A new blog focused on Ares, called Aspis of Ares, is up as of last weekend, and I am excited about it and will be following along faithfully except that, as is the case with many Blogspot blogs that use OpenID for commenting, I basically am unable to leave comments from the machine I usually use (and weirdly I cannot leave them as “Kullervo,” either). So I thought I would reformulate my thoughts on Peripatetic Pete’s blog in general and the issue he raised in his first post and post it here myself as a full-fledged blog post of my own.
Pete says:
I decided to dedicate a blog for Ares for a number of reasons. First is that, even in modern circles of Polytheists (Hellenic or otherwise), Ares gets a bad rap, and I want to discuss Him and his dominion and why it is important we continue to acknowledge and sacrifice to Ares. Second, there’s not much information available for the worship of Ares, modern or ancient, so I want to share my findings, musings, and UPG regarding practice. Third, since modern worshipers are few and far between, and online groups can be active only sporadically, I wanted to gather as many resources for Ares’ worship into one place.
On the one hand, it seems to me like bloggers with a strong bent towards Ares have been coming out of the woodwork lately (at the very least there’s me, Wednesday, and now Ophiokhos), so maybe there’s a change in the air, or at least a trend towards some kind of increasingly vocal minority.
On the other hand, you only need to glance through the pagan internet to see that a lot of people out there are very uncomfortable with Ares, don’t know how to approach him at all, or want absolutely nothing to do with him. Whether they ignore Ares, hostilely disparage him, or try to subvert him into some kind of symbolic god of moral struggle in the service of their favorite liberal political agenda, they do him an incredible disservice.
My thoughts on the reasons for Ares’s unpopularity are themselves demonstrably unpopular (given the knee-jerk reaction people have had when I have posted them in the past), but here they are:
(1) I think that for most modern western people, we live lives that are so insulated from the reality of war that even thinking of it as a real thing it makes us extremely uncomfortable. Make no mistake: war is with us, it has always been with us, and there is no indication that it will ever not be with us. We put it out of our minds easily because war is not happening right here, right now, and at the risk of spouting cliches, we often fail to remember the hard wars that have been waged and are currently being waged to try to keep it that way. And while I think fighting to keep our homes safe and peaceful is virtuous and noble, when there is a massive imbalance, virtue slides back into its enemy. We are lazy, weak, and complacent, and we resent the people who fight our wars far away because they remind us that war is real. What we have done inadvertently is to create an artificial world-within-a-world where we do not face the proximity of war, and that means we are cut off from what is honestly a fundamental facet of the human experience. In doing so, we have actually become less human–what an irony in how we talk about the dehumanizing effects of war, when freedom from war also dehumanizes us!–and consequently, we have distanced ourselves from the gods that reflect those parts of humanity.
(2) Ares is not only a god of war, but a god of manhood and masculinity, a concept that is not popular either: in much of modern cultural discourse, manhood either denigrated, ridiculed, conflated with boyhood, or dismissed as an entirely optional social construct that can be cast aside as a dysfunctional and useless relic in a modern enightened world. Or worse, masculinity is re-defined by the self-help crowd into something emasculated and more socially accpetable. I think this pattern closely connected to my point above: we inhabit an artificial and (in the long term) unsustainable sociocultural bubble of gross prosperity and opulence, where masculinity, and the pursuits associated with masculinity, are not necessary for individual, family or community survival. As long as we play along with our cultural milieu, we don’t really have to be manly in order to survive and protect and provide for our wives and children. But again, it means cutting ourselves off from our own humanity: by creating this social dystopia, we have isolated ourselves from part of what makes us human, and consequently from the gods–including most particularly Ares–that reflect that part.
(3) Ares is a god of physical courage, and we are a culture of physical cowards. For probably a dozen different related reasons, we have collectively granted ourselves permission to be weak, and have done our best to steadily re-engineer the rules and rewards of our culture in order to reflect that. Physical courage is now seen as unnecessary risk-taking, because the default position for far too many people is total spinelessness. And Ares stands squarely against that position, for men and women.
