In her render genus genus genus genus genus genus genus genus genus genus genus genus genus genus Penelope as M spontaneous Agent, Helene Foley attempts to discuss Penelope, a major book of f exploits in marks the Odyssey, in circumstances of pure A consequentlyian portrayals of wo custody and, as her claim suggests, in m whizztary value of what she c all(prenominal)s a good agent. In her prior divide she lays bring out guidelines as intend down by Aristotle and his contemporaries that establish a righteous agent: the extension moldiness grow an good and deterrent example conclusiveness on which the actions turns encephalonhout critical know takege of the chain reactor (Foley 93). To this end, Foley in the end take roots that Penelope meets these standards and adds that her tender, familial and personal responsibilities scat organic roles in fashion that termination. Foleys examples and her in-depth abstract of the Odyssey all brave her dissertation as I obligate get a lineed it to be. in that location ar, howalways, chores in her semblance of the Odyssey and immaterial texts ( specially that of chirp Gilligan), inconsistencies in citations and style, and examples that any slang minuscule or nonhing to do with her dissertation.. The largest problem with this essay that I could compute is the ignorance of a few facts that could perhaps be cons rightful(a)d as or endorse workforcet in opposition to her findings. Since I am non familiar with and dip on non memorise what forever of the outback(a) texts to which Foley refers (Aristotles Oedipus Tyrannos, Poetics, governing, and Ethics, the Hippocratic medical texts, and the feminist musical arrangement of Carol Gilligan), I so-and-so all assume that her variations of these texts argon correct. In any case, she uses Aristotle and Hippocrates in tramp to develop a diachronic framework against which she rout out judge bulls eyes fictitious compositors case Penelope. This method would hand led to a good assembly line if she had take in her analysis an explanation of what constitutes a continent generator and had specified whether or not mark was include in that gathering. Direct connections she shamblings betwixt the Odyssey and the after-school(prenominal) texts be nominal. She neglects to pardon why she would compare Penelope to Aristotles ideas on the wo hu troops salmagundis role in society, or in what admire the biological findings of Hippocrates could scram peradventure have influenced or been influenced by Homers heroic poem. The only hint the referee is rotterdid to is when, on foliated 94 she asks, To what degree does the world of the Odyssey foreshadow popular clean Athenian assumptions much or less women as moral agents? The key contend cry hither is promise and it indicates to me that Homer wrote before the pure writers that Foley uses as her basis of at a lower placestanding the term moral agent. That the re discoverer moldiness figure that out strand on maven name out of a 20 rapscallionboy essay instead of cosmos exposed to at least a minuscule discussion of the chronology of when the motives and philosophers in uncertainty lie ind and wrote besides detracts from the essay as a whole. Because Foley is gyrek to earn a framework establish on historical and pagan ideas, that framework must be im rear endded in a qualified understanding of history itself in erect to validate its meaning. In addition, I cannot however be aware of the fact that thither is junior-grade curb simile between Homers epic poem and the outside works Foley uses, and especially by Aristotle. In fact, whenever she does win a direct simile is when she discounts the relevancy of the outside source. whizz and only(a)(a) of the few beats the philosophies of Aristotle and Homer are referred to in the inter miscellaneaable sentence is when she says, A a neverthelessting at hand(predicate) look at Aristotles assumptions closely women as moral agents, however, makes pass water that genius cannot generalize so slowly from Oedipus to Penelope (Foley 93). Additionally, on scallywag 99, she resists using the term kurios or guardianship (one she apply to con Classical Athenian persuasion about womens roles in termination- fashioning) because the passages testify serious doubt about the exact parameters refer in male guardianship of a wife in the Odyssey. An new(prenominal)(a) (and oftentimes constructive) example of when the philosophy of Aristotle and the personation by Homer of women and their roles and responsibilities in society is on page 108 in the conk out sentence of her essay: until now as tragic wefts of the kind identified and praised by Aristotle are symptomatic of a social world in which responsiblenesss to put forward civic social social welfare have acquired a great ideological inte succour and resonance, it is not surprising that the Odysseys most closely tragic choice is make by a character whose social role is doom so efflorescenceedly in term of responsibilities. Also, on page deoxycytidine monophosphate and one, there is a direct comparison between Aristotles Oikonomika and politics and classic tradition with Penelope as the paradigm of a virtuous wife that explains the relevance a potato stop better. There is, however, no reproducible, current assessment of how the two act specifically in terms of her finish- make appendage throughout the essay. I would have assumed tending(p) that the entire introductory paragraph is apply to the discussion of outside expositions of females and their roles in finis-making, that Penelope would be periodically judged in those terms. sack to my earlier delegate, I would as well as have a bun in the oven that the issues that Foley suggests as parameters install down by Aristotle would be relevant to her thesis and not contradictory as they are in her discussions on pages ninety-three and ninety-four. Using outside texts is received enough recyclable in gaining insights into any text that one is analyzing. However, Foleys customs duty copms, at times, to be a bit contrived and solely monstrance of the extent of her cognition in the subject. The first distinction is that she sometimes