In the parable "Before the Law", a man found the law he had been looking for, but a gate and a gatekeeper were in front of it. The man asked the gatekeeper for admittance, but the gatekeeper refused, though he did step aside from the door. The man continued to wait beside the door and never found enough courage to stand up to the guard and enter. Eventually, when he was very old, the man asked why no one else had come to gate. The guard then said that the gate was made for him. The gatekeeper also said that he was going to close the gate. "Before the Law" shows how submissive humans are. The guard wasn't the person keeping the man from the law. After all, the stepped to the side after the man arrived, as if inviting him in. The man kept himself from entering because of his own self doubt and fear. He could have walked straight in, but chose not to. The book this is an excerpt from, The Trial, also explains submissiveness in humans. The main character, Josef, was being charged of a crime. However, he was never told what the crime was and couldn't remember doing anything wrong. Instead of straight out asking what he did to deserve his punishment, he asked indirect questions and received indirect answers, never understanding why he was convicted. The man from the parable felt like he was supposed to stay out, when in reality, it was his right to enter, just like it was Josef's right to know what he did wrong. The meaning of "Before the Law" can be likened to two characters from Antigone, Ismene and Antigone. Ismene wanted to follow the law instead of helping Antigone bury their brother. However, by the end of the tragedy, she realized she wanted to help her sister, but it was too late. In the parable, the man chose to submit to the gatekeeper in the beginning. However, when he realized he could enter, it was too late. Both Ismene and the man chose to submit to a force they saw as greater than themselves, and realized too late that they didn't have to. They could have stood up for what they wanted. Antigone did oppose the force she was going against. Even though she knew it was illegal to give her brother a burial, she did it anyway. If she had been in the man from the parable's position, she would have faced that guard head on and marched through the gate, not caring what would hold her back inside. Instead of submission, Antigone chose to stand up for herself.
0 Comments
Pride has been a common trait in humankind. It is hard to humble yourself after realizing you are at fault in a situation. In Antigone, Kreon refused to back down after wronging Antigone and her brother, and paid deeply as a result. Tragedy was created when Kreon chose to uphold his law instead of listening to those around him and relenting. However, happiness was still found by the ending as Kreon realized he was wrong and accepted the fact. When humans refuse to humble themselves, tragedy is created. This idea comes into play in Antigone when Polyneices is killed and a law is created by Kreon that proclaims that anyone that tries to give him a proper burial will die. Polyneices sister, Antigone, refuses to accept the law and gives a burial to her brother, but is caught. To show the citizens of Thebes that breaking the law will always have consequences, Kreon upholds the law although Antigone is betrothed to his son. Many people try and convince him to let Antigone go, but because of his pride, Kreon refuses to. Kreon’s pride ultimately leads to the demise of the people he loves. If had Kreon put his pride aside, his wife and his son wouldn’t have died. Happiness must be the final result of tragedy. Even though it may seem sad on the outside, a truth must be learned that leaves the reader satisfied. In Antigone, the ending seems sad at first. Kreon lost his wife, son, and soon to be daughter-in-law, all because of his own actions. However, Kreon tried to make it right with his son before Haimon killed himself. He let go of his ego and was willing to let Antigone go. This tragedy ends on a happy note because Kreon learned by the end that pride will only lead to tragic endings. As humans, we all assume that we are in total control of our choices. That since we have to right to make our own decisions, they are automatically are our own. However, this presumed fact is not always true. In the TED Talk titled “Are we in Control of our own Decision?”, Dan Ariely explained some irrational choices humans have made because of the way they were presented. Tragedies are no different. For example, in Oedipus Rex, if there was no prophecy, the character’s choices would have been very different than what they were. No matter what the situation is, our decisions can be manipulated. All of the examples that Ariely showed had some form of manipulation affecting different choices. Most seemed rational at first, then slowly became more irrational as the manipulation was made known, or vice versa. One example he showed had to do with a website called economist.com. The website had three choices, one option for $59, a second option for $125, and a third option that had both of the choices combined for $125. When Ariely gave these choices to some students, the majority chose the third option. However, when Ariely gave these choices to a different group of students and didn’t include the second option, most of them chose the first option. The manipulation in this case was the second choice. When the subjects saw that they could get a deal, the majority chose the deal. When the deal was taken away, the students chose the less expensive item. With this study in mind, we can see that when an outside force affects our decisions, people tend to choose an option they wouldn’t have chosen otherwise. Tragedies also have played off the idea that manipulation can affect our choices. In Oedipus Rex, the prophecy was the manipulation. The prophecy caused Oedipus and his parents to do certain actions that eventually lead to their demise. If it wasn’t present, the character’s actions would have been very different from what they were. Both Oedipus