That’s what I think at least. Through our successes, we have swung too far beyond peace, safety and prosperity into complacency, neurosis and decadence, and we are less human because of it. And Ares, a stark reminder of what we have done to ourselves, shames us. We reject Ares because we are ashamed. And by the gods, we should be.
Hail Ares! Hail the fearsome lord of war, stormer of cities, feasted by women, who rallies fighting men and leads them brazen-armed into battle! Hail the golden-helmed master of the hounds! I give you praise and honor!
(Also, check out my other recent post about what Ares is all about)
Sailing to Byzantium 
I propose that we write “KGA”, meaning the “kinder, gentler Ares,” to refer to attempts to modernize and Ares to fit him into Gender Studies-ified norms.
Ha! You’re just purposely punching my Angry White Male buttons.
I adore Ares. I have experienced him as the Ultimate Redneck, the Redneck that all rednecks try to imitate and usually fail…loyal to his brethren/family (how ever he chooses to define them), brazen, loving, daring, willing to fight, to do the stupid just for the fun of it, fun-loving, short-tempered, lusty, intelligent (but not scholarly if you see the difference), courageous, willing to get dirty/bloody, protective (yet still pushes you to be the best), foul mouthed, etc. [shrug] as they say YMMV
Mine doesn’t. Even about the Redneck part. I am from East Tennessee, after all.
[…] touched on some things about why Ares is unpopular here, go read that first if you haven’t read it already. He brought up very good points that I […]
I’m rather kind of touched I got a blog post about my blog post, and more so that it’s positive. Ares influenced me greatly during my service in the Air Force, and it’s a manner of pride that my god is ignored in those circles he should be praised in. I’m glad to see I’m not the only one who feels this way.
[…] an excellent reflection on why Ares is unpopular. I agree very much with Kullervo here that it’s good to see other people who worship the god […]
[…] and denying the helm and shield. Both the “KGA [Kinder Gentler Ares]” and the “short-tempered … foul-mouthed … ultimate redneck” are both false images of the God. While masculinity is certainly within Ares’ realm, […]
Ruadhán, I tried to post a comment on your blog in response, but I was unable to log in and post correctly, so I’m going to post it here instead, in the hope that you’ll at least see the pingback.
Regarding your post on Ares, I think it is generally well-said. I think one thing that we have to always keep in mind is that the gods are complex and multifaceted. They’re real gods, not cardboard cutouts, and that is what makes them so compelling.
The person who tries to edit out Ares’s warriorship and masculinity to make the god more suitable is doing himself and Ares a deep injustice, but so is the zealous devotee of Ares who overcorrects with chip firmply placed on shoulder to insist that Ares is in fact a cardboard cutout violent hypermasculine caricature of a war-god and nothing else.
To be fair though, that’s not what Melia did: she said:
There’s a whole lot more nuance there than you’re giving her credit for. I realize that the term “redneck” may push some people’s buttons in a really negative way, but honestly there’s a lot that’s admirable about “rednecks,” too, and Melia is talking about the good in the good ol’ boy. It’s no surprise that the military draws heavily from the rural South, and it’s not just because they’re ignorant, poor and easily exploited.
Is it possible that by using the term “redneck,” Melia punched your buttons and invoked a connotation for you that is not at all what Melia was talking about?
Let me point out that my husband in his own words declares himself a redneck so I am certainly NOT insulting Ares by calling him the “Ultimate Redneck” aka “Good Ol’ Boy”. While there are those rednecks that are dumb, stupid and an embarrassment to the human race in general, there are those that are hard working (hence the red neck though the more politically correct term is blue collar), loyal to family and country, they have “street smarts”, are practical, lusty, courageous (to the point of foolishness sometimes), they are NOT attention seekers or flashy dressers, they like their beer, food and love (and are not afraid to show it). They are certainly NOT effeminate. I would happily hang out with this type of redneck any time and be proud to do so. Hell, I married one almost 17 years ago.
