Greek Myths by Robert Graves

[Bix]

I recently purchased this book, but after lurking around the forums a bit, I've seen some negativity geared towards him. Is he inaccurate or something?

[IvyWitch]

Robert Graves isn't completely inaccurate, some of the the stuff he writes is good and some of is is bad. Generally I find that he tends to extrapolate on things, sometimes to an extreme, and then present it as proven fact. He also has some theories about the "White Goddess" and matriarchal societies that are pretty dodgy.

Your mileage may vary, but I find that unless you've already done a good amount of research it's hard to pick out from Gaves' books what's correct and what's not, and for that reason I don't suggest him.

[Theres]

despite the current trend against him, i like Graves.

my biggest problem with 'The Greek Myths' is the very awkward index. but i think he tends to present the myths in a reliable fashion. and although you will find some of his prejudices shining through on occasion, they are usually pretty easy to spot, for example, he insists that Agamemnon's murder by Clytemnestra equates him with the death of the Oak King! :rolleyes:

but really, it's as good a collection as any, and better than most.
Bullfinch's annoying habit of using the Greek and Roman names interchangeably irks me at least as much as Graves' triple-goddess filtered glasses. Edith Hamilton is good too, if a bit terse.
some of my favorite versions of the Greek myths are from Bernard and Dorothy Evslin. although they are aimed more towards a younger audience, they do bring the stories to life very well, imo.

[-Ember]

Greek Myths is one of the better collections. Many of the objections to "White Goddess" are based in Graves' Greek mythology background (and applying his understand there to Celtic myth.)

He has some problems, but I think you are better off trying to obtain a religious understanding of the myths from Graves (even if you disagree with some of the details, or even most of the details, he at least has the right approach in making them breathing sacred stories) than you are from say Hamilton or Bulfinch.

[Gracecat]

I agree with Theres. Greek Myths is about as close as a collection of greek myths can be. For the most part, he's fairly accurate with his version compared to the Homer versions.

I know my greek myths though so it's very easy for me to pick out the factual and bypass the theory. So Ivywitch is correct here. It's much easier to read an opinionated person incorporating extra theory and recognize it as such once you've established what is "Home-approved" and what isn't. Example, if you complained all the way through Troy with Brad Pitt, then you're probably able to read Graves with no problem :D.

[Silverfire Darkmoon]

I haven't read the book of Greek myths by Graves. He does try and pour an awful lot of Greek myth into his 'White Goddess', which I will never be able to reccomend to anyone except as an exercise in confusion (at times I think Graves is one of the greatest proponents of syncrenitism!) but for all I know the Greek Myths book is perfectly fine. If he has a tendency to view everything through trifocal glasses (a term I just invented for the sort of person who crams every single Goddess into the Threefold Goddess idea) then, well......eeech. There might be something better, but don't as me...

[Theres]

i actually like 'The White Goddess', but not as standardized mythology, and certainly not as authentic history.
but i see it as a book of poetry (or more about poetry) than any of the above. :hmmmmm:

one only has to read his opening poem 'In Dedication' to see that this was a middle-aged Catholic man who had fallen in love with the Goddess, and i think that's pretty cool.

but the fact that he then went on to paint every goddess ever with the same brush is where he gets annoying for me. :razz: