Ophelia's Madness
There is no doubt that Ophelia is quite mad at the end of her life. The last scene that Ophelia appears in her dialogue is almost completely composed of nonsensical little songs. These songs are focused on death, love, and betrayal. Laertes says in line 170, "This nothing's more than matter," about his sister's ramblings. Indeed, her obsession with death and love reveal the cause of her insanity: the death of her father. The death of her beloved father, who she was shown to follow blindly, by none other than her lover broke the last straw. The stress of the last few days events, her brother's departure, the suspicious air at court, Hamlet's crumbling mental state, and finally her father's death were too much to handle and Ophelia cracked. She, like the rarely mentioned Denmark, was just a pitiful, innocent, but very intimately connected bystander.
Hamlet's Madness 2
The beginning of Act V opens with a slight break all the tragedy and seriousness by introducing two comical gravediggers. Hamlet comes across one cheerily digging up to grave of poor Yorik for Ophelia's fresh corpse. Hamlet and Horatio come across this sight and Hamlet's response is telling. While he seems to have the reaction of any sane person, somewhat horrified, his response when compared to Horatio's is telling. Hamlet's dialogue is long winded and a tiny bit comical as he makes legal puns about what one should lose and keep during death. Even when he finds out that the bones being carelessly tossed about by the clown are that of his old friend Yorik, Hamlet's reaction is more amused than sad and upset while he rambles on and on. Horatio's only response are short, unemotional statements. Horatio, who surely would comfort his friend or help him in some way, has no reaction at all. Therefore, the mood and length of Hamlet's speech imply that he is still mad.
However, Hamlet's madness is different from Ophelia's madness. Ophelia insanity was born instantaneously by natural human forces. She had lost all powers of comprehension and reason, and even her own identity in her madness. Hamlet, on the other hand, still was essentially Hamlet even when he became insane. He was still aware of his surroundings, had his reason, and his personality. His madness was born out of obsession, revenge, and supernatural forces (the ghost that was supposedly the "spirit of [his] father).
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Thursday, December 3, 2009
12/3 Hamlet #13B
Hamlet's Madness 1
To say Hamlet had gone completely mad would be false, but to say that he was not mad at all would also be false. In some of the circumstances Hamlet's craziness seems to be purposeful for his endeavours to uncover the king's secret murder and his mother's unfaithfulness. For example, when he and Horatio are getting ready for the play that he has planned and the king and his entourage are about to enter, Hamlet says to his friend something along the lines of "Oh, they're coming. I need to act insane now." This alone shows he has a definite purpose in many of his odd words and behaviors. However, Hamlet's madness does seem to be out of his control at several points as well. One sign of his madness is his shift from utter conviction to spare his mother to wanting to humiliate her at others. His erratic behavior towards Ophelia is also a sign of madness. The most obvious moment of his insanity, however, when he is confronting his mother, he can see the Ghost, but she cannot.
Ophelia and Gertrude
From reading Hamlet, it is clear that Hamlet does not have a positive view about women. He treats them as one disillusioned, which is exactly what he is. His mother was once the loyal and loving wife to the king, but now she is the incestuous, forgetting wife of her husband's murderer. It is not surprising that Hamlet would feel hurt and betrayed by her. However, instead of dealing with it in a healthy way, Hamlet lets this view of an unfaithfulness permeate his outlook on all women, including his loved Ophelia. His dislike for women is obvious in the way that he talks to Gertrude and Ophelia. His bitterness leaks out in his sexual comments and unwarranted attitude towards them. When dealing with Ophelia alone, the reader can see that the prince thinks women are bad influences on men. He states, "Or, if thou wilt needs marry, marry a fool; for wise men know well enough what monster you make of them." Hamlet also thinks of women as uncommitted. In addition to his several comments about Gertrude, this view can be seen when Ophelia comments that the prologue to the play is short and he responds, "As woman's love."
Play within a Play
The events in the play that Hamlet writes are clearly a retelling of how Hamlet suspects his father's murder took place. The speeches put a spotlight on how Hamlet views his parents and uncle's thoughts during this time. The player Queen's speech in particular seems to be a jab at Gertrude. The King's response to the murder of the Player King was the exact clue that Hamlet was looking for. The purpose of the whole play was to set a trap for his uncle so that Hamlet might discover the truth through the king's reaction and then work accordingly. Hamlet is overjoyed at the king's give away of his guilt. His suspicions and the Ghost were right after all. Besides that, the "play-within-a-play" had no underlying significance.
To say Hamlet had gone completely mad would be false, but to say that he was not mad at all would also be false. In some of the circumstances Hamlet's craziness seems to be purposeful for his endeavours to uncover the king's secret murder and his mother's unfaithfulness. For example, when he and Horatio are getting ready for the play that he has planned and the king and his entourage are about to enter, Hamlet says to his friend something along the lines of "Oh, they're coming. I need to act insane now." This alone shows he has a definite purpose in many of his odd words and behaviors. However, Hamlet's madness does seem to be out of his control at several points as well. One sign of his madness is his shift from utter conviction to spare his mother to wanting to humiliate her at others. His erratic behavior towards Ophelia is also a sign of madness. The most obvious moment of his insanity, however, when he is confronting his mother, he can see the Ghost, but she cannot.
Ophelia and Gertrude
From reading Hamlet, it is clear that Hamlet does not have a positive view about women. He treats them as one disillusioned, which is exactly what he is. His mother was once the loyal and loving wife to the king, but now she is the incestuous, forgetting wife of her husband's murderer. It is not surprising that Hamlet would feel hurt and betrayed by her. However, instead of dealing with it in a healthy way, Hamlet lets this view of an unfaithfulness permeate his outlook on all women, including his loved Ophelia. His dislike for women is obvious in the way that he talks to Gertrude and Ophelia. His bitterness leaks out in his sexual comments and unwarranted attitude towards them. When dealing with Ophelia alone, the reader can see that the prince thinks women are bad influences on men. He states, "Or, if thou wilt needs marry, marry a fool; for wise men know well enough what monster you make of them." Hamlet also thinks of women as uncommitted. In addition to his several comments about Gertrude, this view can be seen when Ophelia comments that the prologue to the play is short and he responds, "As woman's love."
Play within a Play
The events in the play that Hamlet writes are clearly a retelling of how Hamlet suspects his father's murder took place. The speeches put a spotlight on how Hamlet views his parents and uncle's thoughts during this time. The player Queen's speech in particular seems to be a jab at Gertrude. The King's response to the murder of the Player King was the exact clue that Hamlet was looking for. The purpose of the whole play was to set a trap for his uncle so that Hamlet might discover the truth through the king's reaction and then work accordingly. Hamlet is overjoyed at the king's give away of his guilt. His suspicions and the Ghost were right after all. Besides that, the "play-within-a-play" had no underlying significance.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
12/1 Hamlet #13A
Opening Scene
The opening scene of Hamlet sets the mood for the supernatural, quiet, intense mood of the play. Hamlet opens with Bernardo and Francisco changing guard while on watch at the palace. Not only does Horatio's explanation of the tumultuous state of Denmark add a gloomy feel to the scene, but so does the mood Shakespeare sets. It is a cold, silent, haunted night. He describes it as (in line 7) "bitter cold," and (in line 10) so quiet that "not a mouse [was] stirring," during that "dead hour," (line 65). The perfect night for a ghostly appearance. This mood sets the tone for the entire play, including Hamlet's and his comrade's encounter with the ghost of his father, the king. While Hamlet gives no thought to what the motive of the ghost may be, Horatio fears that ghost may just be a malevolent spirit wishing to lure the prince off to an untimely and dramatic death. This fear that Horatio and the other have is understandable considering the mood if the night. Ominous, spooky air would give one pause when intending to follow ghosts.
The Ghost
When Hamlet encounters the ghost of his father, two things are clear: he was murdered for the crown and that murderer was his own incestuous brother. The Ghost, while he identifies himself as the estranged spirit of the king, still speaks of the king's life and death in third person. He shows an un-connectedness to the world around him. The ghost shows no emotion at the sight of seeing his son nor at the mention of his horrid fate after death. The ghost's only focus is the events of his death and the task in which he gives Hamlet. His request is unquestionable, "Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder," (line 25). Hamlet is, naturally, surprised at the ghost's identity and understandably horrified at the circumstances surrounding his death and his uncle's seduction of the king. While he is shocked though, and possibly uncertain of the truth, Hamlet is determined to fulfill the Ghost's request. He even says, "Now to my word [... Uncle,] Adieu, adieu! [...] I have sworn't," (line 110) This seems to be an allusion to his goal of fulfilling the Ghost's task by murdering his uncle.
The opening scene of Hamlet sets the mood for the supernatural, quiet, intense mood of the play. Hamlet opens with Bernardo and Francisco changing guard while on watch at the palace. Not only does Horatio's explanation of the tumultuous state of Denmark add a gloomy feel to the scene, but so does the mood Shakespeare sets. It is a cold, silent, haunted night. He describes it as (in line 7) "bitter cold," and (in line 10) so quiet that "not a mouse [was] stirring," during that "dead hour," (line 65). The perfect night for a ghostly appearance. This mood sets the tone for the entire play, including Hamlet's and his comrade's encounter with the ghost of his father, the king. While Hamlet gives no thought to what the motive of the ghost may be, Horatio fears that ghost may just be a malevolent spirit wishing to lure the prince off to an untimely and dramatic death. This fear that Horatio and the other have is understandable considering the mood if the night. Ominous, spooky air would give one pause when intending to follow ghosts.