Kullervo, for some reason, I don’t seem to get pingbacks in comments, but sometimes referral links in the stats balances that out (one of the reason I check my referrals and stats daily)
Is it possible that by using the term “redneck,” Melia punched your buttons and invoked a connotation for you that is not at all what Melia was talking about?
As Melia and I sorted out in the comments, I’m willing to agree to disagree that “redneck” in always used in the pejorative, and even prior, I’d been vaguely aware of a reclamation movement of that word, though this seems to be predominantly in the world of comedic entertainment &mash;and as a language arts major with a speciality in humour, I’m also well-aware of the history and current tropes of self-deprecating humour —and it seems pretty obvious that Jeff Foxworthy’s trademark routine is in a playfully self-deprecating vein. I don’t know a single person who both self-identifies with the term and who doesn’t fit the dictionary-definition to a T, but then that’s my personal experience.
[…] Why Ares is unpopular (byzantium.wordpress.com) […]
[…] Why Ares is unpopular (byzantium.wordpress.com) […]
Ruadhan, aren’t you from Michigan?
I’m from Ohio, partially UK-raised; but yes, I live in Michigan[/pendant hat] — I’m not sure what you mean by this. Michigan and Ohio have historically been a major migration destination for workers coming up from the South (yet Indiana is the northernmost Klan state), and there are still plenty of people, even two or three generations removed from Mississippi, Georgia, the Carolinas, etc…, who speak with evidence of a Southern accent, or (though less commonly) will be in possession of a “family heirloom” Confederate flag or minted bills. Please don’t assume that I’m some know-nothing Northerner who lives in a completely different culture.
And my house-mate’s parents live in East Tennessee — that’s Appalachia, so technically the local low-prole rural pejorative/reclaimed term is “hillbilly”, and the Gatlinburg tourist pamphlets tend to agree.
As educational as your authoritative lesson about the cultural geography of where I fucking grew up is getting, the point is, whether or not you approve of her use of the term, Melia used “redneck” to mean something specific, and to alleviate any confusion, she even defined the term as she used it. You reacted by editing most of her definition out when you quoted her on your own blog post. That’s pretty much just willfully using a straw man, and I have no idea why, other than maybe you just have a visceral reaction to the word she used, because nothing you described in your post is inconsistent with what Melia said.
And for the record, “redneck” with a neutral or positive connotation is not recent, it’s not “reclaimed,” and it sure as fuck didn’t start with Jeff Foxworthy. No offense, but as an urban yankee transgendered pagan artist, it seems like the cultural identifiers of Southern rural working-class people may just not really be on your radar. You can doggedly insist all you want that the term is only or primarily perjorative, but that doesn’t change the shit ton of people driving around the South with trucks, hats and t-shirts that say “Redneck” on them right now, or the positive image of the ideal redneck that a lot of those people are imagining.
Kullervo, dear, do you understand what a strawman argument is, or do you just follow the TV-Tropes school of stretching definitions to make them fit? You even said that nothing I said really disagrees with her characterisation, so I guess you just didn’t understand my post — which is likely, a lot of people just have a habit of only reading what they want to out of any piece.
And hon, my TS history has nothing to do with this — ad hominem, poisoning the well, bringing up shit that has nothing to do with any of this in a transparent attempt to discredit anything I’m saying. Urban? Sure, that’s relevant. Artist? Well, probably — I sure will agree that there’s no such thing as a redneck artist (especially if you’re going to say it first). I object to “yankee” on the grounds that it’s often used as hate-speech against the English diaspora living in the United $tates (and the reason I now instinctively switch accents when speaking to or even hearing people from the UK), but I’m not going to argue with it in this context — even though my family wasn’t even over here until 1920 (long after the Civil War), and that’s only my father’s side, so technically, even in context, it’s still incorrect (but that might just be my “edjumication” talking). But what does being TS have to do with any of this? How does it in any way affect my argument? Unless, of course, you’re slyly suggesting that there are no TS/TG people who may self-identify as “rednecks”, in which case, I gotta ask why? Seriously, why would you suggest that?
