More handpicked essays just for you.
Ancient greek womens roles in stories
Ancient greek womens roles in stories
Roles of women in ancient Greece
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Ancient greek womens roles in stories
Ania Loomba presents numerous arguments throughout her piece; I have chosen a few below to respond and elaborate on.
In Response to the first block of Ania Loomba’s work she states, “Although Cleopatra calls herself ‘black’ and Philo calls her ‘tawny’ [1.1.6], none of the repeated , hyperbolic, and contradictory descriptions of her in the play tells us much about her physically” (261). Loomba goes on to recount the history of Egyptian linage and the history of the uses of the words black and tawny. Looma’s focus on the physical look and lineage of Cleopatra, in my opinion, is very unnecessary and to mystify her serves better purpose. The mystic of Cleopatra helps to other her, a great example of this is when Enobarbus is describing her, “Age cannot wither her, nor custom stale her infinite variety. Other women cloy the appetites they feed, but she makes hungry
…show more content…
She then goes on to explain the parallel it would have made with English society at the time and how it would have made audiences uncomfortable. In the piece she tells us that women were seen as the most masculine they had ever been and that men were playing women in the theatre (well they had to since women were not allowed to). The best example of the reversal or bending of gender roles is when Cleopatra puts her clothing on a drunken Antony, “Ere the ninth hour, I drunk him to his bed, then put my tires and mantle on him whilst I wore his sword Phillipan” (2.5.20-23). Not only is this image humorous, it is also clearly feminizing Mark Antony. By feminizing Antony, Cleopatra becomes dangerous, especially to a male audience. Women with the power to be the dominate partner or be the one to embody the masculine role would have been a huge red flag. Not only was Cleopatra a dangerous and mysterious figure to the audience, it made Egypt and the east dangerous and mysterious as
Changing social habits of a contemporary society have seen Cleopatra depicted in many different ways. Whilst few artefacts remain of the true image of Cleopatra, we see from her portrait on the coins (Fear, 2008, p, 21 Fig 1.4) that despite being no legendary beauty, she had the power to captivate two of the greatest Romans of her time. Cleopatra consummated her union with Julius Caesar, which strengthened her grip on the throne, following his assassination; she formed alliance with Mark Antony, in opposition to Octavian, a coalition that would lead to her downfall as both Antony and Cleopatra’s combined forces would be defeated against Octavian in the battle of Actium in 31 BCE. (Fear, 2008, p.7)
These women are sexualized, audacious, respectful, and flirtatious. Women in the Elizabethan society were considered the weaker sex and in need of always being protected. Women, however, were allowed many freedoms in Shakespeare writings. The thinking from both plays was that women were not above men but more like sex objects and a necessary part of society. Women have evolved into so much more, however, I would like to think this is from the open-mindedness of how Shakespeare saw each woman.
After the completion of the book, it had let me to believe the book was written for the general audience. Although the author provided many resources, the information was taken from literature that was written during the time. Therefore, some of the quotes were biased either against or favored Cleopatra. For an example of bias against her, the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus called her a “wicked creature, who was a slave to her lusts, but she still imagined that she wanted everything she could think of, and did her utmost to gain it…. As for Antony, he was so entirely overcome by this woman that… he was some way or other bewitched to do whatever she would have him do.” On the contrary, here is an example of bias in favor of Cleopatra: “a princess well versed in the sciences, disposed to the study of philosophy and counting scholars among her intimate friends. She was the author of works on medicine, charms, and other divisions of the natural sciences.” This was taken from a tenth-century Arab historian Al Masudi. The author allowed his readers to conclude their own interpretation of Cleopatra by stating both sides of the story.
Feminine sexuality and power has been a controversial topic since the dawn of time. In many ancient societies, females exist as the lesser beings. They were meant only to bear children, and to stay loyal to their husband. Cleopatra VI became one of the first prominent females to exert her power. She reigned as queen of the entire Egyptian kingdom and bowed to no one. Cleopatra used her beauty to get what she wanted and needed for her country, and by doing this, she conquered some of the most politically important men of the Roman republic. Yet for many years, the life of this formidable queen was left unrecognized. The story of Cleopatra VI came back into intrigue with the production of three films: Cleopatra by Cecil B. de Mille in 1934, Cleopatra by Joesph L. Mankiewicz in 1963, and Cleopatra Jones by Jack Starrett in 1973. Each of these productions represents the historical Cleopatra in modern glory and power. They meant to appeal to both men and women; to the woman’s want and need for power in a still male-dominant world, and to the man's lust for an intellectual, and beautiful woman. All three of these films served their purpose accurately; they maintained a close connection to the historical context of Cleopatra, yet successfully attracted their target audience.
Do Women Play a Vital Role in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar? In my essay I will be analysing two critics, Jan H. Blits and Mary Hamer, that discussed whether or not women played a vital role in William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. The first critic, Jan H Blits, discusses how the women in the play are inferior to the men. Blits states this opinion by comparing the two genders roles in the entire play, “The manly is associated with the firm, the brilliant, the cold, the independent, the high and the noble”.
