Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Unjust and just speech analysis
The culture of Athens in the golden age
The culture behind Athens
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Throughout Aristophanes’ “Clouds” there is a constant battle between old and new. It makes itself apparent in the Just and Unjust speech as well as between father and son. Ultimately, Pheidippides, whom would be considered ‘new’, triumphs over the old Strepsiades, his father. This is analogous to the Just and Unjust speech. In this debate, Just speech represents the old traditions and mores of Greece while the contrasting Unjust speech is considered to be newfangled and cynical towards the old. While the defeat of Just speech by Unjust speech does not render Pheidippides the ability to overcome Strepsiades, it is a parallel that may be compared with many other instances in Mythology and real life. The dialogue between the Just and Unjust speech was handled very skillfully on the part of the Unjust speech. Although the points that the Just speech made were what many would consider to be true and right, Unjust speech exemplified a mastery of language by using wordplay and turning any suggestion made by its “stronger” opposition against itself. For example Just speech was implying sur...
Theseus, The Great Athenian hero, was the son of Dianae and King Aegeus. Theseus had something that not many children at his age didn’t have, “he grew up strong far beyond others” (210). When he was young his father, King Aegeus, set a hollow sword and a pair of shoes and placed a great
Odysseus’s revenge towards the suitors, whose only crime was the crime of theft, was unnecessarily cruel, after all, a hero must be able to forgive. It has been twenty years since anyone on Ithaka have seen, or even heard news about Odysseus. Therfore, it would have been perfectly pliable to pronounce him dead. “ He has been gone for twenty years.” The people of Ithaka were all under the impression that Odysseus, has in fact, passed a...
Prometheus Bound is quite different from other tragedies in that it is peopled entirely by gods. The play focuses on the story of Prometheus, and we have versions of this myth in Hesiod's famous works. There is reason to think that the author of Prometheus Bound was not only acquainted with Hesiod's version but actually drew on Hesiod directly in this play. This essay therefore aims to establish in what ways the author of Prometheus Bound seems to have drawn from Hesiod's version of myth, in what ways he has diverged from it, and what reasons he might have had for making these changes and innovations. This might therefore highlight any particular emphasis or purpose of Prometheus Bound and what its author might have been trying to get across. Though there is not space in this essay to discuss the problems of attributing this play, it must be recognised that this ambiguity of authorship and dating makes it even more difficult than usual to look at views and purposes behind the play.
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.
The debate between Just and Unjust Speech highlights the ongoing debate between old and new traditions. These traditions can range from how to interpret laws to family values and the struggle between them is highlighted in Aristophanes Clouds. The battle between old and new is seen in argument between Just and Unjust Speech and the arguments between father Strepsiades and son Pheidippides. The constant battle between old and new is seen in many different areas throughout the Clouds such as justice, piety and issues of law.
Thucydides’ version of Pericles’ “Funeral Oration” can be read as more of an ironic rendering of Pericles’ original speech since The History of the Peloponnesian War is not just considered to be a historical account but also a “highly imaginative piece of work” in which Thucydides made characters involved in the war say what he believed they actually meant instead of what they might have originally said (Thucydides Introduction pg. x). In the “Funeral Oration”, Pericles praises certain
The book written by Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, contains two controversial debates between distinguished speakers of Athens. The two corresponding sides produce convincing arguments which can be taken as if produced as an honest opinion or out of self-interest. The two debates must be analyzed separately in order to conclude which one and which side was speaking out of honest opinion or self-interest, as well as which speakers are similar to each other in their approach to the situation.
Aside from all the prodigious number of Greek tragedies in history, stands a collection of Greek comedies which serve as humorous relief from the powerful overtone of the tragedy. These comedies were meant to ease the severity and seriousness sometimes associated with the Greek society. The ideas portrayed in the comedies, compared to the tragedies, were ridiculously far-fetched; however, although abnormal, these views are certainly worthy of attention. Throughout his comedy, The Clouds, Aristophanes, along with his frequent use of toilet humor, ridicules aspects of Greek culture when he destroys tradition by denouncing the importance of the gods' influence on the actions of mortals, and he unknowingly parallels Greek society with today's. Aristophanes also defiantly misrepresents an icon like Socrates as comical, atheistic, and consumed by ideas of self interest, which is contradictory to the Socrates seen in Plato's Apology or Phaedo.
In Aristophanes’ speech, which primarily takes the form of a myth, he weaves together comical elements with undertones of sadness that serve to create a profound account of what Eros is. The speech describes humans as combined creatures who, after being separated, are filled with longing. These beings spend the remainder of their lives, in a sometimes futile attempt, combating this feeling of longing by searching for the individual that can make them one again. Aristophanes describes Eros as a remedy for this overwhelming emotion. He uses his story to make Eros an entity that acts in tandem with individuals wishing to be whole. As a result, Eros ultimately serves as a guide that allows humans to bring about their original feeling of completion,
Bowra, C. M. “Sophocles’ Use of Mythology.” In Readings on Sophocles, edited by Don Nardo. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press, 1997.
In this paper, I will first extract Thucydides views from the Melian Dialogue and then analyze whether or not these views are well founded. Thucydides believed that the Athenians had the stronger argument. Proof of this lies in the way Thucydides picked the arguments for each side. For the moment, we will disregard the actual content of the arguments, and look at argumentation forms and the flow of the debate. The Melians argued using consequences of an Athenian take over.
As with many plays from the same time period as Oedipus the King, there seems to be more to the story than the tragic story of a simple man. One way that Oedipus the King can be interpreted is as a political commentary about the str...
In Plato’s The Republic, we, the readers, are presented with two characters that have opposing views on a simple, yet elusive question: what is justice? In this paper, I will explain Thrasymachus’ definition of justice, as well as Socrates’s rebuttals and differences in opinion. In addition, I will comment on the different arguments made by both Socrates and Thrasymachus, and offer critical commentary and examples to illustrate my agreement or disagreement with the particular argument at hand.
Out of the confrontation with Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus, Socrates emerges as a reflective individual searching for the rational foundation of morality and human excellence. The views presented by the three men are invalid and limited as they present a biased understanding of justice and require a re-examination of the terminology. The nature in which the faulty arguments are presented, leave the reader longing to search for the rational foundations of morality and human virtue.
The play was considered comic by the ancient Athenians because of its rhyming lyricism, its song and dance, its bawdy puns, but most of all because the notion and methods of female empowerment conceived in the play were perfectly ridiculous. Yet, as is the case in a number of Aristophanes’ plays, he has presented an intricate vision of genuine human crisis. In true, comic form Aristophanes superficially resolves the play’s conflicts celebrating the absurdity of dramatic communication. It is these loose threads that are most rife with tragedy for modern reader. By exploring an ancient perspective on female domesticity, male political and military power, rape, and efforts to maintain the integrity of the female body, we can liberate our modern dialogue.