and his parents unintentionally set themselves up tragedy by focusing on outside forces before making their decisions. When people consider outside forces before making our decisions and don’t focus, they tend to choose an option they wouldn’t have otherwise chosen. Manipulation affects our decisions, but we still overall have the freedom of choice. The choices we make are certainly our own, but outside forces can lead us to do things we wouldn’t normally have done. At times it is hard to cope with tragic events that happen in our lives. We find it hard to accept them and usually end up feeling a level of despair afterwards. On the outside, it may seem like this fact is true for tragedy as well since bad things keep happening to the characters. However The Tragic Fallacy, by Joseph Krutch explains how that is not anything but true. In tragedy, we accept the bad events that happen because they led to greater things. The ending of tragedies is always happy because we know that no other alternative would have closed the story better. In The Tragic Fallacy it states "We accept gladly the outward defeats which it describes for the sake of in inward victories which it reveals." The piece then goes on to say that it's okay that Juliet died because she showed us how great love can be. Well written tragedies have the ability to make a bad event lead to great things. In fact, we are happy to accept the tragic event to learn of the truth hidden inside of them. We should be content with the ending of a tragedy because we know that no other alternative would have been better. It's okay that Jocasta from Oedipus Rex died because we know that her and Oedipus couldn't have continued their marriage after what they learned, and their mother to son relationship was shattered by their marriage. Even though this conclusion is not happy, we gladly accept what happened. Tragedy is written in a way that helps us accept the bad events that occur to its characters because we know that greater things are ahead. Tragedy endings leave us content, knowing that no other conclusion would have been better. From this, we learn that although tragic events are hard to cope with, in the long run, we are better because of them. Oedipus experiences many misfortunes is Oedipus Rex, by Sophocles. Unknowingly, he killed his father and married his mother, causing the city he lives in to fail. After realizing he has done this terrible deed, he stabs out his eyes, blinding himself. The townspeople that were once so loyal to Oedipus quickly turn on him and want nothing to do him or his children, going as far as to agree that Oedipus would be better dead. In a very short amount of time, Oedipus’s world is flipped upside down. Through no fault of his own, Oedipus is suddenly in the depths of despair. These acts cause the audience to feel sympathy for Oedipus, an element that is very important in tragedy. The grievous circumstances Oedipus experiences cause the audience to feel sympathy. While trying to escape the horrible an oracle predicted, Oedipus ran into a traveling group. After being hit with a cow prod he killed everyone there, including his birth father. He then traveled to a town called Thebes, defeated a Sphinx and became ruler of the land his father used to own, unknowingly marrying his mother in the process. As a result of their marriage, the town starts to fail. When Oedipus learns this, he blinds himself by stabbing his eyes. Because Oedipus was ignorant to the fact that he married his mother, the audience feels bad for him. If Oedipus had married his mother on purpose, the audience would think he was gross. However, because the misfortunes that add up all happened by no fault of Oedipus, they feel sympathy. As the events that cause Oedipus to blind himself unfold, the townspeople of Thebes quickly want nothing to do with Oedipus, someone they had revered only a day ago. The same people that held him up as a hero go as far as to agree for Oedipus, death is the best option. At this point, Oedipus seems to be completely alone. He is blind, lost his wife/mother, and no longer has a town that adores him. This causes the audience to feel sympathy for Oedipus. He unknowingly caused his own demise in the worst possible way. Sympathy is felt by the audience for the misfortunes Oedipus has gone through. Oedipus accidently caused all of the tragic elements of the story, making the audience feel bad each time something new happens. When Oedipus blinds himself after learning he killed his father and married his mother, the audience feels bad that he caused his own demise. When the townspeople quickly turn on Oedipus after considering him a hero, sympathy is felt because Oedipus seems so alone. The misfortunes that happen to Oedipus allow the audience to connect with the main character through sympathy. Many changes have occurred in today’s society. Poor people are often seen as losers instead of unfortunate. Tragedy, though, hasn’t changed. Sympathy still plays a major role in how we feel towards the characters in tragedies. Alain de Botton TED Talk titled “A Kinder, Gentler Philosophy of Success” explains some key differences concerning society of the past and the present and shows how much sympathy impacts tragedy. In a speech titled "A Kinder, Gentler Philosophy of Success", Alain de Botton explains how certain changes in modern societies have effected the people. In the past a poor person would be seen as unfortunate. Today a poor person is seen as a loser meaning they are in their position because of their own actions. The change that caused this was a shift in beliefs. In the past, almost everyone believed in a higher deity. The deity was where they believed fortune came from, meaning the person who was poor was unfortunate, that they hadn't received fortune yet. Nowadays, the idea meritocracy has caused people today to assume that poor people are in their position through their own actions, that they are losers. Sympathy is lacking in our present society, but has always played a key role in tragedy. Botton stated "It