And hey, a shit tonne of Black people use “the Big Bad N-word” affectionately! Your argument doesn’t logically follow — I mean, your oh so specific population of “shit ton” aside, a lot of people use a lot of things, from words to body lotions, inappropriately and incorrectly; just because a “shit-tonne” of people do it, doesn’t make it a correct thing to do. Your logic here is in line with “everybody else I know is jumping off that cliff to certain death, therefore it is the right thing to do, and I shall do it, too.”
But hey, who am I to stand in your way of white-knighting for Melia, when she and I had already long before agreed to disagree?
Oh, and by the wway, the OED (and not Wikipedia) is the authoritative go-to for what words mean in the English language:
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/redneck?region=us
I appreciate his efforts to defend me as I realize I do not debate well in written form. It is your insistence that redneck is only negative that is causing the continued issue even after we both pointed out differently. Even OED’s definition is not what I would call negative despite their label of derogatory. We obviously just know completely different sets of people, which is what makes this country great. It’s diversity. Just let it go. Our personal definitions of Ares differs but that isn’t the important thing here (though I would bet he finds this argument highly amusing). The important thing is that Ares deserves recognition as part of the Greek pantheon and should not be treated as a distasteful leftover from the ancient times.
Kullervo, spare yourself a lot of pain and ban Ruadhan from your blog. Mark his comments as spam so that they don’t show up anymore. You’ll be way better of.
By selectively editing Melia’s description of Ares-as-Ultimate-Redneck on your blog, you misrepresented her position. That’s what a strawman is.
Go back and read what I said instead of just reacting to it. I’m suggesting that the total picture of yourself that you present probably just doesn’t correlate with a lot of familiarity with Southern rural working class culture. I admit that I am making assumptions based on your online persona, but that’s all I’ve got to go on.
Are there transsexual rednecks? Probably. Are there redneck artists? Absolutely. But I’m not talking about those two things in isolation, am I? Is there likely to be a lot of love lost between the average redneck and the average urban yankee transgendered pagan artist? You tell me. They’re probably just not your kind of people, and your doggedly insistent display of ignorance about them pretty much illustrates my point.
Here’s how this thread has gone:
1) Melia used “redneck” to describe Ares
2) You objected because you assign an unambigiously negative connotation to the word, despite how Melia defined it
3) Melia and I said that plenty of rednecks we know use and think of the word–especially the way Melia qualified it–non-perjoratively
4) You insisted we’re wrong
5) I suggested that the cultural concept Melia is expressing may simply be foreign to you given, your own cultural identity
6) You objected to my formulation of your cultural identity and continued to insist that “redneck” is only ever properly an insult
At this point I think you’re just being argumentative for argument’s sake. There’s not really an “agree to disagree” here; Melia and I are talking about a cultural construct that you have more than demonstrated you know jack shit about. So why are you arguing about it?
Except that’s not how language and culture work. If rural working class Southerners mean something different when they say “redneck” than you do, then that means “redneck” has an additional, culturally-specific definition. Just like when black people say “nigger.” It has a different connotation in a different cultural group. That’s just how linguistic and cultural constructs evolve.
Unlike the OED entry, the Wikipedia article sheds light on the word’s historical use and its varying connotations across American subcultures. That’s the point I was trying to make; I wasn’t trying to appeal to a lexicographical authority.
Ruadhan, you are shockingly arrogant.
And ignorant. I know you are putting on your intellectual clothes before you type, I’m just saying they don’t cover very much.
Apollodōros Phlamandos, this is not your blog, don’t tell other people what to do. Your personal bias against me is clearly not shared — Kullervo is a big boy and can decide things for himself.
Racticas, LOL. Clearly you speak out of ignorance of me; please stop. Or don’t — I could use a good laugh.
