Emily Wilson translated The Odyssey and the internet lost its mind — here’s why

So here’s a thing that happened: a classicist published a translation of a poem that is literally three thousand years old, and the internet had a complete meltdown about it. Not about AI. Not about a celebrity. About Homer.

Emily Wilson’s translation of The Odyssey came out in 2017 and people are still arguing about it. Scholars, Twitter users, people who haven’t opened a book since tenth grade English — all of them with opinions. Very loud opinions.

And honestly? I kind of love it. Because it turns out there is something genuinely wild happening here, and it’s not just about ancient Greece.

Why does a new translation of an old poem even matter?

Every translation is also an interpretation — and the words a translator picks decide what you think the story is. Wilson opens The Odyssey with the word “man” — just that, plain and unadorned — where other translators had written things like “the hero” or “the great Odysseus.” One word. That’s it. And it completely changes the energy of the whole thing before you’ve even gotten started.

The poem hasn’t changed. The Greek is the same Greek. But when Wilson describes Odysseus’s enslaved women as “enslaved women” instead of “maids” or “serving girls,” suddenly you’re reading a story about power and ownership instead of a cozy domestic epic. That’s not a small shift.

What did Emily Wilson actually do differently?

Wilson was the first woman ever to publish an English translation of The Odyssey. First. Ever. In the entire history of the English language. That fact alone is kind of stunning when you sit with it.

She also made choices that felt almost jarring to people used to the older versions. The famous Greek word polytropos — used to describe Odysseus in the very first line — has been translated as “cunning,” “wily,” “much-traveled,” “of many devices.” Wilson went with “complicated.” As in: Tell me about a complicated man. Some people found that electrifying. Some people found it outrageous. Basically nobody felt nothing about it.

Her translation is also written in iambic pentameter — the same meter as Shakespeare — which keeps it readable and rhythmic without feeling stiff. According to The New Yorker’s profile of Wilson, she went through multiple drafts of every single line. That’s not a casual project.

Is the “complicated man” controversy actually justified?

Here’s where people split, and I want to be fair about both sides because the pushback isn’t entirely wrong.

The case against Wilson’s choices goes like this: polytropos has specific heroic weight in ancient Greek culture, and flattening it to “complicated” strips away the epic register that Homer intended. Some classicists argue that a translation should preserve the strangeness and grandeur of the original, not make it feel like a modern character study.

That’s a real argument. I don’t think it’s the winning one, but it deserves to be said honestly.

Here’s why I still think Wilson is onto something: every single translation before hers was also making choices, they just didn’t get called out for it. Calling Odysseus a “hero” isn’t neutral — it’s already an editorial decision. It just felt invisible because it’s the version we grew up with. Wilson made her choices visible, and that visibility is exactly what lit the fuse.

Why is the internet specifically so obsessed with this?

People who care about representation saw Wilson’s translation as proof that who tells the story changes what the story is. And honestly, that’s not a new idea in literary criticism — scholars have been writing about translation theory and power for decades — but Wilson made it undeniable in a way that non-academics could feel.

There’s also just something satisfying about a story where a woman translates a story in which women have been largely sidelined, and suddenly the women in that story — Penelope, Circe, the enslaved women in the hall — come into sharper focus. Not because Wilson invented them. They were always there. She just didn’t let you look away from them.

Should you actually read it?

Yes. Genuinely, yes, even if you have never once thought about ancient Greece and have zero plans to start.

Wilson’s translation reads like a story. Not a homework assignment, not a dusty artifact — a story with momentum and a main character who is, in her own words, complicated. You might find yourself annoyed at Odysseus. You might find yourself annoyed at the poem for all the ways it has always treated women as furniture. Both of those reactions are the point.

In my earlier take on why certain books go viral for surprising reasons, I talked about how sometimes a book blows up not because it’s new but because the timing finally catches up to what it was always saying. Wilson’s Odyssey is that.

What does this say about how we read anything?

Every piece of writing you have ever read came to you through someone’s choices. Word choices, framing choices, what to emphasize and what to slide past. The Odyssey just makes this unusually obvious because we have so many versions to compare.

And if a translator’s word choices can change how you feel about a 3,000-year-old epic hero, imagine what they’re doing to the stuff you read every day without thinking about it. News articles. Product descriptions. Social media captions. Someone is picking those words too.

But what do I know? I just think it’s worth asking who’s doing the translating — and what they’re deciding you should see.

The Emily Wilson Odyssey discourse is one of those arguments that looks like it’s about ancient Greece but is actually about everything. It’s about who gets to tell stories, what words are doing when we think they’re just describing, and why the version of a thing we grew up with can feel like the only true version even when it isn’t.

Wilson didn’t rewrite Homer. She just made his choices — and every previous translator’s choices — impossible to ignore. That’s a pretty good reason for the internet to lose its collective mind over a poem from 800 BCE.

Go read it.

📌 Pin this post