would be insane to call Hamlet a loser. He is not a loser though he has lost." The way tragedy is written forces us to feel a level of sympathy for its characters. Perhaps it is the feeling that what happened to the characters occurred through no wrong of their own, or maybe that we are able to see a portion of ourselves within the character's struggles. Whatever the reason, one idea remains clear, sympathy will always be apparent in tragedy. The society of the past and of the present has changed. Poor people are now seen losers instead of unfortunate as a result of meritocracy. However, sympathy still plays a major role in tragedy even though it doesn't always appear in society today. There are many misconceptions relating to tragedy. Some feel that tragedy is not for them, that it is meant for people higher than the common man. Pessimism is often linked to tragedy, meaning, even though the ending of a true tragedy should support the readers “brightest opinion of the human animal." (Miller, Tragedy and the Common Man) Miller's "Tragedy and the Common Man" refutes all of these false ideas, stating that tragedy is for everyone and that optimism plays a major role in tragedy. The common man can enjoy tragedy as well as any other person in the world. However, this fact is not always realized. As Miller stated, "For some reason or another, we are often held to be below tragedy--or tragedy above us." (Miller, Tragedy and the Common Man) In this statement, Miller is explaining that it is often implied that only the best and highest people should read tragedies. What if chocolate cake was assumed to be too good for everyone except the rulers of this world, would common people still eat it? Of course. Just because chocolate cake is amazing doesn't mean that only the best, most influential people can partake of it. The same is true for tragedy. Anyone can read it and enjoy it, regardless of how high up in the ranks the are. Although pessimism is often linked to tragedy, in reality it is not. "Tragedy and the Common Man" explains that tragedy contains more optimism in its storyline than comedy and that the ending should support the belief of “the perfectibility of man.” (Miller, Tragedy and the Common Man) In Romeo and Juliet, both the main characters die. However, they died for love. Romeo and Juliet died while trying to be with each other in a world that was forcing them apart. Even though there was a tragic ending, the reader still knows that Romeo and Juliet would have done anything for each other. The optimistic idea in this tragedy is selfless love. In all tragedies, there has to be some optimistic element, some plug for the “brightest opinion of the human animal.” Tragedy has many false ideas that surround it. Many believe that tragedy is for only the highest of the high. However, everyone can enjoy it and has the ability to comprehend the meaning contained therein. Tragedy and pessimism have seemed to be linked for quite a while. Nevertheless, the end of tragedies should always leave the reader with only the best outlook of humans in general. "Tragedy and the Common Man" breaks many myths that surround tragedy, which allows more people to enjoy the best that this genre has to offer. Tragedy has much deeper roots than I first assumed. Tragedies started in the ancient Greek theaters. From there, the genre grew immensely. The Romans adapted it, then the British. Each culture that adopted tragedy influenced it in different ways. Many different people have written tragedies, including Shakespeare and Muller. Philosophers through the years have speculated on tragedy such as Aristotle and G.W.F. Hegel. As people have analyzed, criticized, and created tragedies, it has allowed the genre to evolve into what it is today. Tragedies were created around the 6th century BC in ancient Greece and began to gain momentum through the years. It soon became an important part of ancient Greek theater. Athenian tragedies were presented in the early spring months in honor of Dionysus. Performed in groups of three, this type of tragedy became a state religious festival, showing how significant this genre became to the Greeks. When the Roman Republic took over, they learned of Greek tragedy. Roman tragedies were created and became some of the first crucial pieces of Roman literature. As the Romans gained more influence, tragedy spread throughout Europe. Tragedy was forgotten by the 16th century in Europe. Then more and more writers began to creating tragedies and it took off once more. In England, Shakespeare and Marlowe wrote many famous tragedies known today such as Macbeth and Tamburlaine the Great. As a result of a genre created in ancient Greek times, many important works known today were created. Tragedy has influenced literature in many cultures and continues to do so today. Many philosophers have analyzed and criticized tragedies, dating back to Plato and Aristotle. When Aristotle wrote about tragedy, he said "tragedy is characterized by seriousness and involves a great person who experiences a reversal of fortune." (Tragedy - Wikipedia, 28). He also descried tragedy as a work that evokes fear and pity in the spectators. Those statements have helped created a description of what tragedy is. A more recent philosopher, G.W.F. Hegel also discussed tragedy. He reasoned that tragedy is more complicated than what was first assumed, and noted differences between Greek tragedy and Shakespeare's. Both of these philosopher's theories noted key points of tragedies that has helped people notice the characteristics of tragedy in literature. When the Greeks first started making tragedies, were day long dance-dramas. However, it has since become much more, all made possible through the combined efforts many different authors and philosophers through the ages. However, even though tragedy has grown from a dance-drama into literature, it still has the same core it did thousands of years ago, "a form of drama based on human suffering." (Tragedy - Wikipedia, 1). |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |