“Name one hero who was happy”
Madeline Miller’s The Song of Achilles is a retelling of the Trojan War myth. In this novel, she shifts the focus away from the stories on the battlefield and onto the relationship of two young lovers. Narrated from Patroclus’ perspective, the novel follows his life alongside Achilles from childhood to their time at Troy. While retelling the familiar myth, the story is less focused on recounting events than on the emotional weight behind the two boys’ dreams and pursuits.
Achilles’ pursuit of glory can be seen either as ambition or fear. Before he was born, both the prophet Oracle and his mother, Thetis, had predicted that he would live a life of greatness. In this prophecy, his life was reduced to a binary: a long, peaceful life in obscurity, or a short life in glory. This kind of rigid stipulation trapped Achilles in an identity foreclosure (Petitpas, 1978), which means he committed to being a hero even before he had a chance to explore what he could have been. He was fixating on how he would be remembered as the foundation for all of his thoughts and considerations. This was his attempt to outlive death through his legacy; he attempted to ensure that his life would not vanish without a trace (DBryant & LPeck, 2009). Under a great amount of pressure, Achilles internalized a performance-based identity, determining his worth entirely by what he does. In doing so, he underwent a form of self-dehumanization where he’s no longer a person who fought but just a weapon that existed.
“He is a weapon, a killer. Do not forget it. You can use a spear as a walking stick, but that will not change its nature.”
And yet, he believed that he could have both glory and love. He tried to be the legend that the world demands from him, and the man that Patroclus loves. This served as a moment of cognitive dissonance, as his two incompatible dreams were present at once, unresolved. Tragically, even in intimacy, he could not see a moment when he was not a hero.
“Name one hero who was happy.”
“I’m going to be the first.” He took my palm and held it to his. “Swear it.”
“Why me?”
“Because you’re the reason. Swear it.”
“I swear it…”
This line was a plea, a demand from Achilles that he would be the exception, the first hero to achieve both greatness and happiness. But just the need of that promise showed that he knew, he understood that heroism and happiness cannot be together. And when Patroclus died, Achilles’ motivations shifted, but his mindset did not. His grief turned into a fit of rage and revenge. To fight for Patroclus’ honor was not just to avenge his death, but also to cope. It was a way for Achilles to process loss and to restructure his sense of self. He had sacrificed his loved one for a life of glory. He had lost the only part of himself that existed outside heroism. Killing Hector became inevitable in his eyes. He knew, from the prophecy that dictated his life, it would lead to his own death. But rather than resisting fate, he fulfilled it. His “decisions” and thoughts formed a self-fulfilling prophecy, where belief in destiny produced the very outcome he could not escape. His desire acted as a lodestar, leading him straight to the tragedy that he once tried to resist.
If Achilles’ life was spinning around the concept of being remembered, Patroclus’ life was the opposite. He was exiled, overlooked, and uncertain of his worth. When he looked at Achilles for the first time, his love for Achilles organized everything in his life. Loving Achilles became the only way he understood himself. This distinction was crucial. While Achilles longed for legacy, myth, and fame, Patroclus sought a shared life and a private happiness. Despite that, Patroclus’ devotion to Achilles made him dependent on Achilles’ decisions. His life was consumed by every decision Achilles made.
Patroclus was also driven by desire. His desire was just different from Achilles’. After growing up isolated and exiled from his royal family, his deepest desire was to be chosen and loved by one person. This was why his relationship was central to his identity. He desired a quiet human life with his lover, removed from the prophecy and the war, yet he could not seem to have a destiny or a way of his own. His love for Achilles was so consuming that he began to shape his existence through preserving their bond. Even when he disagreed with Achilles or feared what heroism might turn his lover into, Patroclus still followed him. Because losing Achilles would feel like losing himself. While Achilles sacrificed himself for glory, Patroclus sacrificed himself for an attachment to Achilles. In this case, his desire for love was portrayed as being deadly, as it made him dependent on someone else to be complete.
