Ulysses vs Odysseus on Ego

Throughout Homer's Odyssey and the Coen Brothers' O Brother, Where Art Thou?, both main characters, Odysseus and Ulysses respectively, are shown to have rather large egos that often end up getting both themselves and their crew in trouble. Whether inducing the wrath of Poseidon by letting Polyphemus know exactly who it was that tricked and blinded him or leaving behind a trail of "Dapper Dan" products for the police to follow to keep his hair neat, both characters end up in tight spots from their egotistical antics.

It makes sense for the characters to have similar egos; O Brother, Where Art Thou? is based upon the Odyssey, and Ulysses likewise is based upon Odysseus. However, the difference between Odysseus's ego and Ulysses's ego is that Ulysses often has humor associated with the problems his narcissistic antics, while Odysseus in general has tragedy associated with his such antics. As a result, I ended up liking the character of Ulysses more than that of Odysseus.

Why is this? The two characters are extremely similar in terms of their narcissism. Both of them multiple times end up getting their crews into deep trouble in various ways, resulting in the death or injury of crew members. How is it, then, that I find Ulysses more likable than Odysseus?

At first, I thought that it was the comedic aspect of Ulysses. He is able to be a very humorous character to watch in spite of the trouble his selfishness causes. On the other hand, the Odyssey is not a comedy, and as such the trouble Odysseus causes is more epic than funny. As such, I could laugh my way through Ulysses's problems, while I was able to stop and think about Odysseus's problems.
For example, when Ulysses's need for Dapper Dan products gives the police a trail to follow and find them, I was too busy being amused at how they had been found to worry about how vanity had caused the downfall of everyone Ulysses was with. On the other hand, when Odysseus bragged about who he was to Polyphemus, there was nothing humorous about it; all I was able to see was the ego of Odysseus causing Poseidon's wrath to crash down upon the crew.

However, taking aside the humor, some of what Ulysses does is really stupid and detrimental to his "crew", such as baiting them with the promise of a nonexistent treasure. So, it cannot just be humor that makes me not mind Ulysses as much in terms of egotism. What I think pushes Odysseus over the edge towards being a character I don't like as much is the narrator. In the Odyssey, Odysseus is the only survivor of the events he talks about. As such, he is able to narrate them however he pleases. Therefore, there is a lot of room for doubt in his story, and his ego and ability to easily lie is offsetting for me. On the other hand, none of Ulysses's crew actually dies; he has sources that he can corroborate with. They can get mad at him, and we can see them getting mad, and we can see such fights being resolved. The humor in O Brother, Where Art Thou? along with the credibility of watching that story unfold makes the ego of Ulysses much more bearable compared to that of Odysseus.

A Reflection on the Development of Telemachus

The first four books of the Odyssey center around the character of Odysseus's son, Telemachus. In the beginning of the Odyssey, Telemachus seems rather pathetic. All he does is mope about while the suitors take advantage of his father's absence, while not actually doing anything about them. Then, Athena inspires him to go looking for his father, and to start taking more charge. He takes small steps towards taking charge by ordering his mom away, trying to tell the fathers of the suitors to get them to stop, and by going off on his own little adventure to find information about his father.

As the Odyssey goes on, Telemachus seems more and more in charge. He is able to successfully ask the people he meets about Odysseus, and when the time comes to go home, he is able to take full command of his crew to avoid the suitors, coming up with clever excuses. When he returns, he seems very much more in charge. He takes command with Eumaeus and his disguised father when he visits them, and is able to not only listen to Odysseus's plan, but offer his own input as well. Upon his return to the palace, he speaks much more confidently around the suitors rather than being completely passive. He's willing to fight alongside his father in the bloodbath of Book 22, and even has his own decision to do a mass execution for the unfaithful maids.

At first, this personal growth seemed unnatural to me. Homer is trying to get me to believe that Telemachus goes from being a passive boy to a man capable of performing mass execution in one week? Interactions from his homecoming made me especially skeptical of this. The fact that, after only one week of being away at sea, his nurse and swineherd show that much affection for his return? It was as if he had fought in the Trojan War himself! As said in class, it almost reminds me of a little kid coming home from summer camp for the first time. So, he clearly hasn't shown much maturity up until now. And yet, he's still able to go along with a slaughter and think to mass hang the maids?

I thought about this a little further, however, and realized that this might not be so unnatural. The reason I say this is mainly because of his parents. Both of them are very cunning and very smart, so some of that had to be passed down to him. So, he naturally has some cunning, but how does he go through such a transformation in such a short time? I'm wondering if maybe he's only making an external show of transformation. He makes several mistakes in spite of his supposed coming-of-age, clearly still showing that he has a lot of room to grow. Yet, he's trying to be stronger. Maybe having his father there also encouraged him; he has more of a safety net with him there. Overall, I'm not sure whether or not I fully believe how far Telemachus has come in such a short amount of time, yet subtle mistakes make me still believe that he could have gone that far in maturity.