Medea was written in 431BC by the Greek playwright Euripides during the Golden Age of Athens. His works earned little of the public’s respect and was socially unaccepted due to its unnatural tragic conventions. Medea, and her barbarian identity in particular, antagonized the 5th century Greek audience and the Chorus is used to place emphasis on her position as the ‘Other’. As an unusual protagonist, Euripides uses her to subvert the hypocrisy of traditional values of heroism to subvert the hypocrisy of Athenian culture in Medea. He also depicts the rulers of Greece, King Creon and King Aegeus as weak and immoral, which challenge the power hierarchy between characters.
Both Sophocles’ Antigone and Avid’s metamorphoses show the lust for power that both these characters have that cause to be ineffective leaders in the city of Thebes. Plato’s Symposium supports this case while showing how these characters attempt to ascend to the next level in the divine ascent in their own ways. Creon and Pentheus both contain the trait of being narrow-minded in similar ways. Creon shows the trait of being narrow-minded in several ways including the main plot of the story with Antigone. He refuses to look at both sides of the story before making a decision on whether he should bury Eteocles or not.
Caesar contained few characteristics of a tragic hero compared to Brutus. “I rather tell what is to be feared than what I fear; / For always I am Caesar” (Shakespeare I.2.211-212). Caesar, like Brutus, is hubris and thinks fondly of himself. Caesar, so far, only expresses one tragic hero quality. This does not necessarily mean he cannot be a tragic hero.
This paper is going to talk about how Prometheus did not deserve the punishments he received and compare and contrast with other mythological characters who were also punished. Prometheus was a titan god who was given the task to form mankind out of clay. Prometheus had other jobs in mind. There are a couple events and things Prometheus did for being
While the book itself is written in a similar style to other books known to have been written by Paul, and some of the same principles and themes are repeated in Colossians, there are some notable discrepancies that lead many to question its authorship. If Paul were to have written the book, he would not have yet actually visited the city. In addition, Paul had an extremely close relationship with Philemon, yet he was not mentioned anywhere in Colossians. There are others reasons as well, which when all combined lead to the claim that Paul did not actually write the
Human sacrifice, animal mutilation, Devil worship - all forever linked to the idea of a cult. Officially, a cult has been described as a “religious group that holds beliefs that diverge from mainstream religions.” The Hellfire Club, however, was an infamously exclusive and mysterious club founded at different points in the 18th century, and is only now being realized to be so much more. There were three distinct periods for the Club; the earliest happening sometime in the 17th and early 18th centuries, the second following later in the 18th century, and various others continuing from the 18th century onward. It was believed that Lord Wharton’s Hellfire Club came first, which created the name for centuries to come, while Sir Francis Dashwood’s
Avant-garde theatre arose in France in the late 1800s and lasted into the early 1900s, partly as a retaliation to neo-classicism. Avant-garde was wild. A lot of playwrights and designers tried to push the limits on what was acceptable and what could be done in theatre. Absurdism blossomed shortly after, and it was playwrights like Antonin Artaud and Pirandello that really shaped both movements. Absurdism is similar to avant-garde in that the playwrights were not as concerned with plot and characters and logical continuity as they were with eliciting reactions.
In this case, the misgivings following the escape of the cyclops-inhabited island were the wrath of Poseidon. And while enduring the punishment of one god, Odysseus admits to a lack of free will, “hardly landlocked of…free will,” then reasons, “I…have angered one of the… gods,” and interrogates a nearby immortal, “which one of you blocks my way” (Homer 2006: 148). However, critics might point out that Odysseus was not a definitively pious hero considering his infidelity, excessive cruelty, and tensions with Poseidon, and Odysseus only sought divine intervention in dangerous situations. Where he lacks in piety, Odysseus makes up for in favorable traits–heroic characteristics that appeal to others in his society as well as a number of Gods including Athena, “[Odysseus is] far the best at tactics…and I am famous…for wisdom” (Homer 2006: 389). And with what diminished piety and favorability among the Gods Odysseus has at the end of his journey, he still admits to losing free will when the Gods
The play Oedipus Rex was written by Sophocles and adheres to Greek Tragedy conventions. It tells primarily about the legendary Oedipus, King of Thebes, whose flaw in character contributes to his downfall. Oedipus’ fate was already pre-determined by the gods. This play demonstrates the part that Oedipus’ arrogance plays in the fulfilling of his destiny, and the self-realization that emerges as he struggles to deal with his calamity. In the tradition of Greek tragedy, the protagonist is an admirable, but not perfect character.
His characters often display this humanism in their flaws, natural desires, and lack of the conviction that the classic heroes often presented in Greek theatre, and were given flaws, doubts, vulnerabilities, and true problems without the presentation of a deus ex machina; in fact, many of the fates of his characters were directly influenced by their flaws. His characters were also known to hault dramatic action in preference for a more psychological and insightful
Many people think that Gilgamesh was not the leader he should be and he did not treat his people fairly. Some of his responsibilities were to protect and provide for his people. According to the history, Gilgamesh was two-thirds god and one-third human. He was a handsome, fearless man who did not care about his own people because he was malevolent and willful. The king of Mesopotamia represented the god and as
Hoplites traditionally fought in the phalanx formation, which is usually seen as a closely compacted and rigid formation, functioning essentially as a shield wall. The first mention of the phalanx formation is noted in Homer’s Iliad, yet this is often dismissed by modern historians as anachronistic and not necessarily reflecting the actual first use of the phalanx. Ancient sources do not mention the hoplite phalanx until Xenophon in Anabasis, with Herodotus and Thucydides, prominent historians during the classical period, mostly use the term politically rather than militarily. Hoplite warfare often began with both sides charging against each other. It is thought that the charge was more of a slow build up rather than just running towards the enemy in order to maintain the battle formation and effectiveness of the phalanx.