“I will never leave him. It will be this, always, for as long as he will let me.”
Reflecting Patroclus’ anxious attachment style, his connection to Achilles became so central to his life that he minimized himself to preserve it. His identity was defined by who he was to Achilles, and loving Achilles was how he felt real. Only through someone else’s significance. When Patroclus entered the war, he did not share Achilles’ pursuit of glory, but he wanted to bridge the gaps between their worlds. And in trying to fit in Achilles’ world, Patroclus was destroyed by it.
And this created an imbalance between these young lovers. Achilles’ dreams and life expanded outward, to the world, to immortality. Patroclus’ dreams contracted inward, toward a single person, a shared life. One sought to be seen by everyone, and the other sought to be understood by only one. Interestingly, Patroclus and Achilles’ desires didn’t neutralize each other, but they reinforced each other’s worst aspects. Patroclus validated Achilles’ need to feel important. Achilles gave Patroclus a sense of worth. Together, they made each other even more unstable than before.
What “The Song of Achilles” conveys is that dreams can limit what choices a person can imagine. Achilles cannot imagine a life without glory. Patroclus cannot imagine a life without Achilles. Both are trapped in their limited views of what life can bring for them. Their love fails, not because they are weak, but because they demand two incompatible realities. In the end, Achilles’ desires are achieved. He became the hero he was meant to be. He is remembered, immortalized through kleos. But the story we read about is not his narrative. It is told by Patroclus. What lingers is not the glory, but the connection that they have with each other. Achilles is remembered not only through his feat but through his emotions, by how he is felt, through Patroclus’ eyes.
References
- DBryant, C., & LPeck, D. (2009). Symbolic immortality. Encyclopedia of Death and the Human Experience. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412972031.n305
- Petitpas, A. (1978). Identity Foreclosure: a unique challenge. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 56(9), 558–561. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2164-4918.1978.tb05310.x
“Name one hero who was happy”
Madeline Miller’s The Song of Achilles is a retelling of the Trojan War myth. In this novel, she shifts the focus away from the stories on the battlefield and onto the relationship of two young lovers. Narrated from Patroclus’ perspective, the novel follows his life alongside Achilles from childhood to their time at Troy. While retelling the familiar myth, the story is less focused on recounting events than on the emotional weight behind the two boys’ dreams and pursuits.
Achilles’ pursuit of glory can be seen either as ambition or fear. Before he was born, both the prophet Oracle and his mother, Thetis, had predicted that he would live a life of greatness. In this prophecy, his life was reduced to a binary: a long, peaceful life in obscurity, or a short life in glory. This kind of rigid stipulation trapped Achilles in an identity foreclosure (Petitpas, 1978), which means he committed to being a hero even before he had a chance to explore what he could have been. He was fixating on how he would be remembered as the foundation for all of his thoughts and considerations. This was his attempt to outlive death through his legacy; he attempted to ensure that his life would not vanish without a trace (DBryant & LPeck, 2009). Under a great amount of pressure, Achilles internalized a performance-based identity, determining his worth entirely by what he does. In doing so, he underwent a form of self-dehumanization where he’s no longer a person who fought but just a weapon that existed.
“He is a weapon, a killer. Do not forget it. You can use a spear as a walking stick, but that will not change its nature.”
And yet, he believed that he could have both glory and love. He tried to be the legend that the world demands from him, and the man that Patroclus loves. This served as a moment of cognitive dissonance, as his two incompatible dreams were present at once, unresolved. Tragically, even in intimacy, he could not see a moment when he was not a hero.
“Name one hero who was happy.”
“I’m going to be the first.” He took my palm and held it to his. “Swear it.”
“Why me?”
“Because you’re the reason. Swear it.”