(most importantly) Kullervo:
Yes, I understand that there is a cultural difference — but see, this whole argument ended long before you decided to White Knight all up in my face. If you’d actually read the comments between Melia and myself on my own blog, you’d’ve seen that quite clearly (aside: Melia, *I* think you put yourself very well, I don’t know why you might think you didn’t). My first comment back to you really should have said that I was done arguing this, and I still think it does say that clearly — but you had to up and tell me where I’m “from” (even getting it wrong; and for all you know, had I not responded to your bait, I may have been born and raised in urban Atlanta or Dallas or New Orleans or Charleston, SC, regardless of where I live now, and may have held a similar opinion of the term “redneck”), as if where I’m “from” or where I live now had anything *real* to do with the ended convo, especially considering the note that said convo ended on. If anybody’s been unnecessarily aggressive here, it sure hasn’t been me.
Furthermore, I’ve told you to stop calling me “yankee” and why, yet you continue to do so — which I think proves my point about who the aggressor is. If you get to pick your self-identification, then so do I. You persistence at calling me something I’ve asked you not to while touting the alleged importance of another term as a self-identity reeks of hypocricy; or would you rather I call you a Hillbilly, and then we can both be done with this nonsense?
Ruadhan, I gave Kullervo some advice. Whether he takes up on it is his decision. I do want to point out this thread on Hellenismos.us though: http://hellenismos.us/f/YaBB.pl?num=1284712373 concerning my discussion with you, so he can see that what you do here is what you always do. Whether you follow up on my earlier advise will be up to you.
As far as my personal bias goes, you created it. And I see nothing here to change my opinion, not before or after my first comment. You don’t seem to have changed at all, except for the hairdo. You’re still showing everyone exactly what you are (pretty much what Racticas said; and before you accuse me: I AM NOT THE SAME AS RACTICAS).
And now I am leaving this argument. I will not be dragged in ANOTHER of your melodramatic “You’re the one who’s wrong! I’m RIGHT!”-arguments.
Cry me a river, Apollodorosh.
Oh, and Apollodorosh, be sure and mention why I might need assurance that you’ve only posted under your own name this time. Could it be because you’ve attempted to impersonate others before?
I take your personal “seal of disapproval” as a compliment, Apollodorosh.
Keep studying language arts, oh misunderstood one, and eventually you’ll get to the part about lexical, proscriptive, and stipulative language and realize that when we say “redneck” we don’t have to mean what you think we should mean.
Nothing about your major, roommates, or the history of white supremacy in the great lakes region has done anything to disabuse me of the notion that you’re “some know-nothing Northerner who lives in a completely different culture.” If anything, the fact that you think those things seal the deal reinforces my notion.
Honestly, before I read this ‘dialogue’ I had the suggestion that we only had such a ‘culture’ of debating in Germany. But I’ve found myself wrong. This seems to be a worldwide Pagan phenomenon. Thus there will be no minimum common basis for the almost non-existing Pagan community. Am I right so far?
Haganrix
[…] From Ophiokhos: To Ares I. From Kullervo: Ares, and what Paganism is all about. From Kullervo: Why Ares is Unpopular. From Ophiokhos: Re: Why Ares is Unpopular. From Wednesday: The God of War is Alive and Well. From […]
No; I asked if you were from Michigan. And where you are from has a whole lot to do with your various probable levels of geographic cultural exposure. Sure, you could be from Atlanta and think what you do, but you’re not, are you?
No no; you misunderstand. I am deliberately using yankee as a slur. I don’t care whether or not you self-identify as one.
Ruadhan and Apollodorosh:
I’m not nearly irritated enough to start banning anyone or assigning them to the spam bin. I do that as a pretty extreme last resort, so we can drop that line of discussion right now. Both of you are more than welcome to comment on my blog.
But for the record, Apollodorosh is definitely not posting as Racticas. I know Racticas quite well in real life.
As far as I remember the topic of this discussion is about the popularity of Ares. But what I read is that:
Please help me, where is the connection!
