Is the world black and white?

I believe this story of continual cycle of bloody affairs shows humans that the world is not so perfect and there isn't always a right and wrong choice. We do not always do what is ethical and logical when it comes to the people that we love. If we put ourselves in each of the characters shoes, we will discover that we may say we may stop the cycle by doing the right thing but at the end of the day we will end up   seeking revenge in the name of justice for the person responsible for the crime. We can say the right thing to do would be but at the end of it all say Orestes forgives his mother, will they relationship ever be the same? No, there is no right thing we can do sure he can say he forgives her but then she would be lurking in the background with her power hungry hands. The reason the world is not so black and white is because of these intense feelings we experience when it comes to our loved ones. These feelings impede us to delegate justice.

Ps. I commented on Jannah's "Revenge or justice?"

Justice or Revenge?

     This week I've been struggling through the Oresteia, I've constantly been trying to decipher the theme in this piece of literature. Is it Justice or Revenge? After much debating I've come to my own personal decision on the matter.
     In my view, the Oresteia does not portray justified murder, instead it portrays the vicious endless cycle of murderous revenge.  Everyone who becomes a murderer has a 'justified' reason. Aigisthos says he is justified in helping plot the death of Agamemnon, because of Atreus' (Agamemnon's father)  tricking Aigisthos' father into cannibalizing his own children.  Clytamnestra says she is justified for murdering Agamemnon because he sacrificially murdered their daughter Iphigineia.  Orestes and Electra says that they are justified for plotting and enacting the murder of their mother in order to justify their father's death.   They are are justified because they seek revenge. This is not justice.
     I was watching an episode of House MD today, and their case study was a convicted criminal on death row. The criminal was convicted for murdering four people.  During the show, it was revealed why the criminal killed three of those people. His first victim was his wife, he found out that she was cheating on him. His second victim was another inmate who started to attack him first. His third victim was an officer who was cruelly beating him.  In all these instances, the man said he had just cause for killing the people, but clearly it was not so. He was seeking retribution and revenge for the wrong done to him. Does this make him justified? No.
   After Clytamnestra's death, why did Orestes flee? Clearly, everyone in his house supported him. Yet, he became insane with guilt, he knew the Furies were after him. Surely the other greek gods would support Orestes if his crime was truly justified, surely they would shield him from the Furies wrath. That's not the case however. Also at the end of the Libation Bearers, the chorus seems to asks, "What is next? Is this the end of bloodshed, or will the murders continue?"
    Anyways those are my final thoughts so far, maybe they will change as we continue to read through the Oresteia.
   P.S. commented on Katelyn Ewing's post.

Moral Authority

Today in our discussion group, we talked about whether what Orestes did was revenge or justice. However, the issue came up of what standard we have to define those terms. Speaking from a biblical perspective, the standard that we have to discern between justice and revenge is God and the fact that He is righteously just. That simple fact is an absolutely uncompromising objective lens in which moral law can be defined in the absolute. The problem with this approach in The Libation Bearers and other instances in greek mythology is that an absolute authority in which morality can be discerned is absent. The gods in greek mythology we see are actually very human in many of their characteristics. They commit decidedly human acts such as adultery and rape. The issue then presents itself, even if Apollo commanded Orestes to undertake this quest and kill his mother, was he justified in doing so or was it simply an act of vengeance on his own part? This problem arises purely because of the lack of absolute moral authority of the gods. If the gods command humans to go and enact vengeance for past wrongs, then they are no better than humans taking revenge on one another. As we see in The Libation Bearers,  even when Orestes follows the will of Apollo, it doesn't stop or even halt the ongoing cycle of revenge.  If there is one thing that can be concluded from all this, I would assert that it is simply that revenge brings no resolution, only further destruction.

PS. i commented on Molly's

I Side with Clytemnestra??

Much of our discussion today focused on the justification of the three killings mentioned in these plays. Agamemnon sacrificed his daughter, Iphigenia, in order to gain safe passage to Troy. Clytemnestra hacked Agamemnon to death in the bathtub. Orestes coldly killed his mother over her co-conspirator's body.

The chain of revenge (according to Clytemnestra) owed its formation to Agamemnon's sacrifice of Iphigenia. Was he justified in doing this? He sacrificed her to appease Artemis and gain passage to Troy. But was the trip to Troy really worth the sacrifice? Agamemnon was going to Troy to support his little brother, who wanted to fight Troy because Paris had taken his wife. Perhaps the Greeks thought this quest for vengeance seemed like a good reason to sacrifice a daughter, but I can't agree that this sacrifice was necessary. Perhaps this sacrifice of one did save many, but none would have died at all if Agamemnon had stayed home. I'm not saying Clytemnestra was 'justified' in killing Agamemnon, but I think this sacrifice should never have taken place.

