Once I wrote Helen of Troy, in Greek.
Well, or in what looked like Greek, although I was actually only inventing that.
Even if Helen of Troy would have been only an invented name in real Greek too, come to think about it, since it is assuredly doubtful that anybody would have been calling her that at the time.
I have decided to hide among some women so that I do not have to go and fight over Helen of Troy. That hardly being the manner in which one imagines that Achilles would have thought about such things, for instance.
Or, I have decided to make believe I am mad and sow salt into my fields so that I do not have to go and fight over Helen of Troy. That hardly being the manner in which one imagines that Odysseus would have thought about them, either.
Moreover everybody would have doubtless been too accustomed to calling her of Sparta to have troubled with changing in any event.
Even after they had sailed to Troy in the one thousand, one hundred and eighty-six ships.
Which is how many ships it says in Homer that the Greeks sailed to Troy in, incidentally.
Even if one is personally next to positive that there would have been no way in the world that the Greeks could have sailed in one thousand, one hundred and eighty-six ships.
Doubtless the Greeks had twenty or thirty ships.
Well, as I believe I have mentioned, the whole of Troy being like little more than your ordinary city block and a few stories in height, practically.
No matter how extraordinary one may find it that young men died there in a war that long ago and then died in the same place three thousand years after that.
Although what one doubts even more sincerely is that Helen would have been the cause of that war to begin with, of course.
After all, a single Spartan girl, as Walt Whitman once called her.
Even if in The Trojan WomenEuripides does let everybody be furious at Helen.
In the Odyssey,where she has a splendid radiant dignity, nothing of that sort is hinted at at all.
And even in the Iliad,when the war is still going on, she is generally treated with respect.
So unquestionably it was only later that people decided it had been Helen's fault.
Well, Euripides of course coming much later than Homer on his own part, for instance.
I do not remember how much later, but much later.
As a matter of fact it was as much later as twice the time between now and when Bertrand Russell's grandfather met George Washington, approximately.
And certainly any number of things can be lost track of, in that many years.
So that once he had gotten the idea to write a play about the war, certainly it would have been necessary for Euripides to think up an interesting reason for the war.
Not knowing that the real reason must surely have been to see who would pay tariff to whom, so as to be able to make use of a channel of water, as I have indicated.
Although on the other hand it is also quite possible that Euripides just lied.
Quite possibly Euripides knew perfectly well about the real reason for the war, but decided that in a play Helen would be a more interesting reason.
Certainly writers must have now and again done this sort of thing, one would imagine.
So that when one comes right down to it, it is equally possible that Homer just lied, too.
Quite possibly Homer knew perfectly well himself about the real number of ships, but decided that in a poem one thousand, one hundred and eighty-six would be a more interesting number, as well.
Well, as it undeniably is, as is verified by the very fact that I remember it.
Doubtless if I had underlined only twenty or thirty ships when I was tearing pages out of the Iliadand dropping them into a fire I would not have remembered that at all.
In fact if Homer had said there were only twenty or thirty ships doubtless I would not have underlined any numbers to begin with.
Which is to say that perhaps certain writers are sometimes smarter than one thinks.
Then again, Rainer Maria Rilke once wrote a novel called The Recognitions,about a man who wears an alarm clock around his neck, which seems less like a lie than just a foolish subject for a book altogether.
Except that in this instance I remember it without even having ever read The Recognitions.
And which furthermore now makes me realize that if Euripides had not blamed Helen for the war very possibly I would not remember Helen, either.
So that doubtless it was quite hasty of me, to criticize Rainer Maria Rilke or Euripides.
Even if on third thought what one is only now forced to suspect is that there could have been still a different reason entirely, for the wrong number of ships in the Iliad.
Which is to say that since Homer did not know how to write, very possibly he did not know how to add, either.
Especially since Pascal had not even been born, yet.
But be all that as it may, what it also occurs to me to mention here is that I am frequently just as annoyed at how Clytemnestra is blamed for certain things as I am about Helen, to tell the truth.
This would be in regard to when Clytemnestra stabs Agamemnon in his bath once he comes home from the same war, of course.
Needing some assistance. But nonetheless.
Although what I am really saying is why in heaven's name wouldn't she have?
Well, after the way Agamemnon had sacrificed their own daughter to raise wind for those identical ships, I naturally mean.
God, the things men used to do.
Kings and generals especially, even if that is hardly any excuse.
But what also just so happens is that I have sailed from Greece to Troy myself, actually.
Well, or vice versa. But the point being that even with a page torn out of an atlas, instead of maritime charts, the entire trip took me only two unhurried days.
In spite of having been frightened half to death by that ketch, near Lesbos, with its spinnaker taking noisy wind, even.
But which in either case still scarcely comes close to making it a distance that calls for the sacrifice of anybody over, obviously.
Let alone one's own child.
And which is additionally not even to bring up the question as to what possible difference a day or two's extra sailing might make in any event, if your silly war is about to last for ten full years.
But then to top it off there stands the man with a concubine in tow when he finally gets back too, no less.
And yet the way the plays are written, even Electra and Orestes somehow manage to get furious at Clytemnestra for finding the sum of this a bit much.
Again one may be foolhardy for criticizing famous writers, but certainly it does seem that somebody ought to draw the line someplace.
Daddy murdered our sister to raise wind for his silly ships, being what any person in her right mind must surely imagine that Electra and Orestes would have thought.
Mommy murdered our daddy, being all that they think in the plays instead.
Moreover in this case there are plays by Aeschylus and Sophocles as well, even before Euripides.
Nonetheless one is still categorically forced to believe that Electra and Orestes would have never felt that way in the least.
In fact what I have more than once suspected is that the whole story about the two of them taking their own revenge on Clytemnestra was another lie altogether. More than likely all three of them together would have felt nothing except good riddance.
Or certainly once the bathroom had been cleaned up.
And then lived happily together ever after, even.
So that as a matter of fact what I have furthermore even suspected is that Clytemnestra would have hardly been that much upset about the notion of the concubine after all, or at least once she had gotten the more basic matters off her chest.