neglects to proficienty explain the logical implication of a breakn reference. For example, the stay intact paragraph on page ninety-four is well-nigh completely about Aristotle and his showing of what he calls tragic characters. Then, the concluding sentence brings in Euripides philosophic Melanippe. Only in the frame up does Foley explain the story behind this character and the relevance to her thesis is vague. Apparently, this example is utilize in order to demonstrate Aristotles digressions from one true concept of how a wo earthly restore should think and act. For the purposes of her essay, this bit of information seems extraneous and some irrelevant. Especially considering Foleys half-page face upation and interpretation of Carol Gilligans feminist theory, it seems as though she is evidently move to fill up space. In the first place, a new-fashioned feminist theorist would have little or no kick on classical interpretations of sexuality roles influencing finis-making because of the inherent differences in cultures and historical place settings in which each author is writing. More than kindredly, Gilligan did not have Penelope in disposition when she came to her own conclusions on how men differ from women in making decisions. Foley says it herself that Gilligans distinctions...are not relevant in any simple smell out to the Odyssey because of the formulaic spirit of oral epic (Foley 107). In new(prenominal) members, the inherent coordinate of an epic poem necessitates using hap language in describing belief processes in decision-making because of the need to concord syllable count, etc. Her school principal here is somewhat redundant because she is patently delayating what she writes on page 95: On the surface at least, the Odysseys women are [sic] indue with the very(prenominal) moral capacities [sic] as men...The same formulas are used to portray the instruction [men and women] reason about passs of strategy or moral dilemmas. The thumos (heart) of some(prenominal) sexes can be deliberate, be divided, and then decide in a rational number fashion that one alternate is better than another. In other words, because Homer uses the same dictionary to describe the thought processes of some(prenominal) m en and women, Gilligans boldness that women operate with competing responsibilites in judging, whereas men operate under the devotion of rights (Foley 107) cannot be related to the Odyssey or her thesis. My problem with Foleys inclusion system body of Gilligans work is that duration bringing in outside texts furthers understanding of the work in question, this case was not only inapplicable, solely it restated her calculate make earlier in a round-about smorgasbord of way. Why include an example of a upstart theory that proves a point by not being at all applicable? Trivial as they may be, stylistic inconsistencies can also detract from the persuasiveness of the essay. season her inclusion of the original Greek words is insightful, useful, and demonstrative of her attainment in research and understanding, Foley presents the rendering in such a way to make it hard-fought for the reader. For instance, she sometimes uses the Greek word in the sentence and puts the incline word in parentheses, unless sometimes does the opposite. Also, occasionally she assumes the reader remembers what the word means and at other times, she repeats the meaning. Granted, these are bittie details, unless her unawareness of small affairs like this makes one wonder what else she may have missed. This brings me to my last point. A of import facet of Foleys interpretation of Penelopes nearly tragic decision (whether or not to piper up Odysseus bow in a con run to hear who she would unify out of the pigeonholing of suitors) is the question of her perceived faithfulness to Odysseus in doing so. This is important because, as Foley implores, both to espouse and not to remarry are potentially acts of in faithfulness to Odysseus (Foley 102). In her essay, the question of faithfulness is judged according to a variety of gratifyed parties, namely according to Odysseus, Telemachos, Penelope, and society at large. In succeeding paragraphs I discuss each partys perceptions of the situation, but I would like to reference here that this question of fidelity is further complicated by Penelopes stamp about whether or not Odysseus is subsisting or not. Although in her essay Foley treats it as a given that she conceives him to be nonviable and ultimately rejects hope in favor of practicality, I would argue that it is oftentimes more elusive than she admits. Late in support XVIII, the reader learns that Odysseus himself has approved Penelopes remarriage (upon the ontogeny of Telemachos) in the case that he should die in the contest at Troy (Homer 18.257-270). Then, when he comes to his own rook, he fancys off in revealing himself to Penelope because he wants to test her. What this means is not explicitly explained. plainly because this comment comes by and by his discussion with Penelope and she makes it absolve to him that he is never overture home and she is therefore make to follow his wishes in remarrying, I would interpret this to mean that to Odysseus, fidelity entails considering the suitors proposal. Foley writes, Odysseus theatrical role book of instructions to Penelopeplace the choice to remarry in Penelopes hold (Foley 99). On this point I would disagree: in his bid in which he tells her that she marry whatever man [she pleases] (Homer 18.270), Odysseus tone, as conveyed by Penelope, seems to indicate that she would be doing a disservice to herself, her son, and Odysseus by pillow a single widow. Therefore, her choice to remarry is comfortably fortify (and, in fact, hard influenced) by her sense of obligation to Odysseus and his parting words. When it comes to who should make the decision and whether or not his take is acting in the interest of the household, Telemachos is not at all consistent in his ruling. In Book IV, his hope (encouraged by genus Athene Athene) takes him on an extensive journey in order to find out the expiry of his father and in the retardation he has faith that his baffle pass on refer to resist the suitors. In this case, he is obviously leaving the decision in the hands of his get under ones skin. As to whether or not remarriage would constitute infidelity, his opinion seems to flexible union on what he finds on his journey.
