Revenge in Aeschylus' The Oresteia Trilogy and Sophocles' Electra
The act of revenge in classical Greek plays and society is a complex issue with unavoidable consequences. In certain instances, it is a more paramount concern than familial ties. When a family member is murdered another family member is expected to seek out and administer revenge. If all parties involved are of the same blood, the revenge is eventually going to wipe out the family. Both Aeschylus, through "The Oresteia Trilogy," and Sophocles, through "Electra," attempt to show the Athenians that revenge is a just act that at times must have no limits on its reach. Orestes and his sister Electra, the children of the slain Agamemnon, struggle on how to avenge their father's death. Although unsure what course of action they must take, both brother and sister are in agreement that revenge must occur. Revenge is a crucial part of Greek plays that gives the characters a sense of honor and their actions a sense of justice.
Killing the person responsible for one of your family member's deaths is Athenian justice. This type of lethal justice is executed by Orestes and Electra. Before proceeding to the house of Aegisthus and Clytemnestra, they plot the murder of their father's murderers. They decide Orestes will murder his mother, and Electra will dispose of Aegisthus. Orestes is the most focused of the two; but Electra, although timid in the beginning, is the most masculine. Both of these personality traits are key to their plan coming to fruition. Once her brother devises the plan, Electra verbally encourages him to follow through with it. After thrusting his blade into Clytemnestra only once, Electra cries that "[i]f thou beest a man, [s]trike twice!" (Sophocles 5...
... middle of paper ...
...ther and being unable to know what that means, Athena proclaims that "[m]ine is the final vote, [a]nd I award it to Orestes' cause" (Aeschylus 140). He was simply following the unspoken law that you kill the person responsible for your family member's death. No matter what action he took, he would of be looked down upon with disdainment.
The act of revenge is the most honorable of all types of justice. Killing those who kill people you care about exhibits your loyalty to the man or woman who is deceased. Even though the cost was killing his mother, Orestes did avenge his father's death. Aeschylus and Sophocles show their fellow Athenians that although it may not be the most pleasurable and best looking solution, revenge is the most just. Although problems and criticism did arise from his actions, Orestes did exactly what he was suppose to do in the given situation.
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2010). Negotiation: Readings, exercises and cases
At first glance, the picture of justice found in the Oresteia appears very different from that found in Heraclitus. And indeed, at the surface level there are a number of things which are distinctly un-Heraclitean. However, I believe that a close reading reveals more similarities than differences; and that there is a deep undercurrent of the Heraclitean world view running throughout the trilogy. In order to demonstrate this, I will first describe those ways in which the views of justice in Aeschylus' Oresteia and in Heraclitus appear dissimilar. Then I will examine how these dissimilarities are problematized by other information in the Oresteia; information which expresses views of justice very akin to Heraclitus. Of course, how similar or dissimilar they are will depend not only on one's reading of the Oresteia, but also on how one interprets Heraclitus. Therefore, when I identify a way in which justice in the Oresteia seems different from that in Heraclitus, I will also identify the interpretation of Heraclitus with which I am contrasting it. Defending my interpretation of Heraclitean justice as such is beyond the scope of this essay. However I will always refer to the particular fragments on which I am basing my interpretation, and I think that the views I will attribute to him are fairly non-controversial. It will be my contention that, after a thorough examination of both the apparent discrepancies and the similarities, the nature of justice portrayed in the Oresteia will appear more deeply Heraclitean than otherwise. I will not argue, however, that there are therefore no differences at all between Aeschylus and Heraclitus on the issue of justice. Clearly there are some real ones and I will point out any differences which I feel remain despite the many deep similarities.
Electra is saturated with the Dionysian quest for vengeance that prevails also in The Bacchae. It is found again in Frankenstein, a work bubbling over with vengeful deaths. This Dionysian pursuit for vengeance is carried out on family offenders, whether they are of the family in question or not. Dionysus, a member of Cadmus' family, causes the death of his cousin Pentheus. Pentheus commits a deadly mistake when he denies Dionysus as a god and attempts to capture him, thus invoking the wrath of Dionysus. This is the same type of vengeance found in Electra's family. In Electra's family, if one commits a family offense, an unending cycle of the Dionysian principle of vengeance ensues: vengeance takes precedent over family ties, thus forsaking them. With Victor Frankenstein and his monster, the principle is also at work, though it exists for each of them in response to the other.
