Throughout the play the Furies where trying to gain revenge by killing Orestes for killing his own mother. The Furies believed that blood must be paid with blood for and gruesome act as killing your own mother. The Furies cross-examine Orestes on the charges that he committed. Orestes admits that he killed his mother, and says that he did so following the commands of Apollo, which got his commands from the God Zeus. He also says that his mother had it coming to her (because she killed Agamemnon, Orestes's father). Now the Furies question Apollo. Apollo backs up everything that Orestes says, and elaborates on Orestes's point that his mother wasn't related to him. Apollo says that mothers are only incubators of embryos, and that only fathers are truly parents are uses Athena as an example of how mothers aren’t needed to birth a child. Apollo expressed the importance of relying on the law instead of revenge and the important things that are on the line. According to the book, “ The Ballots are out, make a careful count, be fair, have respect for justice as you divide the votes. An ill judged verdict could cause great harm, and a single vote can restore a mighty house” (Line 748).
The play “The Furies” shows that law is better than revenge because all facts of a case must be examined before a decision can be made on punishment for crimes committed. The furies wanted to kill Orestes mainly because he killed his own mother and that kind of crime could only be paid with blood, but
Athena first addresses Apollo's argument of the superiority of paternity, but she allows compromise by never fully admitting that Clytemnestra's murder was morally justified. Initially, Athena announces, "I approve the male in all things...
Orestes is the first person who is trying to change the system and realizes it must be changed for the gods and the Furies to spare his life. Revenge as justice has one major problem,
As proof of his theory, he points to Athena, the goddess who came to life from Zeus's forehead, living proof that" the father can father forth without a mother" (Furies, 673). Here, Apollo thoroughly follows the typical patriarchal strategy of denying women their rights and pushing them to the alienated boundaries of society by trying to make marriage more sanctified and unchanged than the parent-child relationship and in denying the mother's support in the offspring of a marriage. Athena, the reigning judge at the trial, is moved by a very different purpose, but she, also, supports the concept of male superiority like Apollo. It is true that her primary concern is for peace and an order of justice that will ensure peace. This implies that
Have you ever acted out in retribution for something done to you? Some examples could be if you punched someone for intentionally kicking you, or if someone deliberately hurt the feelings of someone you love and you retaliated in kind. You probably thought the punishment you received for your actions was too harsh or lenient. Many factors went into the decision of what discipline you received for this act and some were fair while others probably were not. This is true for the actions of many people in Aeschylus’s Oresteia. In each of the three plays, someone is seeking vengeance for a wrong done unto them, someone they know/love, or both. For this paper, I will be focusing on the vengeance enacted by Clytemnestra, Orestes, and the Fates. The vengeance that each person enacted was deemed just or unjust depending on many factors including the people who were doing the judging. Vengeance in Aeschylus’s Oresteia is viewed through the social lens of the society that it was enacted in. This lens is made up of the popular values, beliefs, and social conventions of the period as well as the judge’s personal views and/or experiences. These factors (such as gender and relation to the victim, as well as the presence or absence of transgressions on the characters part) lead to different opinions about the guilt of the accused individual and the individual themselves. The view of vengeance in Aeschylus’s Oresteia is very subjective.
In the Oresteia, revenge drives the characters to act. Although they call it justice, it is not. Aeschylus uses net imagery to symbolize faith and destiny. When Clytemnestra murders Agamemnon and Cassandra, the net imagery acts as a symbol of terrible fate. However, then fate reverse. Now, Orestes is caught in Apollo’s net and kills his own mother. Lastly, Athene changes the meaning of the net from one of chaos to that of order and justice. These uses of the net imagery help the reader focus on a crucial theme in the play: the superiority of a formal justice system to one based on the individual quest for revenge by progressively altering the nets meaning and its affect on those around it.
In modern society humans stand up and fight for what they think is right and fair. Human beings have the desire to avenge what they think is wrong. The theme of revenge has a major effect in the play Hamlet and is a constant throughout the play, it underlies almost every scene. In the play Hamlet, William Shakespeare examines the theme of revenge through the erratic thoughts and actions of the characters Hamlet, Laertes, and Fortinbras. The main revenge plots in the play is Hamlet’s aim to avenge his father, Hamlet Sr, Laertes’ aim to avenge the murder of his father, Polonius, and Fortinbras’ aim to avenge the death of his father, Fortinbras. Having lost their fathers, Hamlet, Laertes and Fortinbras take vengeance on the people that killed them. These plots play a major role in the play presenting the theme of revenge to the audience.
