I am truly glad that we read so many different Greek tragedies as a class because they are all stories of their own. It is nearly impossible to find any parallelisms among any of these readings. There is something new to be learned with each tragedy we encounter. For example, Antigone is the first time the reader sees an example of megalomania in the reading. In no other instance has a leader come to power because of his great deeds prior to the setting of the story and then caused his own downfall through his superiority complex. Creon’s state in the conclusion that is described as a “walking dead man” is the end result of his own hubris- I never saw it coming. The series of events that take place in the story were such a surprising, unique, and refreshing change that made the reading experience all the more enjoyable.
Seriously though, the comparisons between Antigone and Oedipus- used as examples because we’ve read them as a class- are unending. Yet we still analyze Antigone as an individual and unique story. Thus we must consider Creon’s actions and debate whether or not he is a good or evil character- as discussed in Robert’s blog. We must also question if he could have somehow prevented the Teiresias’ prophecy from coming to fruition had he proceeded to take a different course of action- as contemplated in Matthew’s blog. So we proceed to spend 4 periods of 50-minute time intervals each week discussing questions that nobody has the answer to. But my opinion remains the same, Norma Jean in the short story “Shiloh” did, in fact, jump off the cliff. (277)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
It is interesting how you consider the differences between the plays "Antigone" and "Oedipus Rex" even though they contain some of the same characters and are set in the same worlds. Your blog explains the ability of authors to express disconnect between two apparently related stories, and thus convey different ideas in them.
I found your post interesting for the specific fact that we spend a great deal of time discussing what the authors original intent was while at the same time have no idea whatsoever. We will never know what his intent was, and while it is sometimes frustrating, I believe that is what makes great literature great. An unknown intent that spurs discussion. Also, I agree that she did jump off a cliff.
A nice post. I would say that you could have been slightly more specific in your analysis of Antigone. Your references to Robert and Matt's blogs proved that you knew and considered all sides of the question of parallelism in the aforementioned Greek tragedies. And the fact that she jumped is undeniably true.
Chang, I enjoyed your brief insight here into how we, as a class, look upon these tragedies and form opposing viewpoints. It was refreshing to step away from the nitty-gritty of the story and read a blog that discussed both the stories themselves and also how our classes view and interpret them. It was like a step back from the intensity of literature discussion. Good job!
Other Andrew--Since you bring up the issue of unanswerable questions, I'll pose another one: should be spend time in class trying to answer unanswerable questions (can fate and free will both exist? is revenge moral?) or should we stick to topics with definitive solutions?
What do you think? Anyone else who ever reads, this comment, if that ever happens, feel free to weigh in.
Post a Comment