The selfishness that Oedipus possesses causes him to have abundance of ignorance. This combination is what leads to his father’s death. After fleeing Corinth and his foster family, Oedipus gets into a skirmish with an older man. The reason for the fight was because, “The groom leading the horses forced me off the road at his lord’s command” (1336). Oedipus is filled with a rage after being insulted by the lord and feels the need to act. The two men fight, but Oedipus ends up being too much for the older man, and he kills him. What Oedipus is unaware of is that the man was actually his birth father and by killing him, Oedipus has started on the path of his own destruction. Not only does Oedipus kill his father, but also everyone else, “I killed them all” (1336). The other men had no part in the scuffle, but in his rage, he did not care who he was killing.
...ady to obey her, and she has vowed revenge upon the foes of Pyrrhus. But Orestes, true to his love, will not forsake Hermione, until he is told that she is dead. On her way to the temple she met the bier of Pyrrhus, and, bidding the bearers halt, stooped over the body, then turned her head toward heaven and stabbed herself.
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2011). Essentials of negotiation (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill. ISBN-13: 9780073530369
Teiresias blatantly tells Oedipus the truth of what is happening around him, and Oedipus dismisses all he says. Oedipus’ pride blinds him to all the evidence that points to him as the murderer of his own father. When Iocastê tells Oedipus the details of Laïos’s murder, Oedipus is too ignorant to see that he was the one who murdered the previous king and placed a curse upon himself.
The first common theme is the importance of clear strategic intent and big picture thinking in negotiations. Before taking the Negotiation Behaviour unit, I always perceived negotiation as a fixed-pie, a zero-sum gain situation, where one party wins and the other party loses. This belief has often led me to a competitive behaviour in negotiation by trading the big picture thinking with the need to win, getting too detailed too quickly, leading to a positional approach instead of having a broad goal and explore for ways around problems to create value and get the best outcome.
Negotiation is a discussion between two or more people with goal of reaching agreement on
Pylades arrives bearing the sad news of Orestes death. He tells Clytemnestra that Orestes was killed in a chariot race at the Delphian games; his body was cremated and his ashes were sent to. Mycenae. Concealing his identity, Orestes arrives with the help of Electra and Pylades, plots the murder of his mother and his mother's. lover. Orestes enters the palace, kills his mother and returns to Electra. When Aegisthus arrives, Orestes kills him as well. his destiny.
King Oedipus son of Laius his father has been found guilty of the crime of murder and incest by his own conscious decisions. His punishment is banishment. It was the lack of evidence that proved to his honor that there was reasonable doubt in the guilt of Oedipus. The defenses case was not strong enough to prove that Oedipus was innocent. The prosecution brought many people to the stand that weakened the case of the defense. They called the only survivor of the attack of Laius and his men, he said that there was clearly no need to kill the king Oedipus could have controlled the situation without having to kill anyone of the men, but as the man said Oedipus lost control and his temper and killed his King and his comrades. This just shows that
Oedipus, ruler of Thebes, murdered his father and married his mother. Such acts are almost always deemed unnatural and criminal; they are not tolerated within traditional society. A person who has committed these acts of murder and incest would be considered an outcast, yet Sophocles’s character, Oedipus, is not guilty of either.
This paper aims to study two significant playwrights, Sophocles and Euripides, and compare their respective attitudes by examining their plays in respect to plot and character structures. To achieve this goal, the paper is organized into two main sections. In the first section, we provide a brief biography of both Sophocles and Euripides. The second and last section includes summaries of Sophocles’ Electra and Euripides’ Electra which were based on same essentials and give an opportunity to observe the differences of the playwrights. This section also includes the comparisons that are made by our observations about the plays.
In Aeschylus’ The Agamemnon, Agamemnon and Clytemnestra have to make tough decisions throughout the play, decisions they believe are justified. The actions of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra are not justified because they are caused by their blinding hubris and desire for power. Agamemnon makes the choice to kill his daughter just so he could lead his troops to Troy. Clytemnestra kills her husband, not just for revenge, but for his position and power as king of Mycenae. They make selfish choices and do not believe they will be punished for them. By exposing their true motives, Aeschylus makes it clear they are not justified in their actions.
...verestimate etiquette! Although your Japanese business partners may look dead serious (and Japanese people usually take work dead-serious...), they also are human and know to laugh... Here is a famous story (not sure it's a true story though...) demonstrating what can happen with exaggerated cultural adaptation: