Month: March 2020

The conversation between Socrates and Phaedrus begins with Phaedrus’s praise for an article written by Lysias. From Lysias’ point of view, there are lovers and non-lovers. Also, a relationship with non-lovers is better than a relationship with lovers because lovers repent but non-lovers don’t. Lovers and non-lovers behave differently. Lovers measure the benefits from a relationship. They calculate how much they have spent and how much they should get. Once the amount is unbalanced, lovers tend to regret and do something harmful. On the other hand, non-lovers do not measure a relationship this way. Non-lovers do not value the benefits over relationships. Therefore, non-lovers do not regret and do not hurt others. Phaedrus agrees with Lysias’s point but Socrates doesn’t.

According to Plato, the basic purpose of establishing an ideal state is to achieve national justice. For Plato, justice is the ability of each part of the whole to perform its duties, and it is a harmonious relationship between different parts of the whole. Although Plato theoretically constructed an ideal state system that is beyond reality and centered on justice, due to the special social background, history, and class limitations, this state concept is trapped in a utopian lacking foundation. First, the national premise built on the basis of people’s unequal social status, and the rationality of the city-state’s political system through justice, the theoretical premise itself is questionable. Second,“the wisdom of the individual and the wisdom of the country are the same wisdom” . This identity comparison of national justice and personal justice lacks reality analysis. Third, Plato’s hierarchy is based on personal “morality” and is too idealistic.

The use of Imagery in Oresteia is like a darkness imagery. When Clytaemestra kills her husband, Agamemnon, she uses words like “spattered” and “Violent driven rain” creating a horror image of her and the room being covered in blood. Another example of imagery is in The Libation Bearers, Clytaemestra had a dream of giving birth to a snake which turns around a bites her. The snake resembled Orestes, her son, and that he is coming to get revenge for her killing his father. The torches light up in the house as a sign that he is coming. A form of irony is Clytemnestra tries to keep Electra, her daughter, in the city preventing her from getting revenge. Ironically, this backfires when Orestes returns and Electra helps him on a way to sneak into the palace so that he can murder Clytemnestra.

In the renowned trilogy, The Oresteia, Aeschylus depicts a unique and memorable character: Clytaemnestra. Unlike other women in Ancient Greek, Clytaemnestra is decisive and aggressive. She avenges the sacrifice of her daughter, Iphigenia, by murdering her husband, Agamemnon, without any guilty. Her strong will make the revenge must happen. In addition, Clytaemnestra is also a smart and calculating woman because she has been planning her revenge for years. Upon Agamemnon’s return, Clytaemnestra acts as a perfect wife in order to gain his trust and kill him easily.

Some readers might think Agamemnon was very cruel and selfish to sacrifice his daughter to appease Artemis. From the standpoint of his family, he was really cruel. But from the standpoint of the king of Mycenae and the leader of the Greek army in the Trojan War of Homer’s Illiad, that was the only thing he could do. Agamemnon faced a dilemma before making his decision and went through a painful inner conflict. Although he loved his daughter and family, the Macro-benefit was always the king’s priority to consider. His special identity would be doomed to his choice.

A similar moral conflict applied to Clytemnestra’s revenge. From the standpoint of the family interest, some readers might think the way she revenged for her daughter seems acceptable. But she was not only killing her husband, but also the leader of the city, which would affect the safety and stability of the city. Based on that consequent, Clytemnestra was cruel, too.

The conflict of the benefit between family and power leads to the whole tragedies. Aeschylus lets us consider the situations in multiple perspectives: Whether the special identities of the characters in the play or the special situations they face. It’s hard to judge the absolute right or wrong of a fact.

The symbolic featuring of justice in the entire trilogy, specially in the third one is to highlight the transition of ancient self-help justice by individual revenge or battles to the administration of justice by trial sanctioned by the gods. Precisely, the term justice is used to signifies the passage from a primitive Greek society governed by instincts to a modern democratic society governed by reason. In the plays, the Erinyes represent the ancient, primitive laws which demand blood vengeance. In contrast, Apollo, and particularly Athena, represent the new order of reason and civilization and the role of justice thru the trilogy is to represent that transition in the ancient Greek society which was moving towards a modern democratic society.

Although the chorus might have been overshadowed by the other characters throughout the three plays, they were just as important. There were three different choruses in The Oresteia. The chorus in Agamemnon was a group of old men who did not go fight in the Trojan War. Their role in Agamemnon was quite essential as they filled in the audience on some missing information. In the beginning, the chorus discussed some details involving the Trojan War and they also expressed some of their own opinions of the events. The chorus also has the effect of influencing the audience to feel a certain emotion. For example, in Agamemnon, when Cassandra revealed the destructing events that will occur to her, the chorus expressed their pity. In The Libation Bearers, the chorus was a group of slave women and they held a more active role. They were the ones to encourage Electra and Orestes to avenge their father and were also the ones to tell the nurse to ask Aegisthus to arrive alone. Without their presence, the plot would not have taken such significant turns. In the last play, the chorus was the Furies and they had undergone an important change in character at the end of the play. The Furies had the initial role of punishing wrongdoers which was shown as they chased after Orestes for murdering his mother. This was to show that Orestes had to take responsibility for his actions. However, in the end, Orestes was proven innocent and to appease the Furies, Athena had to convince them to stay in Athens and to change their roles. Their new role consisted of bringing justice to the people and this ended their roles as vengeful individuals. Their roles were also essential as it showed how the legal system has continued smoothly with the presence of the Furies who became the Eumenides.

Some of us agreed our modern ideas of love align with Platonic ideas of it but some of us don’t agreed. According to Plato second big idea : Let your lover change you. We always say”Finding someone who love you just the way you are.” and we think that’s love. Plato says: “True love is admiration.” In other words, the person you need to get together with should have very good qualities which you yourself lack. Let’s say, they should be really brave or organised or warm and sincere. By getting close to this person , you can become a little like they are. The right person for us helps us grow to our full potential. For Plato, in a good relationship , a couple shouldn’t love each other exactly as they are right now. They should be committed to educating each other and to enduring the stormy passages this inevitably involves. Each person should want to seduce the other into becoming a better version of themselves. Plato’s conception of love influenced ours by we shouldn’t let love confuse us. We should understand what is love and be rational.

 

 

Many plays present a unified perspective on a theme. The author gives readers a single way to look at the characters and events inside a story. In the Oresteia, however, Aeschylus encourages us to consider the situations and problems in the play from different points of view. Two points of view are notable and radically different: those of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra. The core of that revolves around the murder of Iphigenia and how both of them view the events. Clytemnestra refuses to accept Agamemnon’s motives and feels forced to take her revenge on Agamemnon for the deed. Agamemnon considers it his obligation to sacrifice his daughter while Clytemnestra sees his action as a horrible lapse of betrayal.

After reading the play, I think Agamemnon didn’t have any choice but to sacrifice his daughter. I think he could have saved his daughter if he had the chance. Every father loves his children more than anything, and a dad’s love for his daughter counts the most. I think Agamemnon was left with no choice but to kill his daughter. The reason is Agamemnon could sail to Troy and succeed in the war. I think Agamemnon decided to kill his daughter because they had been hoping for a victory for so long. He was desperate.

Clytemnestra considers things differently, and she decides to kill Agamemnon because his actions were terrible. She decided to lure him, after he returns to Argos, decides to welcome him as if she is not bothered, and even lays out a carpet for him to walk on. Clytemnestra is angry about her daughter’s death but she doesn’t show her anger and pretends to be nice to him. She is a good actor and plans her revenge well. It is a strange end to a tragic story.

Phaedrus and Socrates have different opinions as to which behavior is better: a lover or a non-lover. As Phaedrus narrates Lysias’ discourse, it is clear that he thinks a boy should be with a non-lover rather than a lover. Phaedrus describes lovers as madmen. According to his dialogue, lovers put their interest aside only to satisfy their beloved, which is foolish. Lovers are also known to neglect their concerns and do hateful things to other people in order to satisfy their sweetheart. According to Phaedrus, this type of behavior should be avoided since if a person is willing to hurt others and even betray his friends/family to satisfy the person whom they love, they should not be trusted. On the other hand, Socrates thinks these behaviors should be more appreciated than that of a non-lover. Non-lovers are only looking for physical pleasure in exchange for material things while lovers want the best for whom they love, not necessarily in exchange for something. Socrates also explains that non-lovers desire to feel superior in their relationships, while lovers look at the other person as equal, and look to get wiser together. Additionally, Socrates thinks that a lover will also try to help their beloved with material things (such as provide an education) even when the relationship is not about an exchange of pleasure for material items.