Similar to the 1963 film Cleopatra, in Plutarch's The Life of Antony, sexism is maintained in the passage and compatible with its message. Through the author's portrayal of Cleopatra and Antony, he spreads the message that obsession with power is bad and the idea that manipulation and attempts at domination are signs of a bad ruler. Sexism is compatible with such messages because as indicated by Plutarch, Cleopatra utilizes sexist expectations of women in order to manipulate Antony through her aspirations of domination. Therefore, similar to the films Cleopatra and Quo Vadis, because Cleopatra is unsuccessful as she commits suicide in the end and is found "lying dead upon a golden couch," as well as is portrayed as an immoral ruler in Plutarch's Life of Antony, sexism is portrayed in the passage as a negative quality that leads to failure. (Plutarch, Life of Antony, 85) However, Plutarch differs in his treatment of sexism and attitude towards Cleopatra to the extent that he appears to place the fault with Cleopatra. While he maintains that sexism is a negative quality through his portrayal of Cleopatra playing into sexist expectations, by casting Cleopatra as a manipulative woman, Plutarch appears to be blaming Cleopatra for her own weaknesses as a ruler as well as for Antony's downfall. Although the film Cleopatra displayed how Cleopatra got power by using her sexuality and having Caesar and Antony fall in love with her, Plutarch Life of Antony portrays her as even more of a manipulator of men. For example, the author mentions that Cleopatra "pretended to be passionately in love with Antony herself, and reduced her body by slender diet; she put on a look of rapture when Antony drew near, and one of faintness and melancholy when h...
Despite Egypt’s provincial annexation to Rome after her death, Cleopatra managed to keep the Romans at bay for nearly twenty-two years. Unfortunately, much of her achievements have been disparaged and attributed to the utilization of her sexuality. To add, her image as a competent female ruler has been further distorted by the media and literature alike. Much of this misrepresentation can be accredited to the scarcity of reliable and unbiased accounts about her life. The Romans were afraid of Cleopatra’s power and the alliances she created with their generals. Therefore, accounts of her life in Roman scripture are not particularly in her favor.
The Romans were immensely furious with Cleopatra and had primary influence over what sources were left behind about her. So certainly this is going to lead to biases and inaccuracies in the depictions we have. Furthermore, we are all well aware of how Hollywood likes to dramatize and embellish stories in order to generate ticket sales and is not worried about the accuracy of the historical anecdote. Because of this and her popularity, our knowledge of Cleopatra has been flooded with twisted truths. When examining Cleopatra’s full reign beyond her love affairs, reveals Cleopatra put all of her effort forth in order to solve the conflict between Egypt and Rome and should be recognized for her masterminded and commanding leadership
Stacy Schiff author of Cleopatra strives through her book to denounce all historical myths surrounding Cleopatra. With the rigor of a true historian she is able to distinguish historical veracity from historical myth surrounding the queen from antiquity. The author highlights Cleopatra’s role as a powerful woman and in particular how she attempts to manage the various political or economic predicaments she faced. Stacy Schiff gives us a story that is masterfully reconstructed, allowing the reader insight into the historical context of the time- shedding new light on a woman whose greatest fault was not being a man.
Cleopatra is most often remembered as the lover of two Roman consuls, Julius Caesar and Mark Antony, thereby forever connecting the Egyptian queen to the history of Rome. The stories of her relationships with the two men do not always paint a flattering picture of Cleopatra, as her reported promiscuity and presumption give her a colorful reputation. Cleopatra is also sometimes seen as a misunderstood woman, someone who was never given a fair opportunity to be accepted as the wife of Marc Antony nor the mother of Caesar's child. Some historians and authors use the issue of Cleopatra's race as a reason that she was ostracized from Roman society, saying that the Romans were prejudiced against Egyptians, and despite Cleopatra's Greek background, would never accept her as a suitable mate for a Roman consul. This theory, however, is far outweighed by the numerous justifications the Roman people had for their distaste of Cleoaptra. It is not surprising that Cleopatra never found acceptance in Rome, as she offered nothing to the relationship between Egypt and Rome, she stood for everything they were against, and little by little, she succeeded in destroying parts of the society that the Roman people had worked to build.
The woman, by definition is the nurturer of life. She labors through birth, tends to the needs of her family, and assumes unending responsibilities. And while women have given birth to the ancient and modern day male heroes we've come to glorify to this day, we must remember that some of those same women have also been tremendously influential and invaluable all throughout the depths of history. One such woman is Cleopatra, the temptress whose ambition and seduction both augmented her empire's prestige and brought about her theatrical downfall.
This essay will explain both sides of the views and using critical thinking will uncover the real message the author intended to portray.
Overall, I agree with the arguments she presents in her article and find some of them correspond very well with the conclusion I had written about.
Throughout the historical literary periods, many writers underrepresented and undervalued the role of women in society, even more, they did not choose to yield the benefits of the numerous uses of the female character concerning the roles which women could accomplish as plot devices and literary tools. William Shakespeare was one playwright who found several uses for female characters in his works. Despite the fact that in Shakespeare's history play, Richard II, he did not use women in order to implement the facts regarding the historical events. Instead, he focused the use of women roles by making it clear that female characters significantly enriched the literary and theatrical facets of his work. Furthermore in Shakespeare’s history play, King Richard II, many critics have debated the role that women play, especially the queen. One of the arguments is that Shakespeare uses the queen’s role as every women’s role to show domestic life and emotion. Jo McMurtry explains the role of all women in his book, Understanding Shakespeare’s England A Companion for the American Reader, he states, “Women were seen, legally and socially, as wives. Marriage was a permanent state” (5). McMurtry argues that every woman’s role in the Elizabethan society is understood to be a legal permanent state that is socially correct as wives and mothers. Other critics believe that the role of the queen was to soften King Richard II’s personality for the nobles and commoners opinion of him. Shakespeare gives the queen only a few speaking scenes with limited lines in Acts two, four, and five through-out the play. Also, she is mentioned only a few times by several other of the characters of the play and is in multiple scenes wit...
...ergren, Paula S. “The Woman’s Part: Female Sexuality as Power in Shakespeare’s Plays.” The Woman’s Part: Feminist Criticism of Shakespeare. Ed. Carolyn Ruth Swift Lenz, Gayle Greene and Carol Thomas Neely. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1980.