The review of Gilgamesh

The word hero has undergone many different meanings throughout its millennia long existence. With there still not being a consensus nowadays. For individuals that some see as heroes while others detest them. There’s virtually no world leaders in both the past and present that have no detractors. With the realm of fiction being the only area where select figures are perceived as universally good and universally bad. With figures like superman or ironman coming to mind but even they aren’t without flaws. Should an author portray a character as unquestionably good without flaws or evil without redeeming qualities and have neither undergo any personality changes during the course of their story, those characters would be seen as flat and one dimensional. This trope is now referred to as black and white storytelling and it’s now regarded as an age old trope. With shows and series that go outside those tropes such as Rick and Morty. However this is far from the truth. With the oldest story known to many having story tropes that if published today would be seen as unique and eccentric. The story I’m referring to is the Epic of Gilgamesh.

One thing one must always keep in mind while reading and analyzing this tale is that it’s quite literally the oldest story known to man. So it shouldn’t be seen through the criteria that stories published today are. Instead it should be seen as an ancient piece of literature that in one way or another influenced many works that followed. With some of these works being some of the most influential books in history. With one key example being the bible which was a text that arguably changed the face of an entire continent which went on to shape the globe. In addition to comparing Gilgamesh with the works it influenced it's also important to contrast it with those works. For as described at the beginning the word hero hasn’t and still doesn’t have the most concrete definition. For the epic of Gilgamesh is a piece of literature that uses the word hero in a context that most people in the modern world would disagree with. Since in modern times a hero is an individual who goes out of his way to help those in need or right wrongs in the world. Gilgamesh on the other hand wasn’t motivated to right a wrong or help his people (at least initially and even when he did want to help them that was a bonus and not his primary goal). What primarily motivates Gilgamesh throughout the story is a desire for glory. Despite already being a king he still desires more. Additionally the foes he fights aren’t exactly villains and he’d face negative consequences for killing them. Thus it can be argued that Gilgamesh fits into the anti-hero category then the hero. Since though having the role of a hero he lacks key traits most people would associate with heroes.

In addition to raising questions about heroism it also puts a lot of religious and cultural practices. Like all works of literature it provides the reader with a look into the cultural of the society it was made in and though a handful of expected things like rituals for the gods and desire for eternal life are present there’s also a lot of unexpected themes. Such as how it portrays sex. In our modern culture sex is regarded as a sinful activity but in Gilgamesh but in Gilgamesh it’s something done by priestess to honour the gods. Specifically Ishtar the goddess of love. In addition to being a polytheist the god in Gilgamesh are not portrayed as infallible and do make mistakes and also regret those mistakes.

However that isn’t to say Gilgamesh doesn’t change throughout the story in fact Gilgamesh’s personality shifts are the primary facet of the story. With everything else in the story being the means which altered his personality. Which is another difference with most modern media. Since most heroes like superman already have their moral compasses mostly formed at the beginning of or halfway through their story. Gilgamesh on the other hand only has his moral compass formed by the end with the development of his moral compass being the primary focus of his story.

Now all of this isn’t to say the book is without its flaws. Since it is a thousand year old book so obviously some elements of it don't quite up. With many of the side characters not getting flushed out and serving minut roles in the story. Additionally only translations of it exist so it’s basically impossible to experience the original version of the story as it was originally written. One final thing to note about the story is how aristocratic it is. Since the only characters who actually have an impact on the world are the gods and the beings who have ties to them. Everyone and everything else in the world is subservient to them. This is another major point where Gilgamesh contrasts modern heroes' stories. For in most modern stories the protagonist is an ordinary member of society and in some cases among the poor members of society.

In conclusion the epic of Gilgamesh is a fascinating read which anyone interested in literary history and literature and his in general. It puts many things about both topics into perspective. It’s a fascinating piece of historical literature that deserves more recognition and notoriety and definitely worth a few days of reading.

(P.S For those who are wondering why I haven't elaborated on the plot of the book that is because the big man himself Sherman is yet to read it.)