“I swear it…”
This line was a plea, a demand from Achilles that he would be the exception, the first hero to achieve both greatness and happiness. But just the need of that promise showed that he knew, he understood that heroism and happiness cannot be together. And when Patroclus died, Achilles’ motivations shifted, but his mindset did not. His grief turned into a fit of rage and revenge. To fight for Patroclus’ honor was not just to avenge his death, but also to cope. It was a way for Achilles to process loss and to restructure his sense of self. He had sacrificed his loved one for a life of glory. He had lost the only part of himself that existed outside heroism. Killing Hector became inevitable in his eyes. He knew, from the prophecy that dictated his life, it would lead to his own death. But rather than resisting fate, he fulfilled it. His “decisions” and thoughts formed a self-fulfilling prophecy, where belief in destiny produced the very outcome he could not escape. His desire acted as a lodestar, leading him straight to the tragedy that he once tried to resist.
If Achilles’ life was spinning around the concept of being remembered, Patroclus’ life was the opposite. He was exiled, overlooked, and uncertain of his worth. When he looked at Achilles for the first time, his love for Achilles organized everything in his life. Loving Achilles became the only way he understood himself. This distinction was crucial. While Achilles longed for legacy, myth, and fame, Patroclus sought a shared life and a private happiness. Despite that, Patroclus’ devotion to Achilles made him dependent on Achilles’ decisions. His life was consumed by every decision Achilles made.
Patroclus was also driven by desire. His desire was just different from Achilles’. After growing up isolated and exiled from his royal family, his deepest desire was to be chosen and loved by one person. This was why his relationship was central to his identity. He desired a quiet human life with his lover, removed from the prophecy and the war, yet he could not seem to have a destiny or a way of his own. His love for Achilles was so consuming that he began to shape his existence through preserving their bond. Even when he disagreed with Achilles or feared what heroism might turn his lover into, Patroclus still followed him. Because losing Achilles would feel like losing himself. While Achilles sacrificed himself for glory, Patroclus sacrificed himself for an attachment to Achilles. In this case, his desire for love was portrayed as being deadly, as it made him dependent on someone else to be complete.
“I will never leave him. It will be this, always, for as long as he will let me.”
Reflecting Patroclus’ anxious attachment style, his connection to Achilles became so central to his life that he minimized himself to preserve it. His identity was defined by who he was to Achilles, and loving Achilles was how he felt real. Only through someone else’s significance. When Patroclus entered the war, he did not share Achilles’ pursuit of glory, but he wanted to bridge the gaps between their worlds. And in trying to fit in Achilles’ world, Patroclus was destroyed by it.
And this created an imbalance between these young lovers. Achilles’ dreams and life expanded outward, to the world, to immortality. Patroclus’ dreams contracted inward, toward a single person, a shared life. One sought to be seen by everyone, and the other sought to be understood by only one. Interestingly, Patroclus and Achilles’ desires didn’t neutralize each other, but they reinforced each other’s worst aspects. Patroclus validated Achilles’ need to feel important. Achilles gave Patroclus a sense of worth. Together, they made each other even more unstable than before.
What “The Song of Achilles” conveys is that dreams can limit what choices a person can imagine. Achilles cannot imagine a life without glory. Patroclus cannot imagine a life without Achilles. Both are trapped in their limited views of what life can bring for them. Their love fails, not because they are weak, but because they demand two incompatible realities. In the end, Achilles’ desires are achieved. He became the hero he was meant to be. He is remembered, immortalized through kleos. But the story we read about is not his narrative. It is told by Patroclus. What lingers is not the glory, but the connection that they have with each other. Achilles is remembered not only through his feat but through his emotions, by how he is felt, through Patroclus’ eyes.
References
- DBryant, C., & LPeck, D. (2009). Symbolic immortality. Encyclopedia of Death and the Human Experience. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412972031.n305
- Petitpas, A. (1978). Identity Foreclosure: a unique challenge. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 56(9), 558–561. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2164-4918.1978.tb05310.x