Right here. We’re talking about whether Melia’s characterization of Ares as “the Ultimate Redneck” is an appropriate one.
Well, then, that settles it, Hillbilly. Enjoy your cooter pie.
OH ZING YOU GOT ME.
I love that I am from enough places and assimilated well enough into all the cultures that I can identify as a yankee and a redneck and be perfectly happy with all labels and all of the associated connotations, good and bad.
The fact is, calling someone a redneck can either be a supreme compliment or a terrific insult, depending on the context and the speaker. A lot of the adjectives we use to describe people totally depend on the context and speaker to discern their meaning.
Some words that could have negative or positive connotations include, for example:
-hippie
-soccer mom
-yuppie
-crunchy/granola
-artist
-pagan
-Christian
-Republican
-liberal
-redneck
-yankee
…
Depending on one’s experiences with these labels will depend on whether they have a positive or negative connotation… but it is important to recognize that all of them can be used both positively and negatively. For example, I am a Christian, but sometimes the label makes me cringe because of some other Christians I’ve met who I don’t want to be associated with. At the same time, I am happy to be associated with Jesus Christ.
Moon Pies are way more delicious. 🙂
HILLBILLY.
I have never had a cooter pie… or heard of it. I’ve heard of moon pies but have no idea what they are… is my redneck card going to be revoked?
Yep. They’re glorious. And they’re brought to you courtesy of the glorious city of Chattanooga, Tennessee.
I also do not know exactly what a cooter pie is supposed to be.
Yeah, me neither. But you have to admit Moon Pies are awesome.
After looking it up, I think I’ll never get my redneck card back…I don’t like s’mores and I doubt I’d like these.
Well, (1) I don;t think they taste like s’mores (although you’re crazy for not liking s’mores), and (2) they come in different flavors, so you may be salvageable yet.
(1) I live in the nosebleed section of the Colorado Rocky Mountains, of course I’m crazy.
(2) doubting it. I hate marshmallows
.
AJ/Melia–if you like RC Cola, you can keep the redneck card. And you can give me your moon pies. Yum.
Per Urban Dictionary (which is obviously authoritative here), a cooter pie is:
“An affectionate name said to someone jokingly with a southern, trucker like accent. Usually very loudly and followed typically by laughing and associated with boob slapping.”
So, Ruadhan was being affectionate. 🙂 See what happens when you assume a word is pejorative? You miss out on affection.
[laughing] I haven’t had RC in YEARS! I remember drinking it a lot as a kid. Does that count?
Deal. Kullervo, she beat you to it. She gets my share.
Gee I thought that was cutiepie.
Urban Dictionary lists a second definition…
“Right here. We’re talking about whether Melia’s characterization of Ares as “the Ultimate Redneck” is an appropriate one.”
Now I see, you’re arguing with American domestic sentiments. But why should that be the modern interpretation of the Greek God Ares?
Polemos pater panthon (the war (or dispute) is the father of all), Aristophanes said in his comedy “The Clouds”. But that was not about racism.
1) I completely agree. I work for the defense industry and I see the consequences of this in the lives of soldiers every day.
2) Augh. Augh augh augh augh augh. Do you have to go there, dude? Do I have to bring out my Gender Studies 101 and bash you over the head with anthropology to make the point that ideas of manliness have a) involved phenomenally different valuations, b) were not present as-such in many militarily successful cultures, and c) REMIND YOU that you are a polytheist and are advised that Womanly Dionysos is a man, Adonis is a man, Apollo is a man, Hermes is a man, and that Athena’s manlier than all four of them combined?
We’re rethinking masculinity, but that’s because placing it as the default has been severely harmful to men AND women. Sin City, 300, etc., and – more positively – the popularity of video games like Red Dead Redemption and the like show that it’s far, far from lost cultural traction. It just needs to be recontextualized.
Sorry for the rant. Other than that I really enjoyed this post.