The Ghost
When Hamlet encounters the ghost of his father, two things are clear: he was murdered for the crown and that murderer was his own incestuous brother. The Ghost, while he identifies himself as the estranged spirit of the king, still speaks of the king's life and death in third person. He shows an un-connectedness to the world around him. The ghost shows no emotion at the sight of seeing his son nor at the mention of his horrid fate after death. The ghost's only focus is the events of his death and the task in which he gives Hamlet. His request is unquestionable, "Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder," (line 25). Hamlet is, naturally, surprised at the ghost's identity and understandably horrified at the circumstances surrounding his death and his uncle's seduction of the king. While he is shocked though, and possibly uncertain of the truth, Hamlet is determined to fulfill the Ghost's request. He even says, "Now to my word [... Uncle,] Adieu, adieu! [...] I have sworn't," (line 110) This seems to be an allusion to his goal of fulfilling the Ghost's task by murdering his uncle.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Sunday, November 15, 2009
11/17 The Prince #12A
Human Nature
In the Prince, Machiavelli describes the guidelines that a leader should ascribe to himself. Almost all of these tips pertain to how the "the prince" should act in relation to his people. In his writings, Machiavelli's view on human nature and people in general are seen. To him, humans as purely political, emotional creatures. His view places no faith in man, save for his ideal prince. Machiavelli even says, "For men in general judge more by their eyes than by their hands; everybody is fitted to see, few to understand." While his assumptions about man are seen often in reality often, he places too many expectations in his prince considering his low opinion of everyone else. He writes that people are flighty, unfaithful, and somewhat stupid. Yet, he expects the prince to be and achieve number of extremely difficult to impossible things. His view of man requires impossible acts to be the perfect leader. While his view of man is very pessimistic and somewhat insulting, it is true at many times. Therefore, to have a realistic version of his new government, Machiavelli should have changed his high expectations.
Virtues
Machiavelli makes several great points about that type of qualities a prince should have. For example, when discussing on rather it is better to be a loved ruler or a feared one, Machiavelli supports a feared leader. His explanation makes sense, a feared leader has more control and can make a better country (and so is in the end loved). And when discussing whether the prince should deal with his subjects through politics or violence, Machiavelli suggest politics. However, he add that it will be necessary to use violence and trickery at times, "Hence a prince must know perfectly how to act like a beast and like a man." The author made several points like that are reasonable. However, the thought of one man being able to balance out all these traits and perform them in the manner that Machiavelli prescribes is near impossible. He expects his prince to be perfect, yet no man is perfect. Therefore, no man would be able to posses all the qualities Machiavelli writes about. While "The Prince" is a good example, no leader would be able to do everything written in it.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
11/12 John Donne #11B
Holy Sonnet 14
"John Donne's work Holy Sonnet 14 follows the style of his other poems in it reads and has the imagery of a love poem. As the title suggests, however, this is not an ordinary poem but a love letter to God. In the first line, Donne addresses his words to the "Godhead." The language Donne uses suggest strong, passionate feelings bordering on sexuality, not what one would expect to a love letter to Christ. For instance, Donne even says about his devotion to Christ, "Except you enthrall me, never shall be free, Nor ever chaste, except you ravish me." This use of language like a lover conveys his strong feelings towards his faith. Donne's chosen worldly vehicle (the imagery, feelings like for a lover) to express a religious message fits in with the Renaissance.
Flea Bait
Two of John Donne's poems, "The Flea" and "The Bait," are similar is several ways, but also different. Both are love poems, from one lover to another (presumably to the man to the woman), and both have subjects of things in nature, a flea and fish. Both the poems express adoration and a desire to be together in one way or another. However, in these way they also differ. While "the Bait," does include something from nature, in the "the Flea," the flea is part of their love. The flea is almost put on an equal standard as the two lovers. Their love is intensified because of the flea. In "the Bait," likewise, their love is not affected by the fish, but the fish are affected by the lovers. Another difference between the two is the desires of the speakers. In the "the Flea," the speaker is addressing a woman that he wants to be with, yet cannot. The poem expresses his desire for her. Yet, in "the Bait," it is implied that the two lovers are already together. The speaker of the poem is not expressing his desire, but he is complimenting his lover. In these way, John Donne's poems are very similar, yet also different.
"John Donne's work Holy Sonnet 14 follows the style of his other poems in it reads and has the imagery of a love poem. As the title suggests, however, this is not an ordinary poem but a love letter to God. In the first line, Donne addresses his words to the "Godhead." The language Donne uses suggest strong, passionate feelings bordering on sexuality, not what one would expect to a love letter to Christ. For instance, Donne even says about his devotion to Christ, "Except you enthrall me, never shall be free, Nor ever chaste, except you ravish me." This use of language like a lover conveys his strong feelings towards his faith. Donne's chosen worldly vehicle (the imagery, feelings like for a lover) to express a religious message fits in with the Renaissance.
Flea Bait
Two of John Donne's poems, "The Flea" and "The Bait," are similar is several ways, but also different. Both are love poems, from one lover to another (presumably to the man to the woman), and both have subjects of things in nature, a flea and fish. Both the poems express adoration and a desire to be together in one way or another. However, in these way they also differ. While "the Bait," does include something from nature, in the "the Flea," the flea is part of their love. The flea is almost put on an equal standard as the two lovers. Their love is intensified because of the flea. In "the Bait," likewise, their love is not affected by the fish, but the fish are affected by the lovers. Another difference between the two is the desires of the speakers. In the "the Flea," the speaker is addressing a woman that he wants to be with, yet cannot. The poem expresses his desire for her. Yet, in "the Bait," it is implied that the two lovers are already together. The speaker of the poem is not expressing his desire, but he is complimenting his lover. In these way, John Donne's poems are very similar, yet also different.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
11/10 The Praise of Folly #11A
Folly
In Erasmus's Praise of Folly, Folly is character that describes her role in people's lives. According to Folly, she is a deity, a goddess. She differs from other gods in that she requires no token of devotion from her subjects nor does her rule only over one region, but the entire world. Folly describes her ways as following the ways of Nature. Being a fool does not step beyond the lot that Nature has given humans, like artists, philosophers, inventors do. Foolishness not hurt anyone, instead not only brings pleasure to the fool and to one observing the fool. Since foolishness is simply thriving in the way Nature has allotted us, why would it hurt anyone? Folly's ways, as Erasmus has described, encourages a selfish, low life style where one is not human, only an animal. One should not think outside what pleases him and what would make oneself a better person. Folly's lifestyle is a degrading, wretched life style that, even if it leads to present happiness, can only lead to misery in the end.
Christian Folly
Erasmus's Christian Folly does not make any sense. He wrote that Christianity is folly, that God hates human wisdom (so he must encourage foolishness) and that even our Savior's act was in itself Folly and that is what, in the end, saves us. While I can understand his point, I believe that Erasmus is missing the entire point of Christianity. His earlier descriptions of Folly describes a life style wrapped up around the individual and even still, Erasmus' view of Christianity is about the individual. I know Christianity to be a faith not about me, but about God. God doesn't like human wisdom, but He doesn't want folly either. He wants us to bring glory to Him through making ourselves better and honoring Him in all our actions. Since Folly is only focused on herself, already it cannot relate to Christianity. Erasmus made some good points, about believing in Christ's folly in the cross (which is what it was), he just doesn't fully grasp the concept. God loves us, and when we accept His love, he are commanded to return that love and act according to God, still leaving the point of emphasis on God. Erasmus' school of thought does not grasp this.
In Erasmus's Praise of Folly, Folly is character that describes her role in people's lives. According to Folly, she is a deity, a goddess. She differs from other gods in that she requires no token of devotion from her subjects nor does her rule only over one region, but the entire world. Folly describes her ways as following the ways of Nature. Being a fool does not step beyond the lot that Nature has given humans, like artists, philosophers, inventors do. Foolishness not hurt anyone, instead not only brings pleasure to the fool and to one observing the fool. Since foolishness is simply thriving in the way Nature has allotted us, why would it hurt anyone? Folly's ways, as Erasmus has described, encourages a selfish, low life style where one is not human, only an animal. One should not think outside what pleases him and what would make oneself a better person. Folly's lifestyle is a degrading, wretched life style that, even if it leads to present happiness, can only lead to misery in the end.
Christian Folly
Erasmus's Christian Folly does not make any sense. He wrote that Christianity is folly, that God hates human wisdom (so he must encourage foolishness) and that even our Savior's act was in itself Folly and that is what, in the end, saves us. While I can understand his point, I believe that Erasmus is missing the entire point of Christianity. His earlier descriptions of Folly describes a life style wrapped up around the individual and even still, Erasmus' view of Christianity is about the individual. I know Christianity to be a faith not about me, but about God. God doesn't like human wisdom, but He doesn't want folly either. He wants us to bring glory to Him through making ourselves better and honoring Him in all our actions. Since Folly is only focused on herself, already it cannot relate to Christianity. Erasmus made some good points, about believing in Christ's folly in the cross (which is what it was), he just doesn't fully grasp the concept. God loves us, and when we accept His love, he are commanded to return that love and act according to God, still leaving the point of emphasis on God. Erasmus' school of thought does not grasp this.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
10/29 Travel and Discovery #9B
Mandeville
The Travels of Sir John Mandeville describe several natives that Mandeville supposedly came across in his travels. One nation of people he describes people that are basically what we know as cyclops, giants with one eye that eat raw meat. Today, we know that no such people could possibly exist outside of fairy tales. Of course, it is reasonable to assume that perhaps these people were quite tall and maybe they only did eat raw fish. Another people that Mandeville comes across in his travels are described to have no heads and eyes on their shoulders. Such a claim is ridiculous today and is clearly unrealistic. Another nation of folks written about are said to "Have the lip above the mouth so great, that they sleep in the sun they cover all the face and that lip." While this is an exaggeration, there are tribal groups out there that put rings in their mouths to make stretch out their upper lips. So while the people in this account of Mandeville's travels have unrealistic exaggerations or just plain myths, they could be based in truth. These exaggeration served to excite the Renaissance mind, which thrived off of stories of new and strange worlds.
Columbus
In his letters about his voyage to new world, Columbus was clearly fascinated and excited by what he had come across. His purpose, after discovering the new world, was to use the raw materials to better Spain and to convert the natives to Christianity. His purpose is shown, firstly, in the way that he named and claimed every island he came across for Spain. He claimed ownership so that the King and Queen could use take from that land to give to Spain. He even says, "I hold them all in the name of their Highnesses who can dispose thereof as much and as completely as the kingdoms of Castile." In addition, while he does describe the natives with wonder and affection, he obviously is aware of how easily they could be used. He makes note several times of their timidity and lack of metal for weapons and shields. In addition to his expectation of using the new world as a tool for Spain's success, Columbus shows himself to be deeply religious. He praises God several times and emphasizes his plans to convert the natives. He describes that he gave the natives useful gifts "in order that they may conceive affection, and furthermore may becomes Christians."
The Travels of Sir John Mandeville describe several natives that Mandeville supposedly came across in his travels. One nation of people he describes people that are basically what we know as cyclops, giants with one eye that eat raw meat. Today, we know that no such people could possibly exist outside of fairy tales. Of course, it is reasonable to assume that perhaps these people were quite tall and maybe they only did eat raw fish. Another people that Mandeville comes across in his travels are described to have no heads and eyes on their shoulders. Such a claim is ridiculous today and is clearly unrealistic. Another nation of folks written about are said to "Have the lip above the mouth so great, that they sleep in the sun they cover all the face and that lip." While this is an exaggeration, there are tribal groups out there that put rings in their mouths to make stretch out their upper lips. So while the people in this account of Mandeville's travels have unrealistic exaggerations or just plain myths, they could be based in truth. These exaggeration served to excite the Renaissance mind, which thrived off of stories of new and strange worlds.
Columbus
In his letters about his voyage to new world, Columbus was clearly fascinated and excited by what he had come across. His purpose, after discovering the new world, was to use the raw materials to better Spain and to convert the natives to Christianity. His purpose is shown, firstly, in the way that he named and claimed every island he came across for Spain. He claimed ownership so that the King and Queen could use take from that land to give to Spain. He even says, "I hold them all in the name of their Highnesses who can dispose thereof as much and as completely as the kingdoms of Castile." In addition, while he does describe the natives with wonder and affection, he obviously is aware of how easily they could be used. He makes note several times of their timidity and lack of metal for weapons and shields. In addition to his expectation of using the new world as a tool for Spain's success, Columbus shows himself to be deeply religious. He praises God several times and emphasizes his plans to convert the natives. He describes that he gave the natives useful gifts "in order that they may conceive affection, and furthermore may becomes Christians."
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
10/27 Cantebury Tales #9A
Wife of Bath
According to Chaucer's story The Wife of Bath in Canterbury Tales, all women desire only one thing. That is to hold control over men. Besides the narrator outright telling us that is what women hold most important, this desire is illuminated in many of other aspects of the story. First, we see this when king is about to condemn the knight at the beginning of the story, the queen requests that she be in charge is of trial and sentencing. She wanted to be in control. A more obvious example of this is when the old woman gives the knight between having an ugly, but faithful wife or a beautiful, but disloyal wife. Instead of choosing for himself, the knight lets the old woman decided, leaving her in power completely over the situation. By yielding and letting the old woman have the choice, the old woman is happy because she was given power over her husband. Personally, I think it is true that many women want to have control over others and in situations. Even the Bible says that this is something that women everywhere have to continue to struggle with. However, to say that it is the foremost desire of all women to hold power over others is not true. When stereotyping an entire gender that way, it can never be completely true.
Pardoner's Tale
The Pardoner's Tale is basically a list of rules (with support and examples) of do's and don'ts that people need to heed to. These includes things like don't gamble, don't be gluttonous, don't get drunk, and don't swear on Christ's body. The story given among this list is an example of what could result from doing this things, death. This says a lot about Medieval religion and the Catholic church. For those who choose sinful ways, it's death. For those who choose wise ways, it's life. The Pardoner character, from the little we read of his purpose and actions, is a priestly type figure. By going to him with our sins, he can help pardon us of our past sins and move on to a happy future. This makes me think of the Catholic church, because it is concerned with actions. While actions are most certainly very important, the way to get redemption is through confession (an action). This doesn't deal where the core of the sin lay, in the person's heart.
According to Chaucer's story The Wife of Bath in Canterbury Tales, all women desire only one thing. That is to hold control over men. Besides the narrator outright telling us that is what women hold most important, this desire is illuminated in many of other aspects of the story. First, we see this when king is about to condemn the knight at the beginning of the story, the queen requests that she be in charge is of trial and sentencing. She wanted to be in control. A more obvious example of this is when the old woman gives the knight between having an ugly, but faithful wife or a beautiful, but disloyal wife. Instead of choosing for himself, the knight lets the old woman decided, leaving her in power completely over the situation. By yielding and letting the old woman have the choice, the old woman is happy because she was given power over her husband. Personally, I think it is true that many women want to have control over others and in situations. Even the Bible says that this is something that women everywhere have to continue to struggle with. However, to say that it is the foremost desire of all women to hold power over others is not true. When stereotyping an entire gender that way, it can never be completely true.
Pardoner's Tale
The Pardoner's Tale is basically a list of rules (with support and examples) of do's and don'ts that people need to heed to. These includes things like don't gamble, don't be gluttonous, don't get drunk, and don't swear on Christ's body. The story given among this list is an example of what could result from doing this things, death. This says a lot about Medieval religion and the Catholic church. For those who choose sinful ways, it's death. For those who choose wise ways, it's life. The Pardoner character, from the little we read of his purpose and actions, is a priestly type figure. By going to him with our sins, he can help pardon us of our past sins and move on to a happy future. This makes me think of the Catholic church, because it is concerned with actions. While actions are most certainly very important, the way to get redemption is through confession (an action). This doesn't deal where the core of the sin lay, in the person's heart.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
10/22 Everyman #8B
Human Nature
In Everyman, this sinfulness of man is emphasized. To help him in his reckoning to God, Everyman is shown first not able to rely on people (and things) of this world, and second he cannot rely on physical and intellectual traits. Fellowship, Cousin, Kindred, and Goods all represent things of this world that Everyman hopes can help him reconcile himself to God. They cannot. Knowledge, Good Deeds, Discretion, and Five-Wits all represent traits Everyman has before he does penance and after. It is important to note that the only quality that helped Everyman in his reckoning was Good Deeds, which came to Everyman only after he visited Confession and did penance. Everyman was not able to rely on his things of this world or qualities that were with he could have before penance.
God's monologue at the beginning of the play also reflects his own focus on the sin of man. God reveals that man had scorned God and rejected Christ. He even states, "Verily they will become much worse than beasts..." A very Catholic view is seen here. While God does mention the redeeming blood of Christ, man must still go through a reckoning. During this Reckoning, Everyman achieves a clear ledger not through acceptance of Christ, but through his own actions: confession, penance, and deeds. This view emphasizes not the glory of the Godhead, but the debase nature of men.
"Friends"
The five characters that Everyman encounters towards the second half of the play are Beauty, Strength, Discretion, and Five Wits. They all express the most supreme love and devotion to Everyman at the beginning of their conversation, but when Death's arrival creeps closer, they all progressively abandon him. These four characters all represent physical characteristics than humans possess. The progression of his friends leaving him and the time of Everyman's reckoning with God represent aging and death. As a person ages, good looks fade, skin becomes wrinkled, earlobes elongate, and hair turns white. This parallels Beauty's departure. The next to leave Everyman is Strength. In the life of a regular person, this is true as well. Muscles can grow weaker, bones become brittle, eye sight gets worse, and overall health declines. After this happens, many times mental health also declines for an elderly person. Age and diseases can leave one with fragmented or faulty memory and can impair judgment. Some people just loose their minds and aren't themselves for the rest of their minds when they get to a certain old age. This is represented in Everyman as Discretion leaving him. And the last to leave Everyman is Five-Wits. Clearly, Five-Wits represents the five senses. These become dull over time, but men still is able to perceive sensory data (with or without a lucid mind to comprehend it). Just before death, in both Everyman and real life, the senses are the last to leave a person. All a person has left is what they did in life (Good Deeds). Then man dies and he either goes to Heaven, like in Everyman's case, or Hell.
In Everyman, this sinfulness of man is emphasized. To help him in his reckoning to God, Everyman is shown first not able to rely on people (and things) of this world, and second he cannot rely on physical and intellectual traits. Fellowship, Cousin, Kindred, and Goods all represent things of this world that Everyman hopes can help him reconcile himself to God. They cannot. Knowledge, Good Deeds, Discretion, and Five-Wits all represent traits Everyman has before he does penance and after. It is important to note that the only quality that helped Everyman in his reckoning was Good Deeds, which came to Everyman only after he visited Confession and did penance. Everyman was not able to rely on his things of this world or qualities that were with he could have before penance.