The relevance and significance of the revenge tragedy is in the way it explores human nature and forces audiences to evaluate ideologies such as revenge and justice. The concept of revenge is accompanied by moral conflict and Shakespeare demonstrates that by acting immorally society is likely to be riddled with corruption. Hamlet seeks to avenge the death of his father but struggles with the ramifications of seeking righteous revenge through an immoral act. The imposition of revenge instills the existential questioning on Hamlet as it contradicts his with his social expectation. His
Justice is essential, for with a lack of justice, chaos would be brought about in society. In The Eumenides, the Furies value justice without truly being just. Throughout the play, the Furies, protectors of the law, pursue Orestes because of the crime he has committed. They yearn to "trace him by his
In the first play, Agamemnon, Clytemnestra murders Agamemnon to retaliate for the sacrifice he made of their daughter, Iphigenia. Clytemnestra did this out of revenge, since the code of getting even demanded that someone’s murder must be avenged by their close blood relative. This called for torment at the hands of the Furies, who were female divinities of a terrible frightening aspect, that came upon anyone who murdered a close blood relative. In the second play, The Libation Bearers, Orestes kills Clytemnestra to avenge the murder of Agamemnon. This act is still maintaining the revenge principle, but it is committed primarily at the instigation of Apollo. Apollo takes center-stage in the third play, The Furies, to argue in defense of Orestes in a trial supervised by Athena. This ultimately leads to the end of revenge killing and the establishment of a new order of justice based on the laws of the
However, the violent acts of reprisal do not end with Agamemnon. With this act comes a twist within the traditional system of justice. In The Libation Bearers, Orestes must choose to avenge his father's murder. The twist comes in that by avenging his father, Orestes will be committing matricide, a crime revolting to the gods and especially to the Furies. Orestes is placed in a no win situation; he must avenge his father or else be plagued by (Lib: 285-6)
The theme of Revenge has been utilized in numerous works of art throughout history, including books, plays, movies, etc. Revenge is the result of one’s desire for vengeance, however, revenge is known to be implied under high emotions of anger thus not with reason concluding with a horrible outcome. Shakespeare’s play ‘Hamlet’ is no doubt a play about a tragedy caused by revenge; Prince Hamlet’s retribution for his father, King Hamlet’s murder and Laertes vengeance for his father, Polonius’ murder. The theme of revenge in Hamlet is portrayed through various literary techniques such as foreshadowing and irony.
Retributive justice is a very common element found not only in literature but in almost all text that tries to evoke moral values. A nemetic ending is often used to provide the reader or spectator the satisfaction of seeing the hero be rewarded for his or her virtuous actions. Alternatively, the evil or malicious characters are usually punished thanks to the hero 's actions and thus brings a somewhat “happy ending” to the conflict. Many authors and playwrights would mostly hesitate to bring an unpleasant end to their stories so that the audience may leave their seats with a more positive outlook on the play. Nevertheless, it might be debatable if a standardized nemetic ending would transmit a more poignant message to the spectators, numerous plays that do not follow this norm are well known to have a very similar, if not equal, impact. To illustrate this tactic, we will mostly focus on the ending of “Snow in Midsummer” by Guan Hanqing that may end in a slightly ambiguous note rather than directly rewarding our hero Dou Er. Henceforth, we will also look over the case of Oedipus the King by Sophocles, that challenges the ideal retributive justice at the end of the play. We, as spectators, have a desire to connect with the characters and the issues they try to get through, as long as the heroes remain praiseworthy and villains fall and get defeated.
Every character plays an essential role in any story. Whether it is a protagonist, an antagonist, or a supporting character. Each personality improves the plot of the story. In the plays Hamlet by William Shakespeare and Antigone by Sophocles, Hamlet and Antigone are the tragic heroes whose need for justice are center of the novel. In this argumentative paper, I will compare both characters, Hamlet and Antigone, as they seek justice but instead achieve the role of a tragic hero.
In the opening two books of the Republic, Thrasymachus, along with Glaucon and Adeimantus, proposes fascinating arguments against the definition of justice. According to Thraysmachus, Justice, by its nature, is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger. Despite Socrates’s strong disagreement, many just and unjust incidents in Amazing Grace serve as great examples to support Thrasymachus’s view. In the following paragraphs, I am going to first summarize the arguments from Thrasymachus and Glaucon, and then analyze how the examples from Amazing Grace validate the traditional definition of justice.