What I’m trying to say is, in less pissy terms, Ares’ particular brand of masculinity is legitimate as one of many, as his place within a polytheistic pantheon of male (and androgynous) gods indicates. During wartime, it’s appropriate. However, it’s extraordinarily problematic when it’s not consciously chosen and adopted based on personality, or for use in war.
Syna, you raise valid points and I think this is an extremely important conversation to have. I am planning on a more specific blog post about it in the near future, so stay tuned.
We’re arguing over whether a particular American cultural construct is an (not the) appropriate way to understand Ares. The issue has largely boiled down to one of cultural perspective.
Neither is this.
*pops head in*
Other than the drama llama coming and crapping on your blog about something that has very little to do with the actual subject, I think it’s very well written and brings up some valid points.
I think the truth is what most of us know about Ares and how we experience him is through gnosis…which is not a bad thing in and of itself.
He is confusing in that he is different from Athena…who uses more strategy than brute force. While Ares is about these things (force, bloodlust, thrill of battle, bravery), I would posit that he is also about change through revolution. With his companion Eris he brings about conflict and discord so that there can be greater understanding and growth. In essence, positive change.
There is some evidence that even among the Greeks he was not popular…in that his temples were often found outside the cities rather than *in* them. The implication being that while the Greeks understood the necessity of Ares within the pantheon, they did not necessarily *like* it, as Athena was much more beloved overall.
Anyway – I’m glad I found this blog, and thanks very much for letting me comment.
Lisa
I would imagine that while Athena may be the accomplished strategist, Ares would certainly be a brilliant tactician. I think it does Ares a great disservice to imagine that the only thing brought to warfare other than strategy is brute force.
It’s all really conjecture, but I would be willing to entertain the idea that Ares is the the one that executes the plans of strategy. Having said that, it still means he is the one that is using more brawn, not as much brain as Athena.
I’m not trying to imply that Ares is all muscle with no intelligence…as I said earlier, I believe his role is many faceted, but I would say that in terms of warfare he is about he is the Soldier, while Athena is the Commander. He gets his hands dirty.
Certainly, and that’s what I am saying–when the joint chiefs of staff plan the large-scale integrated war effort, that’s strategy. That’s clearly where Athena’s gifts are needed. When a platoon leader leads his men to engage the enemy by laying down suppressive fire and assaulting the enemy’s position in a flanking maneuver, that’s tactics. And I think Ares could handle that masterfully.
What I think a lot of people without military experience may not always realize is that warfare is not a matter of generals making plans and all the soldiers executing the plans as commanded. The generals make plans at a bird’s eye view that take the whole picture into consideration, and ever level of command from there down to the fire team leader who is in charge of three riflemen has to make plans and decisions at their level of authority, with a surprising amount of autonomy, in order to carry out the broader objectives of the plans made by their higher-ups. There are comparatively very few soldiers in a modern army whose job it is to just do what they are told, the way they are told to do it. The distinction between “soldier” and “commander” is not necessarily clear.
The general doesn’t necessarily tell the platoon leader what tactics to use to “take that hill”. The general may not even be worried about whether there is a hill or not–the general is making plans at a pretty large scale (strategy), and the nitty-gritty specifics are not necessarily on his radar. Someone partway up the chain of command decided, as a part of larger-scale planning, that the hill needed to be taken and told the platoon leader to do it. The platoon leader then has to make it happen, and he has to use his abilities as a tactician to decide precisely how do it.
Strategy and tactics are not just the same thing at a different scale either–they involve qualitiatively different considerations, to the point that they are just not the same playbook at all.
Well, I agree with Lisa (which should come as no surprise to anyone, really)…and I think that you might be oversimplifying, Kullervo. “Brute force” in warfare gets a bad rap, but that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily “bad.” If we are to look at certain archetypes in Greek history that might represent the Ares and Athena “styles” of warfare, one might look at the Spartans (under Leonidas) and the Thebans (under Epaminondas).
The Spartans at Thermopylae won simply through blood, sweat, and guts. There really was no “strategy” apart from the location. There was no real infantry “support” other than a few Helots. It was just, “Hold the phalanx.” This to me, represents classic “Ares”-style warfare.