P.S. I commented on Gary Hamner's post.

Learning

"I'm convinced, glad that I was wrong.

Never too old to learn; it keeps me young."

-Agamemnon, lines 578-579

This, from the leader of the chorus in Aeschylus Agamemnon, is an inspirational quote. We live in a society that is filled with people constantly complaining about their education. Even though we ourselves are currently paying a small fortune to attend a university to further advance our education, we spend an incredible amount of time whinning about our workload and putting it off as long as possible. We are blessed to live in society that offers us an opppertunity to recieve an education, and even requires everyone to reach a certain level. Why not consider education a gift? All of the knowledge that has been passed on to us, does not even begin to scratch the surface of all there is to know. Knowledge is almost thought of as a sign of maturity, but is it not a sign of how young we truely are? There is so much we don't know, and so much left to learn.

p.s- I commented on Jamie Kilpatrick's Clytaemnestra

Orestes' Torment

After Orestes kills his mother, the Chorus sings out in praises saying, “Oh raise a shout of triumph over the escape of our master's house from its misery and the wasting of its wealth by two who were unclean, its grievous fortune!”  They also say, “Look, the light has come, and I am freed from the cruel curb that restrained our household. House, rise up! You have lain too long prostrate on the ground.”  Orestes, however, cannot join in the rejoicing with the rest of the people in his household.  He is very distraught over the act that he just committed; the killing of his own mother.  He does not care about the killing of Aegisthus because “he has suffered the penalty prescribed for adulterers.”  The death of his mother though he must justify.  He does this by saying, “Not without justice did I slay my mother, the unclean murderess of my father, and a thing loathed by the gods.”  Even though the gods want Clytaemestra dead, Orestes knows that somehow there will be revenge for his mother, and the hounds of wrath will come at him.  This shows how difficult it is to pass judgment on someone that is close to us, and also shows the cycle of death and revenge that is occurring.  Orestes does not leave with peace and the passage suggests that he will be tormented with the thought of his actions for the rest of his life.  The entire play, actually, does not end with closure for the chorus says, “Now again, for the third time, has the tempest of this clan burst on the royal house and run its course. First, at the beginning, came the cruel woes of children slain for food; next, the fate of a man, a king, when the warlord of the Achaeans perished, murdered in his bath. And now, once again, there has come from somewhere a third, a deliverer, or shall I say a doom? Oh when will it finish its work, when will the fury of calamity, lulled to rest, find an end and cease?”  The cycle can never end, and for Orestes he will forever be tormented by his actions.  Maybe that is the revenge he must pay for his killing of his mother. 

P.S. I commented on Gary Hamner’s Justified

-Susan Berner

Man's Administration of Justice

In our discussion groups today we discussed Orestes and his agony as he faced the aftermath of his decisions. The text seems to speak to this 'justice' as being more like revenge. One sees that acts done in retaliation are viewed as revenge instead of justice because the only true way for justice to be administered is impartially. In no way is Orestes capable of impartiality--nor could any man, really. There must be a higher standard to appeal to justice, yet even the gods seem inadequate in this endeavor. The gods are just more powerful messed up versions of humans. Perhaps this is the real cry of the greek culture: what is the meaning true justice, and where can it be found? 

Orestes.

                Today in class we discussed which of the three different murder scenarios is the worst (And yes, I’m counting the “sacrifice” of Agamemnon’s daughter as murder). I don’t necessarily think that any of them could be simplified that way. But what I did see in The Libation Bearers a lot of justifications that really were masking over guilt. Orestes tries to cover up his revenge as justice. First of all,  the way that justice is depicted doesn’t even sound just, Orestes says “ —it stabs deeps, the edge cuts through and through and Justice drives it—Outrage still lives on,”. This description doesn’t even sound remotely like justice, it is pure rage driven revenge. But I feel like that’s obvious and doesn’t interest me as much as his reaction to the killing of his mother. It’s this reaction that makes me think that he is feeling a lot guiltier than his justifications would allow him to admit. There’s a scene where he is talking about the blood and it’s very reminiscent of Lady Macbeth’s reaction to the murders in Macbeth. The leader talking to Orestes says, “The blood’s still wet on your hands. It puts a kind of frenzy in you…”. Orestes is going a little crazy because of his guilt.

commented on Skylars.

Clytaemnestra: the original Lady Macbeth?

During our group discussion in class today, there were a couple of scenes and aspects of The Oresteia that made me think of Macbeth.  The scene where Orestes winds up going mad because of the murder of his mother, makes me think of Lady Macbeth and Macbeth. This is because they both wind up going insane and start seeing things shortly after murdering the king.  Lady Macbeth winds up sleepwalking and always has dreams of the blood still being on her hands and Macbeth winds up seeing ghosts.  Both in the end are killed which is similar to the cycle of revenge found in The Oresteia.