God's monologue at the beginning of the play also reflects his own focus on the sin of man. God reveals that man had scorned God and rejected Christ. He even states, "Verily they will become much worse than beasts..." A very Catholic view is seen here. While God does mention the redeeming blood of Christ, man must still go through a reckoning. During this Reckoning, Everyman achieves a clear ledger not through acceptance of Christ, but through his own actions: confession, penance, and deeds. This view emphasizes not the glory of the Godhead, but the debase nature of men.
"Friends"
The five characters that Everyman encounters towards the second half of the play are Beauty, Strength, Discretion, and Five Wits. They all express the most supreme love and devotion to Everyman at the beginning of their conversation, but when Death's arrival creeps closer, they all progressively abandon him. These four characters all represent physical characteristics than humans possess. The progression of his friends leaving him and the time of Everyman's reckoning with God represent aging and death. As a person ages, good looks fade, skin becomes wrinkled, earlobes elongate, and hair turns white. This parallels Beauty's departure. The next to leave Everyman is Strength. In the life of a regular person, this is true as well. Muscles can grow weaker, bones become brittle, eye sight gets worse, and overall health declines. After this happens, many times mental health also declines for an elderly person. Age and diseases can leave one with fragmented or faulty memory and can impair judgment. Some people just loose their minds and aren't themselves for the rest of their minds when they get to a certain old age. This is represented in Everyman as Discretion leaving him. And the last to leave Everyman is Five-Wits. Clearly, Five-Wits represents the five senses. These become dull over time, but men still is able to perceive sensory data (with or without a lucid mind to comprehend it). Just before death, in both Everyman and real life, the senses are the last to leave a person. All a person has left is what they did in life (Good Deeds). Then man dies and he either goes to Heaven, like in Everyman's case, or Hell.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
10/20 1001 Nights #8A
Motifs
1001 Nights paints people, both male and female, very negatively. The men in this story are portrayed as very selfish. For example, when both Shahrayar and Shahzaman find out about their wives' unfaithfulness and then execute, they become very depressed not because they missed their wives, but because "of what [their wives] had done to [them] and how [they] had betrayed [them...]" Even the whole premise of the two brother going on their journey to find someone "whose misfortunes are greater than ours," is entirely self-centered and self-pitying. In addition to that, but many of the men in Shahrazad's stories. Such as the demon and the two brothers who became dogs. Shahrayar's vengeance against women by marrying them and then executing them also shows selfishness through his inability to listen to reason and continue to satisfy his lust for flesh and blood.
But if the men were painted in a bad light, the females in 1001 Nights were shown in an horrendously negative way. The women were selfish, deceitful, jealous, and cruel. First the wives of the two kings were slutty and unfaithful and the wife of the demon was not only deceitful to her husband, but also incredibly promiscuous. Those women even went to far as to expose themselves and to command men to have sex with them. The women in Shahrazad's tales weren't any better. One was a vengeful she-demon, another a jealous and cruel witch, and another an unfaithful wife. While in Shahrazad and her sister go beyond this low standard of behavior for women, Shahrazad does not try to hard to show how upright women are to the misogynistic king. It's is insulting to even be a part of a gender that is associated with so many horrible traits throughout this entire piece. Even according to the narrative, "[...] nothing can prevent or alter what is predestined and that when a woman desires something, no one can stop her."
Both genders are shown in a negative way also in relation to the obsession with vengeance. Shahrayar is obsessed with getting revenge on women by executing his wives. Even in Shahrazad's tales, revenge is a key theme. The demon wanted to get revenge on the merchant, the first old man revenge on his wife, the second old man's wife punished his brothers, and the third man also punished his wife.
As far as forgiveness and reconciliation goes, I didn't see any of that in the reading that were were assigned. While I am sure that the king does pardon his wife and stop his mad plot against marriageable women, we didn't get to it. And even in the stories we read, there wasn't much forgiveness. The demon who wanted to kill the merchant did end up pardoning him, this wasn't due to any moral conviction. He only pardoned him because he was amused by those old men. That's not reconciliation.
1001 Nights paints people, both male and female, very negatively. The men in this story are portrayed as very selfish. For example, when both Shahrayar and Shahzaman find out about their wives' unfaithfulness and then execute, they become very depressed not because they missed their wives, but because "of what [their wives] had done to [them] and how [they] had betrayed [them...]" Even the whole premise of the two brother going on their journey to find someone "whose misfortunes are greater than ours," is entirely self-centered and self-pitying. In addition to that, but many of the men in Shahrazad's stories. Such as the demon and the two brothers who became dogs. Shahrayar's vengeance against women by marrying them and then executing them also shows selfishness through his inability to listen to reason and continue to satisfy his lust for flesh and blood.
But if the men were painted in a bad light, the females in 1001 Nights were shown in an horrendously negative way. The women were selfish, deceitful, jealous, and cruel. First the wives of the two kings were slutty and unfaithful and the wife of the demon was not only deceitful to her husband, but also incredibly promiscuous. Those women even went to far as to expose themselves and to command men to have sex with them. The women in Shahrazad's tales weren't any better. One was a vengeful she-demon, another a jealous and cruel witch, and another an unfaithful wife. While in Shahrazad and her sister go beyond this low standard of behavior for women, Shahrazad does not try to hard to show how upright women are to the misogynistic king. It's is insulting to even be a part of a gender that is associated with so many horrible traits throughout this entire piece. Even according to the narrative, "[...] nothing can prevent or alter what is predestined and that when a woman desires something, no one can stop her."
Both genders are shown in a negative way also in relation to the obsession with vengeance. Shahrayar is obsessed with getting revenge on women by executing his wives. Even in Shahrazad's tales, revenge is a key theme. The demon wanted to get revenge on the merchant, the first old man revenge on his wife, the second old man's wife punished his brothers, and the third man also punished his wife.
As far as forgiveness and reconciliation goes, I didn't see any of that in the reading that were were assigned. While I am sure that the king does pardon his wife and stop his mad plot against marriageable women, we didn't get to it. And even in the stories we read, there wasn't much forgiveness. The demon who wanted to kill the merchant did end up pardoning him, this wasn't due to any moral conviction. He only pardoned him because he was amused by those old men. That's not reconciliation.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
10/15 Medieval Lyrics #7B
Religion
"A Hymn to Holy Women," describes a women receiving salvation with the analogy of a later that she wants to climb with Christ at the top reaching down to her and a Satan at the foot of the ladder keeping people from it. The poem is very clear. Women, and all men in general, have fallen from the ladder because of Eve's sin. The beast that knocks people from the later is obviously the devil. We can see this through the titles given to him- "dragon," "envious one," and "impious serpent-" and also the statements of him as deceiving people and owning sinner. The image of Christ at the top of the ladder, reaching down and then fighting the creature is a clear image of His salvation for us. The poem narrates the story of salvation. First, the woman is at the bottom of the ladder, unable to climb because of Satan. Then Christ dies for us, beats Satan so that we can keep salvation, and allow her to climb the "ladder of love of Christ." Next the author describes the change in the women who are saved. Women become righteous, raise Godly children, and give up promiscuous ways. Women can become heroes for spurring their children in Christian ways, like the Virgin Mary. The last event in the story describes believers worshipping Christ, who saves us, together.
Love
"Lover's Prize" and "Aubade" are both good examples of Medieval courtly love. In "Lover's Prize," describes a married woman who is in love with a knight, a common theme in Medieval literature. She gave him her heart and he claimed that she did not love him. According to her, all he wants is to lie with her in place of her husband. She wants this as well, but only if he were "to do all I'd want to do." She as the lord, and the knight as her loyal vassal. This fits in with the idea of chivalry and courtly love. Similarly, "Aubade" describes the affair of two lovers. However, their love offers a sweeter picture. This poem is from the point of view of both the man and woman, and their love is definitely requited, unlike the pair in "Lover's Prize." But this poem presents the idea of courtly love. The woman is married and her lover is most likely a nobleman of somekind. It says that the lady "holds her heart loyally in love." The idea of a loyal and the other aspects that appear in "Aubade" and "Lover's Prize" are based in courtly love.
"A Hymn to Holy Women," describes a women receiving salvation with the analogy of a later that she wants to climb with Christ at the top reaching down to her and a Satan at the foot of the ladder keeping people from it. The poem is very clear. Women, and all men in general, have fallen from the ladder because of Eve's sin. The beast that knocks people from the later is obviously the devil. We can see this through the titles given to him- "dragon," "envious one," and "impious serpent-" and also the statements of him as deceiving people and owning sinner. The image of Christ at the top of the ladder, reaching down and then fighting the creature is a clear image of His salvation for us. The poem narrates the story of salvation. First, the woman is at the bottom of the ladder, unable to climb because of Satan. Then Christ dies for us, beats Satan so that we can keep salvation, and allow her to climb the "ladder of love of Christ." Next the author describes the change in the women who are saved. Women become righteous, raise Godly children, and give up promiscuous ways. Women can become heroes for spurring their children in Christian ways, like the Virgin Mary. The last event in the story describes believers worshipping Christ, who saves us, together.
