Ana içeriğe atla

Character Analysis of Achilles

 

Illiyad hep incelemek istediğim bir destandı fakat hiç zaman ve enerjim olmadı. Bu incelememin içime hiç sinmese de blogumda olmasını istiyorum. Özellikle özel isimleri olabildiğince yanlış yazdım ve spell-check hiç yapmadım. 

In Homer’s last book of “The Illiyad” Archilies shows compassion and mercy which betokens an unprecedented moral development Archilies undertakes, and he transforms from a prideful selfish warrior to an almost-prudent and wiser man.Homer’s epic opens up with the chapter named “Archilies Rage” which denotes how much importance Archilies quick-tempered and immature persona plays in the plot. It is his undying pride that dooms his best-friend to meet his demise and many Archean soldiers to perish against Troy troops. To elaborate, after giving up his prize to Agamaennon Archilies refuses to participate in the war but what is worse, out of rage and remorse he prays to his goddes mother to hurt Agammenon and his marching army. He reveals his motive by saying “So all can reap the benefits of their kingso/ even mighty Atrides can see how mad he was/ to disgrace Achilles, the best of the Achaeans!" His remark unveils that his only motive in such a request is to drive Agamemnon to regret his decision and to remind everyone of his great importance. In this way, Agamemnon will have to beg Archilies to come back and Archilies will regain his precious honor. This childish reasoning is the single most important indication that Archilies is filled with pride and selfishness. Homer portrays Archilies as an unbeatable warrior that is immune to almost death. The reason for Homer’s depiction could be to signify that Archilies prideful nature could be stemming from his physical invincibility, giving him the false idea that he can’t be hurt. However, as the plot unfolds it become evident that even though he can’t be physically hurt easily, his friends death devastates him and such grief matures him eventually leading him to be able to show compassion. Hence, by depicting Archilies character similar to a child Homer is proposing that pride and selfishness are stemming from lack of reasoning and understanding. Most importantly, Homer spotlights the importance of pain and how it plays a vital role in maturing people.

Archilies compassion towards Priam is the main evidence of his emotional growth. In book 24 Priam undertakes a dangerous voyage to the camp where Archilies tent stands, to beg him of his son’s dead body. The first words Priam utters evoke empathy within Archilies “Those words stirred within Achilles a deep desire to grieve for his own father” This carries utmost importance because it is this scene where Achillies decides to selflessly go against his pride and give back Hector’s dead body. Both characters filled with grieve starts to cry together. Homer depicts such an unexpected scene to demonstrate the power of pain and grief, both characters devastated by the death of their beloved ones forget about their pride and honour. Priam puts his “lips the hands of the man who killed” his son which signifies how insignificant honour is against grief. The theme grief here is quite strange, at first it enrages Arcihilies and causes him to torment and distort the dead body of Hector. He even rejects the last wish of him and feeds him to the dogs and scavengers. Nevertheless, as time passes and when he takes a glimpse at the true reality of what grief is in the eyes of another man, he becomes more aware of death and its ramifications. Eventually grief and death mold him into a more mature character. This goes to show Homer uses grief and emotional pain to convey that maturity only comes from struggles and pain, and those who are not exposed to them cannot show empathy for others.

Yorumlar

Yorum Gönder

Bu blogdaki popüler yayınlar

Rhetoric in Hobbes' Leviathan

  Hobbes’ Word Play Hobbes argues in favor of a monarch or an oligarch. To be more precise, he is in favor of the idea that multiplicity comes with complexity, harming the integrity of the state. In his opinion, men are mostly power-driven, greedy beings who must surrender themselves to a sovereign power that can spread the terror of punishment. According to Hobbes, this fear of punishment is the only effective motivating force that can keep people from brutally murdering each other. While this Hobbesian idea of the state portrays the sovereign’s subjects almost as though they are slaves, this essay will argue that Hobbes is not fundamentally against liberty and allows it within the constraints of laws. Hobbes's description of liberty suggests that only external impediments are against freedom. He states that liberty is “the absence of external impediments” (189) and, although these impediments may take away man’s power to do what he would, they do not prevent men from using th...
1 yorum
Devamı

Rousseau on Legitimacy of State

Hobbes'dan sonra Rousseau okumayı Proust'tan sonra Daphnes ve Chloe okumaya benzetiyorum. Proust aşkı öyle yapay, çıkarcı ve öyle çirkin yansıtıyor ki, ondan sonra okuduğun her romana ister istemez Proust'un realist bakış açısından bakıyorsun. Belki de realizm sevdamı bırakmalıyımdır. Hobbes'un determinist bakış açısı da birçok argümanını epey ikna edici kılıyor. Bazen bu bakış açısından kaçmak istiyor insan. Hobbes kimmiş lan, ben ölümlü tanrıya irademi falan teslim edemem, gayet özgürüm demek istiyor. Yine de gel gör ki Hobbes haklı. Nasıl, Kant ödev ahlakında nasıl ki herkes davranışlarının topluma yansıdığını varsayarak hareket etmeli diyorsa, Hobbes da yapılmak istemediğini yapma diyor. Buna karşı çıkmak da biraz zor. Rousseau abi Social Contract'ında denese de Emile kitabındaki ikna ediciliğini devam ettiremiyor gibi hissediyorum. Birazdan okuyacak olduğun yazıda da oldukça soyut fikirler göreceksin ve yer yer kendine e ama niye diye soracaksın. Bil ki ben de ...
Yorum Gönder
Devamı

Hobbes’ Paradox

Hobbes’ Paradox Resolved According to Hobbes, people are born with passions that ultimately lead them into a never-ending war. They require artificial power to stop killing each other. Unless such a power is erected, Hobbes suggests, leaving the state of nature is impossible since people are not inclined to cooperate and trust each other. The core reason why it is impossible to leave the state of nature is because of the innate passions people have that drive them to be constantly in conflict. Hobbes states that in the condition of nature, “any reasonable suspicion” renders any covenant or promise invalid since “bonds of words are too weak to bridle men’s ambition, avarice, anger, and other passions…” (196). Here, Hobbes highlights the importance of punishments, suggesting that without the motivating fear of punishments, covenants are practically invalid. It is also important to understand what Hobbes means by the condition of nature. He argues that because men are born equal, they...
Yorum Gönder
Devamı