Telemachus' Baby Odyssey

One thing that interested me in our class discussions of the Telemachiad was the purpose – or lack thereof – of Athena sending him on his mission. What’s the point? By any normal measure, the journey is pointless – his father is alive and well, and through the help of the Phaeacians, he’s coming home safely. Odysseus is no longer in any danger, and if Telemachus had kept his butt in place, Athena could easily have set up a meeting between the two when Odysseus got home. She started the journey too late for Telemachus to actually help his dad out (seven years of Athena telling Telemachus nothing while Odysseus was stuck on Ogygia comes to mind), and while he is technically gaining more information, it’s all ten years out of date. He’s not achieving much of anything, and he’s not in any personal danger. So why bother?

In class, we talked about how Telemachus needs to grow up and gain some agency – the boy we see in the opening book isn’t exactly heroic. He’s sulking and pouty, tells his mom off, and ends up crying when he tries to address the assembly. He’s obviously got Odysseus’ noble heart, and tries to help out the visitor (Mentor/Athena) and explain to Ithaca what is happening to his house, but he doesn’t have the maturity necessary to pull it off – he’s too passive and ineffectual to make a difference in his own home. One common thread in the Telemachiad is comparisons between Odysseus’ situation and Agamemnon’s – connecting the characters of Orestes and Telemachus. As sons abandoned by warrior fathers, they both became passive and allowed that father’s household to be defiled. Orestes received a prophecy (I think it was a prophecy. I haven’t read the Oresteia since freshman year) telling him that it was his responsibility to man up and right the wrongs done be Clytemnestra and Aegisthus. Now Telemachus has reached a similar part in his story – a part where he has to gain some agency and some more control over his own life. However, I think a more interesting comparison between Orestes and Telemachus comes before they begin their “journeys.” Both were basically abandoned by their fathers at young ages, Telemachus never even having known his, and raised in households not only devoid of a father figure, but with men who were explicitly horrible, awful, no-good people – and both developed into fairly quiet, ineffectual characters as a result. Orestes lets Aegisthus and Clytemnestra reign as tyrants for years, and Telemachus begins his story as a subordinate to the suitors within his own house. Neither have the bravery or confidence to do anything.

Basically, I think it’s overcoming this mindset – quiet, useless, incapable of heroism – that is the real reason that Athena sends him on his journey. Based on his weird life circumstances, I’m betting Telemachus has grown up in a pretty warped mindset – he’s gone his entire life hearing mythicized stories of his father’s battle valor, his brilliance, his courage, stories probably amplified by the people telling it to him (loyal servants, Penelope, Laertes, or the grandma whose name I don’t feel like looking up). As a young boy, he’d naturally want to follow in his father’s footsteps and prove himself, conquering some great danger. But Telemachus’ greatest enemy is the suitors, who he is not at all capable of defeating. His entire life, his father has been his personal hero, who faced down armies, but at his first real challenge, a bunch of drunk idiots harassing his mom, he’s proven himself useless. Naturally, this isn’t actually fair. Going by the timeline, Telemachus was somewhere between ten and fifteen years old when the suitors moved in. He couldn’t exactly take them on, and they were at least partially within their rights to stay at first. Telemachus probably lived most of his teenage years in this environment, to the point that when he is old enough to assume duties as the master of the house, he’s been stuck in this situation for too long. He doesn’t know how to fight back. Telemachus has also probably been romanticizing a larger-than-life version of his father his entire life, and it seems like he’s been punishing himself for failing at defending his father’s house and his memory. He doesn’t even acknowledge Odysseus as his father in the beginning of the book. Maybe he’s questioning his mother’s faithfulness – but maybe he’s questioning himself. He’s never been able to prove himself worthy of his father’s throne. How could he be the son of a man so absolutely perfect, when all he’s ever done is fail? Maybe Athena wants to send him on this journey to give him some other way of looking at the world – something besides a boy who could never do anything right, couldn’t protect his mother or his palace or his legacy. If Telemachus had just waited a few more weeks until his dad finally made it, he still would have been a sulking, self-hating little boy.

But instead, through his miniature, no-stakes journey, Telemachus finally gains his own character arc – he gets a chance to learn about his father from the men who fought beside him, he gets information, he matures, learning public speaking and diplomacy, and he kicks off the suitor’s plan to kill him (yay, more reasons to slaughter them). And on top of all that, it motivates him. Now, he knows his father. He knows his legacy. Even Helen comments on how he looks like his father – Telemachus can finally identify with his unknown dad. It makes Odysseus more human to him. He’s not a mythical figure built by Penelope’s tales. He’s a man, he had friends, he had soldiers, and now he has a son with some actual motivation. At the end of the Telemachiad, the boy who started out whiny and sulking and ineffectual is sailing home with a goddess at his side, a crew at his command, and a newfound righteous desire to kick some suitor butt. So yeah, I think Athena had a purpose when she sent him off on his journey. She’s the goddess of battle strategy. I think she knew exactly what she was doing.