Love
"Lover's Prize" and "Aubade" are both good examples of Medieval courtly love. In "Lover's Prize," describes a married woman who is in love with a knight, a common theme in Medieval literature. She gave him her heart and he claimed that she did not love him. According to her, all he wants is to lie with her in place of her husband. She wants this as well, but only if he were "to do all I'd want to do." She as the lord, and the knight as her loyal vassal. This fits in with the idea of chivalry and courtly love. Similarly, "Aubade" describes the affair of two lovers. However, their love offers a sweeter picture. This poem is from the point of view of both the man and woman, and their love is definitely requited, unlike the pair in "Lover's Prize." But this poem presents the idea of courtly love. The woman is married and her lover is most likely a nobleman of somekind. It says that the lady "holds her heart loyally in love." The idea of a loyal and the other aspects that appear in "Aubade" and "Lover's Prize" are based in courtly love.
Monday, October 12, 2009
10/13 Medieval Women #7A
Misogynists
Many Medieval thinkers thought of woman as subordinate and less important than man. According to many of our readings, women are described as seducing, vain, cruel, and even with a more sinful nature than man. Women were seen inferior to man in this way because, I believe, because many "religious" and "philosophical men" wanted a scapegoat. Women are guilty of greater sin than man because the actions of Eve in the in the Garden of Eden, so naturally, many thought, all women are the source of all evil and discomfort. These men wanted an excuse for their sexual desires and for when they went astray, so of course its those nasty women's fault for being pretty and forcing them to think sinful things. And if a man is unhappy in a marriage its because, to some of these philosophers, it's because women are so expensive, nagging, and disloyal. In the eyes of many medieval thinkers, men alone couldn't possibly have failed in areas that happen to concern women, so to them blaming and slandering women was the natural answer. Today, we do still see this. However, it is not just on the man's part. I believe both men AND women are guilty and magnifying faults and generalizing them to the entire gender. How many times have we heard that all men are pigs and all women are witches? Misogyny and even misandry are nothing new today.
Feminists
Many arguments are presented to contradict the misogynistic view from the Middle Ages. Both in the Southern Passion and in the Letter from the God of Love provide several similar arguments in support in women. Two such arguments stood out to me particularly. First is the point that men only scandalize women so because men are liars and hypocrites and generalize the female population too quickly. I believe that, in revealing this point, the authors commit the same hypocrisy that they accuse men of. The authors say that is ridiculous for people to generalize women or anyone else. Yet, in the Southern Passion the author directly calls men, "loudmouths and liars." That itself is the very same generalization warned against just a few sentences later. The second argument that stood out as far less problems. In Christine de Pizan's work, she sites biblical material as her evidence of the virtuous qualities of women. Using the example of the virgin Mary and Mary Magdalene, the author employs an effective argument. The behavior, that was totally natural, of those woman directly goes against the negative stereotypes. Not only is the source one that her learned audience would be aware of, but it is also irrefutable. This argument is the much stronger argument of the two mentioned here.
Many Medieval thinkers thought of woman as subordinate and less important than man. According to many of our readings, women are described as seducing, vain, cruel, and even with a more sinful nature than man. Women were seen inferior to man in this way because, I believe, because many "religious" and "philosophical men" wanted a scapegoat. Women are guilty of greater sin than man because the actions of Eve in the in the Garden of Eden, so naturally, many thought, all women are the source of all evil and discomfort. These men wanted an excuse for their sexual desires and for when they went astray, so of course its those nasty women's fault for being pretty and forcing them to think sinful things. And if a man is unhappy in a marriage its because, to some of these philosophers, it's because women are so expensive, nagging, and disloyal. In the eyes of many medieval thinkers, men alone couldn't possibly have failed in areas that happen to concern women, so to them blaming and slandering women was the natural answer. Today, we do still see this. However, it is not just on the man's part. I believe both men AND women are guilty and magnifying faults and generalizing them to the entire gender. How many times have we heard that all men are pigs and all women are witches? Misogyny and even misandry are nothing new today.
Feminists
Many arguments are presented to contradict the misogynistic view from the Middle Ages. Both in the Southern Passion and in the Letter from the God of Love provide several similar arguments in support in women. Two such arguments stood out to me particularly. First is the point that men only scandalize women so because men are liars and hypocrites and generalize the female population too quickly. I believe that, in revealing this point, the authors commit the same hypocrisy that they accuse men of. The authors say that is ridiculous for people to generalize women or anyone else. Yet, in the Southern Passion the author directly calls men, "loudmouths and liars." That itself is the very same generalization warned against just a few sentences later. The second argument that stood out as far less problems. In Christine de Pizan's work, she sites biblical material as her evidence of the virtuous qualities of women. Using the example of the virgin Mary and Mary Magdalene, the author employs an effective argument. The behavior, that was totally natural, of those woman directly goes against the negative stereotypes. Not only is the source one that her learned audience would be aware of, but it is also irrefutable. This argument is the much stronger argument of the two mentioned here.
Monday, October 5, 2009
10/06 Beowulf #6
Character Changes
Beowulf, throughout the piece, is shown to be a very strong character. Not only does he have an impressive physical prowess, but Beowulf also displays strong leadership and intellectual capacities. However, he does show a change in character from the time he is a young man fighting Grendel and his mother to the time that he is an old king fighting the dragon. His change in character is seen in his motives for fighting each beast. When Beowulf goes to fight the trolls, he does not state that he is doing it for personal glory, but simply to come to the aid of a friend. However, when Beowulf goes to fight the dragon, while it is acknowledge that is doing it to defend his kingdom, one reason is mentioned over and over again. Personal glory. Beowulf and the narrator state several times that he is facing the dragon "for the glory of winning," and that he was "inspired again by the thought of glory." The desire for personal glory later in his life is much different from his motives in his younger days when Beowulf seemed to be fighting for causes less for his own merit and more to help others (and then secondarily himself).
Heroism
While Beowulf does not fit into some of the model of the Medieval hero, he does match it in several ways as well. Beowulf does not fit into the Medieval Code of Chivalry and idea of the hero in one important way. All Medieval knights were expected to "love the country in which they were born." We see in Beowulf as this is not necessarily true, as shown by the one that Beowulf passes down the crown to at the end of the story is from a rival tribe. Also, Beowulf himself, when fighting Grendel, first set off not for his own country, for an old friend's. However, besides this, Beowulf fits very well into the idea of a Medieval hero. Like all Medieval heroes, Beowulf was from not from noble birth, but instead a more common birth. Though he later works for the title of king. Also, Beowulf was often fighting as a "test of manhood and loyalty to the liege lord." Beowulf is a great example of warriors being loyal to their lords, or "ring-givers," through the other characters and Beowulf himself. Lastly, Beowulf is a good example of a Medieval hero because he shown to have an upright character. He is said to be "thoughtful and self-controlled," along with having impressive physical skill. These are characteristics that show Beowulf's moral character. So while Beowulf does not fit into the Medieval hero in one aspect, he does fit into the role in many other, more important ways.
Beowulf, throughout the piece, is shown to be a very strong character. Not only does he have an impressive physical prowess, but Beowulf also displays strong leadership and intellectual capacities. However, he does show a change in character from the time he is a young man fighting Grendel and his mother to the time that he is an old king fighting the dragon. His change in character is seen in his motives for fighting each beast. When Beowulf goes to fight the trolls, he does not state that he is doing it for personal glory, but simply to come to the aid of a friend. However, when Beowulf goes to fight the dragon, while it is acknowledge that is doing it to defend his kingdom, one reason is mentioned over and over again. Personal glory. Beowulf and the narrator state several times that he is facing the dragon "for the glory of winning," and that he was "inspired again by the thought of glory." The desire for personal glory later in his life is much different from his motives in his younger days when Beowulf seemed to be fighting for causes less for his own merit and more to help others (and then secondarily himself).
Heroism
While Beowulf does not fit into some of the model of the Medieval hero, he does match it in several ways as well. Beowulf does not fit into the Medieval Code of Chivalry and idea of the hero in one important way. All Medieval knights were expected to "love the country in which they were born." We see in Beowulf as this is not necessarily true, as shown by the one that Beowulf passes down the crown to at the end of the story is from a rival tribe. Also, Beowulf himself, when fighting Grendel, first set off not for his own country, for an old friend's. However, besides this, Beowulf fits very well into the idea of a Medieval hero. Like all Medieval heroes, Beowulf was from not from noble birth, but instead a more common birth. Though he later works for the title of king. Also, Beowulf was often fighting as a "test of manhood and loyalty to the liege lord." Beowulf is a great example of warriors being loyal to their lords, or "ring-givers," through the other characters and Beowulf himself. Lastly, Beowulf is a good example of a Medieval hero because he shown to have an upright character. He is said to be "thoughtful and self-controlled," along with having impressive physical skill. These are characteristics that show Beowulf's moral character. So while Beowulf does not fit into the Medieval hero in one aspect, he does fit into the role in many other, more important ways.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
9/29 Marie de France #5A
Lanval and Joseph
The story of Lanval is very similar to the story of Joseph and his encounter with Potipher's wife, yet also different in a very important way. Like Joseph, Lanval was in a position of honor: Joseph was in charge of all of Potipher's household and Lanval was knight of the king's court. Both Joseph and Lanval were well liked by almost everyone. Both of the character's were approached by their masters' wives,the Queen and Potipher's wife, and asked to have sexy times. Both refused and so the wives framed them. Joseph is sent to jail for years and years without trial, Lanval is put on trial. The real point of contrast between the two stories is the reason behind each man's refusal. Lanval refused the Queen, not because it would be a particularly evil act, but because he already had a lover who surpassed the queen in every way. The fact that she was the wife of the King is only briefly mentioned. Joseph, on the other hand, refuses the queen because she is married to that man he serves. He would not only be sinning against his master, but also against God in doing that "wicked thing." This shows how the Middle Age culture, at least in literature, how moral issues, such as being disloyal to ones spouse was not a real moral dilemma.
