis of the stories of the fourteen heroines Odysseus meets after the encounter with his mother. By diligently juxtaposing the hero’s eyewitness account with the Hesiodic Catalogue of Women and other traditions, Gazis explicates how the poetics of Hades enables the characters to supply only the information that completes their profiles as they wish to construct them, according to their...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.358
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhoenixSame topicClassical Antiquity StudiesFrench-language works237,207