One comparison that someone in our discussion group pointed out struck me. It is how the characters of Lady Macbeth and Clytaemnestra are very similar.  Both seem to be very aggressive and willing to take action where most women would wait for the man to take charge.  Lady Macbeth actually wishes at one point that she is a man so she can commit the murder herself because Macbeth is very hesitant.  In the same way, when Clytaemnestra hears about a disturbance in her house, she yells  out, "Hand me the man-axe, someone, hurry!" She doesn't hesitate at all to take up arms to defend her house. Also, Orestes hesitates when killing his mother, but never do we read about Clytaemnestra hesitating before killing her own husband.  Another similarity is how Lady Macbeth and Clytaemnestra were the main planners of the murders they each committed.  Even though Macbeth is the one who killed the king, Lady Macbeth is the one planning everything, just as Clytaemnestra had her husband's murder all planned out and even committed the crime herself.  Also, in the end they both are disturbed by dreams after the murders.  So, was the character of Lady Macbeth based off of Clytaemnestra?  I guess we will never know, but it is kind of odd how similar the plays of Macbeth and The Oresteia are fairly similar.

P.S. commented on Rebekah Dye's Clytaemnestra vs. Penelope.

Clytaemestra

I do not like Clytaemestra as a character, but when I really think about it, I find myself feeling sorry for her.  The pain of losing a child is enormous, and accompanied by the fact that her husband was to blame, I can somewhat understand her behavior.  After the death of Ifigenia, Clytaemestra became obsessed with hurting Agamemnon in every way she possibly could. Even her relationship with Aegisthus is an insult far beyond a simple affair because of the family's past.  She was determined to not only strip Agamemnon of his life, but also of his honor.  In her eyes, a normal death was to good for him.  She wanted him to die disgraced, likely in an attempt to lessen the pain she felt due to the loss of her daughter.  

Commented on Gary Hamner's "Justified"

The Consequences of Murder

Is there ever a justification for murder? Yes, one can study the motives behind a murder, but it is still a murder. No matter what the motive may be, for justice, power, or revenge, a life has been taken. Ending a life affects a person tremendously. Although we do not get to witness Agamemnon after he sacrifices his daughter, I believe he might have genuinely grieved for her loss. Orestes even hesitates before killing his mother and says, "What will I do, Pylades?- I dread to kill my mother!" (line 886). Maybe that hesitation was a warning that he should have paid attention to instead of ignoring. In the end, Orestes loses his mind. The act of murder has left him undone. I see Lady Macbeth in this. She encourages the murder of King Duncan for different reasons, but in the end, she loses her mind. She walks through the house in her sleep constantly trying to wash the blood from her hands. She may have gained the power she sought but in the act she lost her soul. I think Mel Gibson's character Benjamin Martin from The Patriot phrases this dilemma perfectly, "I have long feared that my sins would return to visit me and the cost is more than I can bear."

P.S. I commented on Mallory's post. 

Quality of Mercy

It’s funny how all my classes and extracurricular activities seem to mesh together into one big net of indistinguishable subjects and themes. This week we’ve talked about the cycle of revenge and how it can really never end unless someone decides to forgive, or extend mercy. In rehearsals for the Shakespeare play we’re putting on 4 weeks from now, November 1^st-4th (shameless MOV plug!), we’ve been discussing the quality of mercy. As a matter of fact, Mercy is the central theme of Merchant of Venice.

So, why does Orestes not offer his mother mercy when she, albeit in a roundabout way, asks for him to extend mercy? Is it because he believes he doesn’t have a choice since Apollo has told him to kill his mother? Perhaps. But what do we as Christians believe about mercy? Do we believe that revenge trumps mercy? Or do we believe that mercy trumps revenge? What should we believe about mercy?

I can’t tell you for sure what I would believe if I were in a situation like Orestes, or even Shylock, Antonio, or Portia from Merchant. What I do know is this, mercy is not something to be taken lightly. God extended His mercy to us when he had every right to condemn us all to an eternity separated from Him.

Tantum e tenebris receptum constabit,

~Meghan

PS. I commented on Malory’s blog “Orestes, Hamlet, Simba, and Socrates”

How do you rank murder?