Salvation
I do not believe that there is great significance in Lanval's salvation by a woman. I believe the fact that she was a woman, in fact, was irrelevant to his salvation. When Lanval's lover appeared, her signficance did not lie in her gender, but in her mystical nature and in her beauty, both of which confirmed that Lanval was truthful. It is understandable that the entire kingdom was dazzled with the maiden when she appeared, she was a magical, beautiful faerie woman. It is important to remember that Lanval was not only saved from punishment by the appearence of (magical) woman, but that he was also put in danger because of a woman. While Lanval did also get his wealth from a woman, it is again important to remember that she was mythical. If the genders of the characters were switched, I do not think that it would have made a big difference to the importance of their love and each character's roles. In short, I do not think that this work was a feminist piece at all. But it is a medival work of literature that holds the emphasis of love and magic, not feminimity.
The story of Lanval is very similar to the story of Joseph and his encounter with Potipher's wife, yet also different in a very important way. Like Joseph, Lanval was in a position of honor: Joseph was in charge of all of Potipher's household and Lanval was knight of the king's court. Both Joseph and Lanval were well liked by almost everyone. Both of the character's were approached by their masters' wives,the Queen and Potipher's wife, and asked to have sexy times. Both refused and so the wives framed them. Joseph is sent to jail for years and years without trial, Lanval is put on trial. The real point of contrast between the two stories is the reason behind each man's refusal. Lanval refused the Queen, not because it would be a particularly evil act, but because he already had a lover who surpassed the queen in every way. The fact that she was the wife of the King is only briefly mentioned. Joseph, on the other hand, refuses the queen because she is married to that man he serves. He would not only be sinning against his master, but also against God in doing that "wicked thing." This shows how the Middle Age culture, at least in literature, how moral issues, such as being disloyal to ones spouse was not a real moral dilemma.
Salvation
I do not believe that there is great significance in Lanval's salvation by a woman. I believe the fact that she was a woman, in fact, was irrelevant to his salvation. When Lanval's lover appeared, her signficance did not lie in her gender, but in her mystical nature and in her beauty, both of which confirmed that Lanval was truthful. It is understandable that the entire kingdom was dazzled with the maiden when she appeared, she was a magical, beautiful faerie woman. It is important to remember that Lanval was not only saved from punishment by the appearence of (magical) woman, but that he was also put in danger because of a woman. While Lanval did also get his wealth from a woman, it is again important to remember that she was mythical. If the genders of the characters were switched, I do not think that it would have made a big difference to the importance of their love and each character's roles. In short, I do not think that this work was a feminist piece at all. But it is a medival work of literature that holds the emphasis of love and magic, not feminimity.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
9/24 Confessions #4B
Sin
In Augustine's Confessions, the author spends a lot of time telling his testimony of how he grew up and lived in sin. His view on the effects of his sin and God are much different than that of the Ancient Greeks. Augustine described, that in his childhood, his laziness in his education was one of his sins. He ignored the more important (in his opinion) fundamentals of learning and took more joy out of reading fictional stories like the Aenead and public speaking. His being taught these things (an evil on the educational systems part) and his laziness in subjects that he cared less for, were, according to him, sin. He also struggled with inappropriate sexual relationships in his later years. Augustine admits to ruining marriage and keeping several mistresses. In his later life, this was one of the sins that barred from fully accepting Christ into his life. But Augustine maintains that his sins and agonies were brought on solely by himself. He writes that our loving, all powerful God had only joy in store for him, but he chose to sin for the sake of evil without any external influence. This contrasts with what Ancient Greeks believed that fate unyielding over everything, sometimes giving out blessings and sometimes curses for no reason. To the Greeks, the gods did not particularly love them and that the gods were also under the power of fate. Augustine clearly does not hold these views.
Conversion
Augustine struggled with his own sexual sin at the time of his conversion. As he was trying to get away from the sin in his life, such as separating himself from his mistresses, he often slimmed into pitiable, but sinful think. He felt he that he could not accept Christ because his shame from the things in his life that he knew were sin. Augustine could not fix the sin in his life by himself, he needed Jesus. But his problems made him feel like he was not ready or not worthy, so he would say "just let it be," for his sin and faith. Augustine's thoughts and hindrances in accepting Christ parallel what many people today feel. It is understandable for those know God, but have not accepted his son into their hearts, to fear an unworthiness. We are inferior to God in every way, but as a Christian, I understand that He still wants to have a personal relationship with me. But I am sure many people today, like Augustine did, not worthy enough to enter into a relationship with Him.
In Augustine's Confessions, the author spends a lot of time telling his testimony of how he grew up and lived in sin. His view on the effects of his sin and God are much different than that of the Ancient Greeks. Augustine described, that in his childhood, his laziness in his education was one of his sins. He ignored the more important (in his opinion) fundamentals of learning and took more joy out of reading fictional stories like the Aenead and public speaking. His being taught these things (an evil on the educational systems part) and his laziness in subjects that he cared less for, were, according to him, sin. He also struggled with inappropriate sexual relationships in his later years. Augustine admits to ruining marriage and keeping several mistresses. In his later life, this was one of the sins that barred from fully accepting Christ into his life. But Augustine maintains that his sins and agonies were brought on solely by himself. He writes that our loving, all powerful God had only joy in store for him, but he chose to sin for the sake of evil without any external influence. This contrasts with what Ancient Greeks believed that fate unyielding over everything, sometimes giving out blessings and sometimes curses for no reason. To the Greeks, the gods did not particularly love them and that the gods were also under the power of fate. Augustine clearly does not hold these views.
Conversion
Augustine struggled with his own sexual sin at the time of his conversion. As he was trying to get away from the sin in his life, such as separating himself from his mistresses, he often slimmed into pitiable, but sinful think. He felt he that he could not accept Christ because his shame from the things in his life that he knew were sin. Augustine could not fix the sin in his life by himself, he needed Jesus. But his problems made him feel like he was not ready or not worthy, so he would say "just let it be," for his sin and faith. Augustine's thoughts and hindrances in accepting Christ parallel what many people today feel. It is understandable for those know God, but have not accepted his son into their hearts, to fear an unworthiness. We are inferior to God in every way, but as a Christian, I understand that He still wants to have a personal relationship with me. But I am sure many people today, like Augustine did, not worthy enough to enter into a relationship with Him.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
9/22 Hesiod'a Theogony #4A
Myths
Hesiod's Theogony is the history of the Greek gods. It records the birth of the earth and the first gods, and follows through each generation and genealogy of gods. Through the Theogony, the Greeks could learn the ancient creation of their world, man, and gods. They could also learn the nature of their gods. The gods come across as solemn, strong and serious, unlike slightly less concerned gods in Homer’s Illiad. The gods in Hesiod’s work, while still emotional, rash at times, and prejudiced, are less so in the Theogony. They gods have a sense of right and wrong, as seen when the gods fight Ouranos and then Kronos for their unjust actions. Zeus is show as the epitome of a leader; he is strong, respected by the other gods, aware of what is going on around him, and has a sense of justice. The Greeks would have been able to see from Hesiod’s work what behavior was honored by the gods, what behavior was punished, and what virtues to hold.
Greek Values
Hesiod’s Theogony shows quite a few of the qualities that the Greeks valued, including honoring the gods and established government, and honesty. When the gods were dealing with Zeus, after he had established his authority, they were expected to follow his rule. Zeus was the god above all the gods, so if the gods disobeyed him, they were breaking the law. Just as show in Antigone and Oedipus Rex, when the characters were disobeying the law, many felt that they were disobeying the gods. Honoring the gods, as shown in the Theogony, meant being completely honest with them. When Prometheus, for example, wanted to honor Zeus and present him with a gift, to avoid punishment, he essentially tried to pull the wool over Zeus’ eyes. Prometheus gave Zeus a sacrifice that was not what it appeared to be and lied to Zeus about it. For that, Zeus punished him. The Greeks knew the importance of offering homage to the gods that was not a trick or less than what was required. Should they have not honored the gods, they were to be punished, as Creon was in Antigone when he did not honor the laws that the gods put in place concerning death.
Hesiod's Theogony is the history of the Greek gods. It records the birth of the earth and the first gods, and follows through each generation and genealogy of gods. Through the Theogony, the Greeks could learn the ancient creation of their world, man, and gods. They could also learn the nature of their gods. The gods come across as solemn, strong and serious, unlike slightly less concerned gods in Homer’s Illiad. The gods in Hesiod’s work, while still emotional, rash at times, and prejudiced, are less so in the Theogony. They gods have a sense of right and wrong, as seen when the gods fight Ouranos and then Kronos for their unjust actions. Zeus is show as the epitome of a leader; he is strong, respected by the other gods, aware of what is going on around him, and has a sense of justice. The Greeks would have been able to see from Hesiod’s work what behavior was honored by the gods, what behavior was punished, and what virtues to hold.
