Side View’s weekend theme is visual this week: probably my favourite theme ever.
Two words.
Epic poem: these dry, dusty monosyllables box in a seamless, organic ritual of storytelling of such stature and power it has enthralled men – absorbed them utterly – for thousands upon thousands of years.
The epic has the things we love; the characters who have just enough of us about them to be riveting, who tread long, involved, unthinkable paths on our behalf. Through them, we can battle the cyclops, or rebuff Morgan Le Fay, or duel with Vader.
That’s why this little illustration – chosen for Side View’s theme this week – is so engaging. It lays out a smorgasbord of epic possibilities.
But does it include everyone?
Let’s match it against one of the oldest epics we know.
Gilgamesh. Twelve ancient tablets, give or take, and those only the standard version found in the library of an ancient Assyrian King. The best part of four thousand years old, there are wandering versions, fragments, story wisps, which weave like a dream, back and forth over the same episodes, re-working them, re-telling them.
I can’t tell it all here and now. Of course not; but even the beginning is a gut-crunching tablet-turner, and in those ancient days when the story was told for entertainment I am left wondering how anyone ever got any sleep.
The epic begins with a master stroke, for the story opens, not with a hero, but with an anti-hero.
Gilgamesh. An arrogant, bored monarch, accustomed to oppressing his people, and with Lord’s rights. You know: the ones more usually associated with mediaeval lords; they had the right to sleep with any of the women in their fiefdom, on the first night after they married.
Got you now, haven’t I?
Gilgamesh indulged his rights constantly. He lived the law right royally. And why shouldn’t he? He was two-thirds God. The man was an icon. A little seamy, maybe, but a very powerful player.
And no one stood up to him. Gilgamesh was the epic hero you love to hate.
So the Gods put their celestial heads together, and they thought: let’s make something to distract him.
And they made a man. A wild and hairy man who lived with animals, named Enkidu.
They made him, but they didn’t lead him straight to Gilgamesh. No; in his first appearance, he was making a nuisance of himself uprooting all the traps which had been set by a local trapper. The trapper enlisted Gilgamesh’s help, and Gilgamesh advised using a weapon he knew well: women.
A stunning, shapely temple prostitute was employed to seduce Enkidu away from the whole business of traps for seven days. Which she did professionally and with aplomb. And at the end of that, she took him back to Gilgamesh’s city.
But it seems nothing could keep the wild man out of trouble. He heard about Gilgamesh and those lord’s rights, and he was outraged. He resolved to sort the business out once and for all.
Most people would have thought up a cunning plan at this point. But not Enkidu. He marched straight to the bedroom where the bride awaited and stood in front of the doorway.
Whereupon there was the most almighty fight between two-thirds-god and wild man. Of course, two-thirds god won; but somehow, by the end of the whole business, they had forged a bond of friendship. And they resolved to go away together on a great adventure.
The beginning.
Perhaps we should add a few more characters to the opening picture from our post today. It needs an anti-hero, and a wronged bride, and a wild and hairy but well-intentioned man.
After all, they were here before all the rest.
Kate Shrewsday 
I’m still caught up in the concept of the shapely, temple prostitute plying her trade with “aplomb”. I look forward to the rest of the epic tale when I can lift my mind off the floor:)
😀 Sexsexsexsexsexsex, Roger. An epic ain’t an epic without it.
of course, the mainspring of existence….
How is it that men can fight, and when it’s over, go out for a beer together? Why can’t women do that?
I don’t know how they do it, Jennifer. I wish I had the knack.
It’s just the chance to go for a beer, really. We’re very shallow.
Bravo, Kate! It’s been a while since I’ve read Gilgamesh, but you brought the complex and fascinating story back to life. It takes great writing skill to synthesize this epic-sized plot down to brief, easily digestible size. Periodically my eye catches the spine of my old volume and I think I’d like to read it again, but I don’t. Now I just may give it a fresh read. You reminded me why I enjoyed it in the first place. Well done!
I am, for the first time, tempted to write a book, Debra. Gilgamesh has it all. It is a best seller which would be so fabulous to re-work for today.
Oh my goodness, Kate! It would! I definitely encourage you to seriously take that on, as I can imagine the story reworked in your particular style and voice. You are a gifted writer and it would be a very unique work. Strike while the inspiration is fresh. 🙂
enthralling, a wonderful re-telling of an epic as only Kate can do.
Thanks Sidey. Kind words.
i did so enjoy it, you really have to do the whole thing Kate-style
Ahh 🙂 mmm…. oooooo!
Well done. A fine theme.
Gilgamesh: Love it.
We’ve come a long way from tablet turners to reading pixels on a screen. Thanks, Kate.
As much as I love to read, there are some books that were just a chore to get thru. Judging by your retelling this classic, I think you have the knack to update these dusty tomes. I enjoyed your story, Kate.
Fabulous tale Kate. Your version is much more interesting and believable. 🙂
One of the very best Star Trek episodes relies heavily on the story of Gilgamesh to illustrate how difficult it can be to communicate with another race whose language operates in a fundamentally different way to our own. Check it out – the episode is Darmok – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darmok
Fun summary, but you forgot to mention the thinly veiled propaganda that is much of this epic.
2E0MCA, “Darmok” is fundamentally about knowledge of linguistic context, there is no “fundamentally different” communication, only a lack of situational and etymological information.
Any translator or person who wishes to gain fluency in a language must learn these things and the context and jargon associated with it, or be doomed to misunderstandings.