When reading over the plays in class, we were trying to discuss which murder was the most evil by looking at the motives, the background, and the actual crime, but to really get an idea of the standards the Greeks had for justice we have to look at the background of what these crimes would have meant to them.  The killing of Agamemnon’s daughter is absolutely horrific; breaking the bonds of parents and children, but it was something that could be understood in the Greek culture.  After all, over and over we see the gods telling people to do something, and they do it.  They don’t question the morals of the action so much, because the responsibility is taken off of them.  The same is seen in the murder of Clytemnestra, it was absolutely horrible, but willed by the gods.  The murder of Agamemnon is different, for while Clytemnestra claimed it was his fate to be killed, we never see the gods commanding her to kill him.  Also, the way in which she chose to kill him tore down all of the honor for which he fought so hard and long for.  After all, was he remembered as the great warrior and king throughout history?  No, he’s remembered as that guy who was brutally murdered by his wife and her lover.  By killing him, Clytemnestra did not merely slay her husband, as horrible as that is, she also took away everything he had fought for and spit in his face before killing him in the most humiliating way.

P.S. Commented on Michelle's post "Bloody Cycle of Revenge."

Revenge.

Revenge comes at a price. The question is it really worth it in the end? Agamenmon kills Clymnestra daughter and in revenge Clymnestra  kills Agamenmon . Orestes kills Clymnestra because of everything  else. So in the end everyone pretty much dies due to revenge. If Agamenmon cared more about his family than the war then he would not have killed his daughter, and his family would still be alive. but if the other two had not let revenge take them over, then it would not have ended badly for them. Clymnestra would still be alive and Orestes would still have is family. So In the end, is it worth it? The answer to that is no.

PS I commented on michelle nellsch's a bloody cycle of revenge

Clytaemnestra vs. Penelope

When we were going through The Odyssey I had a blog post about Penelope because she seemed like such a classy lady to me. Now we're dealing with Clytaemnestra...who is just a psycho. She is the complete opposite of Penelope!
Penelope waited 20 years for her husband to return home to her. She did everything in her power to avoid other men who wanted her. Clytaemnestra couldn't even make it 10 years. She cheated on her husband and then killed him in cold blood when he finally returned home.
People said that Clytaemnestra's killing was because Agamemnon had killed their daughter, and although that might have been part of it, I think it was mainly because she was just crazy!
Sir Walter Scott says, "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive". In other words, one lie leads to another lie, which leads to another lie, and so on and so forth. This can relate back to Clytaemnestra. Her anger towards Agamemnon over the death of their daughter was only the start of it. But as her anger grew and grew, it lead way to her committing bigger "sins", if you will, and eventually leading her to commit adultery and then murder him.


P.s. I commented on Michelle Nellsch's "Bloody cycle of revenge"

Orestes, Hamlet, Simba and Socrates.

I loved the Libation Bearers. I kept referring to Hamlet in my mind, and also the Lion King. I just couldn't stop drawing comparisons.  I think maybe that's because this story of family struggle and power struggle is so universal. I really wonder why that is. This idea of revenge/justice, of restoring things through blood. I mean that's in every culture. I just don't understand why. Why does Orestes make so much sense to me? He's a Hamlet to me. He wants to avenge his father's death and set everything to right, but the only way to do that is through murder which undos him.
Is there some way that justice can happen without revenge? I mean could Orestes have somehow gone home and made everything right without killing his mom and her lover? Or is it that had he failed, he would have failed while attempting to do the right thing, which is better.
I am reading the Republic right now and we're discussing how it is better to be Just even if it means having nothing in life, rather than being unjust and successful. Maybe Orestes should have left everything alone?
It's very confusing, and it all blends together in my mind.

Bloody cycle of revenge

I noticed that during the discussion in class, the murders were claimed as destiny or fate. Each murder spawned the next, creating a never ending cycle of revenge. It first started with Atreus, then Agamemnon, his wife, and finally Orestes. Just like in the bible, Cain kills Abel out of rage and pride and murder was born. This creature feeds on hate, rage, and jealousy. Never satisfied, it ravenously devours everthing in its path. This tragedy seems to so far tell how murder reaks havok on not just a family, but to everyone and everything.

Justified

     The question was asked in class "which killing in the Aeschylus trilogy has been the worst?" That is a great question and we talked about it a lot, but I have another question. Which killing was the most justified?
     Mallory said in class that there are two ways to look at the justification of the killings, now weather or not these are the same two classifications that Mallory used I cant remember, but I think you can either justify the killings by saying that the gods condoned it therefore it is justified, or you can test the justification through ethics. Now if your basing your justification on what the gods say then I believe that Orestes' killing of his mother was the most justified because not only was he avenging his fathers murder, but he also had the "ok" given by Apollo, which would then classify Orestes' killing as justice.
       If you are trying to test the justification of the killings through ethics however, I think it is a totally different story, if you want to do it that way then I would say that Clytaemnestra's killing of Agamemnon was the most justified because Agamemnon killed his own daughter, which ethically is just down right horrible.  

PS: I commented on Mallory Searcy's "Orestes, Hamlet, Simba and Socrates"