Greek Values
Hesiod’s Theogony shows quite a few of the qualities that the Greeks valued, including honoring the gods and established government, and honesty. When the gods were dealing with Zeus, after he had established his authority, they were expected to follow his rule. Zeus was the god above all the gods, so if the gods disobeyed him, they were breaking the law. Just as show in Antigone and Oedipus Rex, when the characters were disobeying the law, many felt that they were disobeying the gods. Honoring the gods, as shown in the Theogony, meant being completely honest with them. When Prometheus, for example, wanted to honor Zeus and present him with a gift, to avoid punishment, he essentially tried to pull the wool over Zeus’ eyes. Prometheus gave Zeus a sacrifice that was not what it appeared to be and lied to Zeus about it. For that, Zeus punished him. The Greeks knew the importance of offering homage to the gods that was not a trick or less than what was required. Should they have not honored the gods, they were to be punished, as Creon was in Antigone when he did not honor the laws that the gods put in place concerning death.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
9/17 The Republic #3B
The Divided Line and the Sun
In Plato's the Republic, Plato spends a lot of time discussing the sun in regards to his Divided Line and his Allegory of the Cave. He uses the sun to represent what Plato calls "the good" and the light that the sun produces in truth. It is only when one sees the sun (the good) that can fully understand forms and objects. For Plato, one must first start at the bottom of the divided line with images, objects, things we can perceive. Then one must work up the chain towards the good, and once the philosopher reaches the good, will the philosopher be able to see the higher reality and everything illuminated by that. Like in the Allegory of the Cave, once the philosopher has seen the sun, then he can truly understand what the shadows were in the cave. "The good," can be defined as, from the Divided Line and and Allegory of the Cave, that ultimate form or the highest reality. All things that are true come "the good."
Allegory of the Cave
The Allegory of the Cave illustrates the situation of man and the education of man. In Socrates' world of forms and "the good," all we, regular people, can see are reflections of these ultimate forms and truths. What we were taught to be true, isn't true at all, but a mere shadow of truth. Like the people who are trapped in the cave, they grew up knowing and identifying the shadows on the wall as what is real. But the philosopher who has left the cave and eventually seen the sun, understands that this not the case at all. His job is to go back to the cave with the people, and help them to understand what he has come to know. Socrates held that people should be ruled by "philosopher kings," in the Allegory of the Cave, the people who have seen the sun and returned to the cave are philosopher kings. According to Socrates, they should rule us and educate us so that we may what is real light, not just shadows.
In Plato's the Republic, Plato spends a lot of time discussing the sun in regards to his Divided Line and his Allegory of the Cave. He uses the sun to represent what Plato calls "the good" and the light that the sun produces in truth. It is only when one sees the sun (the good) that can fully understand forms and objects. For Plato, one must first start at the bottom of the divided line with images, objects, things we can perceive. Then one must work up the chain towards the good, and once the philosopher reaches the good, will the philosopher be able to see the higher reality and everything illuminated by that. Like in the Allegory of the Cave, once the philosopher has seen the sun, then he can truly understand what the shadows were in the cave. "The good," can be defined as, from the Divided Line and and Allegory of the Cave, that ultimate form or the highest reality. All things that are true come "the good."
Allegory of the Cave
The Allegory of the Cave illustrates the situation of man and the education of man. In Socrates' world of forms and "the good," all we, regular people, can see are reflections of these ultimate forms and truths. What we were taught to be true, isn't true at all, but a mere shadow of truth. Like the people who are trapped in the cave, they grew up knowing and identifying the shadows on the wall as what is real. But the philosopher who has left the cave and eventually seen the sun, understands that this not the case at all. His job is to go back to the cave with the people, and help them to understand what he has come to know. Socrates held that people should be ruled by "philosopher kings," in the Allegory of the Cave, the people who have seen the sun and returned to the cave are philosopher kings. According to Socrates, they should rule us and educate us so that we may what is real light, not just shadows.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
9/15 Lysistrata #3A
Stereotypes
The women in Lysistrata are said to have many stereotypes, including being tricky, stupid, and bad money. Throughout the action of the play, the women are shown to indeed be tricky, but they are not shown to be rather smart and able to handle finances. The Greek women are quite clever and wily in Lysistrata, which is especially noteworthy in the scene in which Myrrhine tricks her husband. She teases him just to torture him somewhat and help the cause of the women. The men in Lysistrata, also accuse the woman of being stupid, or not smart enough to be able to sort out a political and international mess. The Magistrate even calls Lysistrata "brainless." However, Lysistrata is able to not only sort out the mess of the war and the women's revolt, but she also acts as a liaison between the Spartans and the Athenians towards the end of the play. Women are also thought to be, by the men in the play, unable to handle money. Lysistrata proves that she can not only take care of the money of the city, but she can also see that money is the real cause of the war, while the men are blind to that fact. In these ways, the women in Lysistrata go support and condradict stereotypes that men in the play, in in Greece, held about them.
A Woman in Power
Lysistrata displays three more masculine traits throughout the course of the play- bravery, leadership, and control- that helps her achieve her goals. First, Lysistrata displays great bravery. When the men threaten her with physical violence, she does not shirk away from the prospect, but instead threatens right back. She is ready to take any blows she recieves with a straight face, while many women would be expected to cower in a situation like that. Lysistrata is also shown to be a great leader. She is looked up to for guidance by the other women, and, as seen when some tried to leave the Akropolis, she was able to control them. Lysistrata's leadership qualities do not also extend to women, but to men as well. She helps with the negotiations between the Athenians and the Spartans, showing her level-headedness, intellect, and, again, control. Lysistrata is also able to obtain a great level of self-control, something viewed as very manly to the Greeks. She kept her words and feelings in check while many of the other characters let themselves get out of control. Lysistrata, although she was distressed, was able to stem her own bodily urges. In these ways, Lysistrata shows her more masculine traits that, in the end, help her to bring peace to Athens and Sparta.
Personal Response
I think it's great that the women took the city's situation in their owns and fixed it. My feminist side was very happy with Lysistrata and the Women's Leader as they were able to hold their own in the face of such violence and threats from the the men. However, the means in which the women fixed their polis' situation, many events, and the language of the play quite disgusting. It was far too crude for my tastes. It shows me how dark, sinful, and nasty much of the Greek culture was, considering their god and fertility rituals as well. Lysistrata was not a play that I enjoyed reading, but was quite eye-opening.
The women in Lysistrata are said to have many stereotypes, including being tricky, stupid, and bad money. Throughout the action of the play, the women are shown to indeed be tricky, but they are not shown to be rather smart and able to handle finances. The Greek women are quite clever and wily in Lysistrata, which is especially noteworthy in the scene in which Myrrhine tricks her husband. She teases him just to torture him somewhat and help the cause of the women. The men in Lysistrata, also accuse the woman of being stupid, or not smart enough to be able to sort out a political and international mess. The Magistrate even calls Lysistrata "brainless." However, Lysistrata is able to not only sort out the mess of the war and the women's revolt, but she also acts as a liaison between the Spartans and the Athenians towards the end of the play. Women are also thought to be, by the men in the play, unable to handle money. Lysistrata proves that she can not only take care of the money of the city, but she can also see that money is the real cause of the war, while the men are blind to that fact. In these ways, the women in Lysistrata go support and condradict stereotypes that men in the play, in in Greece, held about them.
A Woman in Power
Lysistrata displays three more masculine traits throughout the course of the play- bravery, leadership, and control- that helps her achieve her goals. First, Lysistrata displays great bravery. When the men threaten her with physical violence, she does not shirk away from the prospect, but instead threatens right back. She is ready to take any blows she recieves with a straight face, while many women would be expected to cower in a situation like that. Lysistrata is also shown to be a great leader. She is looked up to for guidance by the other women, and, as seen when some tried to leave the Akropolis, she was able to control them. Lysistrata's leadership qualities do not also extend to women, but to men as well. She helps with the negotiations between the Athenians and the Spartans, showing her level-headedness, intellect, and, again, control. Lysistrata is also able to obtain a great level of self-control, something viewed as very manly to the Greeks. She kept her words and feelings in check while many of the other characters let themselves get out of control. Lysistrata, although she was distressed, was able to stem her own bodily urges. In these ways, Lysistrata shows her more masculine traits that, in the end, help her to bring peace to Athens and Sparta.
Personal Response
I think it's great that the women took the city's situation in their owns and fixed it. My feminist side was very happy with Lysistrata and the Women's Leader as they were able to hold their own in the face of such violence and threats from the the men. However, the means in which the women fixed their polis' situation, many events, and the language of the play quite disgusting. It was far too crude for my tastes. It shows me how dark, sinful, and nasty much of the Greek culture was, considering their god and fertility rituals as well. Lysistrata was not a play that I enjoyed reading, but was quite eye-opening.
Monday, September 7, 2009
9/08 Antigone #2A
Moral Conflict
Hegel is right when he states that in Antigone, both sides, Antigone and Creon, are both equally right. Though both Creon and Antigone have opposing views that can both be equally right and supported, Sophocles favors Antigone in the end. To Antigone and the the gods she honors most, all are equal and all family, no matter what crimes they committed in life, should be treated with respect in death. She makes her position very clear to her sister at the beginning of the play. In line 87 she states that she would "rather please the dead that please the living here," because she would never "dishonor the laws the gods hold in honor." Creon, on the other hand, holds loyalty to the state more important than other things. In Creon's opening speech, he, as well, makes his position clear. That "never [...] will the traitor be honored above the patriot." He takes burying Polynices as direct insubordination to his rule and disloyalty to all of Thebes. He even says later that the king "must be obeyed, large and small, right and wrong." Both views could be considered right, because both are and were very important, especially to ancient Athenians. They held state position and power as very important, not to be gone against. But the also valued the laws of the gods that said that the dead must be properly honored. To disobey the state or to dishonor the dead would be to disobey the gods. Sophocles shows his support of Antigone, by in the end, revealing that she was right and that Creon was wrong, and he was punished severely for it.