On the other hand, Epaminondas’s victory at Leuctra over the Spartans was much more about strategy and tactics than force, will, or individual fighting prowess. He defeated the much more technically proficient Spartans (and while the Sacred Band were badasses…they were still not really capable of taking on the Spartans on a 1:1 basis…), by his “invention” of a new kind of tactic (and the “echelon formation”).
Sure, at Leuctra, the “Athena”-style won…but that doesn’t mean that the “Ares”-style of fighting was not “good.” I am probably one of the most Laconophilic people you’ll ever meet. It just wasn’t good in this particular instance. I certainly wouldn’t have wanted it to be 300 Thebans at Thermopylae. That’s for damn sure.
(NOTE: Both Lisa and I certainly have “military experience.” For the record, and all…) 😉
Regardless…we cannot ignore Ares epithets:
Murderous,
Manslaughtering
Manslaying,
Destroyer of Men
Blood-stained,
Bloody
Violent,
Furious
Terrible,
Fearsome
Insatiate of Fighting,
Insatiate of War
These are from theoi.com, btw and are used to illustrate my point. He is what he is. While I think we can both agree that the Gods are much more than a stereotype…we cannot ignore that he is in fact a violent warrior.
It is not a disservice to this God to acknowledge his many epithets regarding his violent aspects. It would be a disservice to focus *solely* on them.
No argument. I am not at all suggesting that Ares is not in fact bloody-handed or manslaughtering or that he is not also a god of brute force. He certainly is! I just think that the dichotomy between strategy and “brute force” is an imaginary one that exists primarily in the minds of civilians and ignores the tactical realities of warfare.
When we say things like “Athena is the general who makes the plans and Ares is the violent grunt who executes them,” we are shoehorning the gods into imaginary military stereotypes, not as anything that reflects reality. I wouldn’t dare deny that war takes immense amounts of blood, sweat, and brutal effort, and that Ares is most assuredly the god of those things. But a good soldier–even, no especially, a “grunt”–has to have those things and leadership ability, and a mastery of tactics on an appropriate scale. And tactics is not the same thing as strategy.
In any case, I think we can all agree that each of the gods is complex and multifaceted, and to the extent that we forget that, we fail to understand them. There may be good purpose in thinking of or presenting a god as a particular stereotype or in a specific aspect depending on the context, but when we forget that these depictions are just that–simplified depictions of complex gods–we make a serious error.
Just so I'm making myself clear, I don't think that "brute force" is "bad," or that we should tone down in any way the fact that Ares is a brutal, visceral, and intensely physical god. And I am not in any way saying that battles are not won by blood, sweat, and guts in a way that Ares absolutely revels in.
What I am saying is that I am bothered by the notion that Athena is the planner and Ares is the fighter, because it betrays a misunderstanding of the kind of planning that front-line soldiers have to do. Front-line soldiers have to do a different kind of planning to win battles and engagements, i.e., tactics, from what the generals and policymakers have to do to win wars, i.e., strategy.
And so I am suggesting that, in addition to being a raw, brutal and physical god, as a soldier’s god, Ares must also be a god of leadership and tactics. That means in addition to brute force, Ares would have to bring his own kind of thought and planning to the battlefield, though a qualitatively different kind of planning, both in terms of substance and in terms of scale, from what Athena does.
And you need both in order to win wars.
“…..but when we forget that these depictions are just that–simplified depictions of complex gods–we make a serious error.”
This!
Kullervo, could you please edit Ruadhans post replacing my real name wtih “Apollodōros Phlamandos” and my nickname with “Apollodorosh”?
[…] Why Ares is unpopular (byzantium.wordpress.com) […]
Absolutely. Done.
Thanks, Kullervo, I appreciate it 😉
My pleasure.
I’m always so excited to meet someone who loves the god of war like I do. He is the one who is feasted by women. I love your blog and I can’t wait to read more from you!