To Regret or Not to Regret
Wrong doing and punishment are an important theme in Antigone. For Greeks, honoring the temperamental gods and working to the betterment of the state were a big part of their lives. For Creon and Antigone, they both reacted differently in the face of their punishments. In Antigone's case, her actions brought on a punishment that inflicted on her from outside force other than herself, Creon. For burying her brother and trying to revere the gods, she was sent to be locked away for life. In Creon's eyes, she disobeyed the highest order-the government in which the gods had put in place-and for that needed to die. This reflect how strongly the Greeks felt about loyalty and serving their city-states, many members of the audience at the time must have agreed with Creon's decision. However, as Antigone was being lead to her prison, she was mourning her fate. While she did not regret her actions, she did feel sorry that she was being punished so. Creon, on the other hand, strongly regrets his actions by the end of the play and insists himself that he be lead away, never to be seen again (as what happened to Antigone). He feels responsible for the death of his son and wife, caused by him being to stubborn and monarchical in his rule. While he does regret his action, like Antigone, he wallows in his sorrow as he is lead away.
Hegel is right when he states that in Antigone, both sides, Antigone and Creon, are both equally right. Though both Creon and Antigone have opposing views that can both be equally right and supported, Sophocles favors Antigone in the end. To Antigone and the the gods she honors most, all are equal and all family, no matter what crimes they committed in life, should be treated with respect in death. She makes her position very clear to her sister at the beginning of the play. In line 87 she states that she would "rather please the dead that please the living here," because she would never "dishonor the laws the gods hold in honor." Creon, on the other hand, holds loyalty to the state more important than other things. In Creon's opening speech, he, as well, makes his position clear. That "never [...] will the traitor be honored above the patriot." He takes burying Polynices as direct insubordination to his rule and disloyalty to all of Thebes. He even says later that the king "must be obeyed, large and small, right and wrong." Both views could be considered right, because both are and were very important, especially to ancient Athenians. They held state position and power as very important, not to be gone against. But the also valued the laws of the gods that said that the dead must be properly honored. To disobey the state or to dishonor the dead would be to disobey the gods. Sophocles shows his support of Antigone, by in the end, revealing that she was right and that Creon was wrong, and he was punished severely for it.
To Regret or Not to Regret
Wrong doing and punishment are an important theme in Antigone. For Greeks, honoring the temperamental gods and working to the betterment of the state were a big part of their lives. For Creon and Antigone, they both reacted differently in the face of their punishments. In Antigone's case, her actions brought on a punishment that inflicted on her from outside force other than herself, Creon. For burying her brother and trying to revere the gods, she was sent to be locked away for life. In Creon's eyes, she disobeyed the highest order-the government in which the gods had put in place-and for that needed to die. This reflect how strongly the Greeks felt about loyalty and serving their city-states, many members of the audience at the time must have agreed with Creon's decision. However, as Antigone was being lead to her prison, she was mourning her fate. While she did not regret her actions, she did feel sorry that she was being punished so. Creon, on the other hand, strongly regrets his actions by the end of the play and insists himself that he be lead away, never to be seen again (as what happened to Antigone). He feels responsible for the death of his son and wife, caused by him being to stubborn and monarchical in his rule. While he does regret his action, like Antigone, he wallows in his sorrow as he is lead away.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
9/03 Illiad #1B
Greek Gods
A major theme in the Illiad are the gods. Throughout the scenes, their actions and thoughts are often shown and are as important as the actions of Achilles and the Trojans. The gods are either aid the human characters or can choose to end them. At times during the Illiad, the gods seemed very interested in the goings-on of the characters, and at other times, mostly unconcerned. For example, Apollo (who was worshipped by Hector) was aiding Hector in running from Achilles around the city. Zeus liked Hector and did not want to see him killed, however, because Athena and Hera did not like the prince (instead the favored), Zeus condemned Hector. Athena then went down to Hector and ultimately tricked him and led him to his demise. While the gods liked Hector for the most part, they were more concerned with the approval of the others than they were of a human life.
The gods were powerful beings, able to go underwater and instantaneously transport themselves from Olympus to Troy and other placed, change their voice and appearance, and decide to give either blessings or death to a character. The human characters are different in the first two areas, but humans can also choose to bless a person or kill them. Achilles, for example, when Priam visited him, could have killed Priam on the spot (even though he would be disobeying Zeus), but instead he chose to protect him while near the Greek ships and let him take his son. The human characters, such as Priam, were often described as being godlike or having godlike qualities. Also, both the gods and humans clearly favored some while not favoring others. Athena clearly favored Achilles over Hector and Priam clearly favored Hector over his sons, whom he rebukes after Hector's death.
Achilles
Achilles comes off from the start as a very strong, determined warrior. He is not afraid of the gods wrath when he feels the need for revenge. He also was looking for glory, as seen when he was chasing Hector around the city walls and would not let the other Greek soldiers shoot him with their arrows. This also shows how controlling Achilles was. He took things into his own hands and did not let other question him after he had made up his mind. While Achilles was headstrong, he was also a very deeply man. His rage at Hector for killing Patroclus was unyielding and his grief at the loss of a friend was unabated for several days, long after revenge was received. He was also able to sympathize with Priam, his enemy, by thinking about his father. Achilles was a great symbol of a strong, god-minded, Greek leader.
A major theme in the Illiad are the gods. Throughout the scenes, their actions and thoughts are often shown and are as important as the actions of Achilles and the Trojans. The gods are either aid the human characters or can choose to end them. At times during the Illiad, the gods seemed very interested in the goings-on of the characters, and at other times, mostly unconcerned. For example, Apollo (who was worshipped by Hector) was aiding Hector in running from Achilles around the city. Zeus liked Hector and did not want to see him killed, however, because Athena and Hera did not like the prince (instead the favored), Zeus condemned Hector. Athena then went down to Hector and ultimately tricked him and led him to his demise. While the gods liked Hector for the most part, they were more concerned with the approval of the others than they were of a human life.
The gods were powerful beings, able to go underwater and instantaneously transport themselves from Olympus to Troy and other placed, change their voice and appearance, and decide to give either blessings or death to a character. The human characters are different in the first two areas, but humans can also choose to bless a person or kill them. Achilles, for example, when Priam visited him, could have killed Priam on the spot (even though he would be disobeying Zeus), but instead he chose to protect him while near the Greek ships and let him take his son. The human characters, such as Priam, were often described as being godlike or having godlike qualities. Also, both the gods and humans clearly favored some while not favoring others. Athena clearly favored Achilles over Hector and Priam clearly favored Hector over his sons, whom he rebukes after Hector's death.
Achilles
Achilles comes off from the start as a very strong, determined warrior. He is not afraid of the gods wrath when he feels the need for revenge. He also was looking for glory, as seen when he was chasing Hector around the city walls and would not let the other Greek soldiers shoot him with their arrows. This also shows how controlling Achilles was. He took things into his own hands and did not let other question him after he had made up his mind. While Achilles was headstrong, he was also a very deeply man. His rage at Hector for killing Patroclus was unyielding and his grief at the loss of a friend was unabated for several days, long after revenge was received. He was also able to sympathize with Priam, his enemy, by thinking about his father. Achilles was a great symbol of a strong, god-minded, Greek leader.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
9/01 Oedipus #1A
Greek Values
Sophocles’ Greek tragedy Oedipus the King exhibits many beliefs that the Greeks held about fate, the gods, and about pride. Fate, to the Greeks, controlled everything on Earth and beyond, god and man alike. It was an unyielding force that drove everything. In Oedipus’ case, an oracle was revealed to him that he would kill his father and marry his mother. No matter the steps the king tried to take to keep this event from happening, it still did. This shows how Oedipus’ fate was written from the start, a way most Greeks felt about their lives (though, they still felt that held control). The nature and relationship between the Greeks and their gods is shown in Oedipus the King. In Oedipus, the play starts with the chorus and Oedipus seeking guidance and help from Apollo. They praise his name, along with other Greek gods. Oedipus is considered a man loved by the gods. However, at the end of the play, Oedipus seems to have disregard the hands of any gods in his life (save misery and death) and calls himself “the man the deathless gods hate most of all!” Oedipus’ downfall is also a good example of Greek beliefs. The ancient Greeks valued knowledge and reason. Oedipus also values knowledge and truth. Yet, during the events of the play, instead of stemming his lesser traits with reason that he did possess (shown when he defeated the Sphinx), Oedipus let his temper and pride blind to the truth and consequences of the situation. If Oedipus had held firmly to his reason, as the Greeks valued doing, and not judged his friends and comrades, he might have avoided the horrible consequences or maybe been less harshly punished.
Heroism
Oedipus met the definition of a tragic hero in Greek theater. Oedipus, like all Greek heroes, was of noble standing. He was not only royal, but a king. While he definitely was not perfect, Oedipus was a good man. He was a beloved king, very smart, and compassionate for his people. His faults included a big temper, stubbornness, and pride. Although his actions were rooted in good intentions, his “act of injustice,” as Aristotle called it, was accusing his loyal brother in law and an innocent prophet of treason, letting his temper get a hold of him, and (although he didn’t know it at the time) killing his father and sleeping with his mother. His fall from such a great height to someone blind and miserable from a respected king was basically his own fault. Due to his ignorance of the significance of the actions that lead to his downfall, the audience can feel pity for Oedipus. And like other tragic heroes, the punishment Oedipus received was not fully deserved, after all, he didn’t know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)