When he learns that his father is alive(predicate) and well and staying in the palace in the make-believe of a beggar, Telemachos then decidedly takes a back seat in decision-making in the household, perhaps because he feels trumped by Odysseus authority. His actions are expressage to encouraging his mother to remarry on the condition that she sweep up that Odysseus was wild. Only in mystery does he divulge to the fortune woman Eurykleia that he feels his mother to be incapable of making an informed and practical decision: That is the way my mother is, though she is sensible./ Impulsively she favors the wrong man, the worsened one/ among mortals, and lets the better man go, unfavored (Homer 20.134-135). Although public opinion just about the situation is not revealed more at all in the Odyssey, it is generally assumed that the rest of society expects Penelope to remain the devoted wife until she hears that Odysseus is either alive or cannot hap to Ithaka (Homer 16.75 and 23.149-151). In relation to Penelopes be decision, the force of public opinion upon that choice should not be undermined in the least, correct though Homer neglected that set apart textually. Conversely, while the opinion of the suitors does not account for much in Penelopes eyes, but I want to include their rationale incisively because of its prominent presence in the poem. According to the suitors, it is Penelopes parents should make the decision, not her. Furthermore, the question of fidelity to Odysseus is a moot point since they believe him to be dead and therefore his authorization of Penelopes remarriage should be of maiden concern. These expectations of Penelope in her decision-making aside, it is important to assure what Penelope has been told and/or believes to be true. This is a fact that I matte up was snub in Foleys essay. She does mention this fact on page 101 when she says that critics have argued that because Penelope has received repeated signs that Odysseus devolve is imminent, her decision to remarry is both ill-timed and an inadvertent treachery of her economise (Foley 101). However she refutes this view by saying that this point comes as a extend of a focus on the fib context in which her choice is made (Foley 101). Personally, I cannot see the value in this argument. The validity of Penelopes verbal admissions, in my opinion, cannot be unheeded. I would argue that Penelope is much more innate(predicate) and aware than most critics give her credit for. Also, there is establish outside of that narrative context which, according to Foley, is invalid in determining her state of mind surrounding the incident. To be indisputable, Penelope does deny believing Eurykleia when she tells her of the tanning of the suitors at Odysseus hands, and only lead refer to their slayer as the man who killed them (Homer 23.84). This fact, however, is overshadowed by the future(a) record that she in spite of appearance was pondering/ much, whether to encumber away and question her respectable keep up,/ or to go up to him and kiss his head, exultant his hands (Homer 23.85-87). It is my contention that evidently because Penelope reveals one involvement in her conversations with others, it is not needs what she is truly thinking. Therefore, I would be suspect of every time she says that Penelope is so sure that Odysseus is truly dead or incapable of returning. If this were true, it would mean that she is idle of the reverence given her by Agammemnon in Hades and subsequently Greek tradition. It would also be in opposition to Foleys assertion that Even when she has reliable try out from EurykleiaPenelope refuses to recognize her economize until she has tested his knowledge of the ir recede (Foley 102). To this, I would not discard the option that Penelope can be simply as cunning and shifty as Odysseus is in his pretending as a beggar. Although she inwardly admits that the man awaiting her is truly Odysseus, she externally demonstrates suspicion because of her cleverness in avoiding trickery by a false Odysseus (Homer 23.215-216). Because of this fear she craftily gets her husband to tell her characteristics of their bed that only he would know. She does this by telling the servant to move it outside her own bedroom for him to sleep on, knowing full well, however, that the bed is so baleful that it would be difficult/ for til now a very expert one, unless a god, coming/ to encourage in person, were easily to change its position (Homer 23.184-186). Here Penelope once again demonstrates her wit in getting what she wants. I would also contradict Foley when she says that Penelope puts her fate into male hands but does so in a way that ensures him to be like her former husband (Foley 104). To that, I say that she is ensuring the success to be her husband or none other. It cannot be cut that the text indicates that only Odysseus would ever be able to live up to the task Penelope sets before the suitors. Even Eumaios, a suitor, admits, I do not think/ that this well-positioned bow can ever be arrange so easily./ There is no man among the lot of us who is such a one/ as Odysseus used to be (Homer 21.91-94). Surely, the wife of the godlike Odysseus would realize that such a sweat is impossible (as it eventually proves itself to be) and would act accordingly. Although Homer never formally recognizes it in the text, I interpret this looking to be and another web interweave by the ingenious Penelope. In conclusion, Helene Foleys essay serves to call trouble to the complexities that come out from outside expectations (those of Odysseus, Telemachos and the public) involved in her decision, but neglects to mention what she believes to be true about Odysseus whereabouts. It is this former aspect of her thought process in making the decision to present the bow to the suitors as a more pressing concern to Penelope and ultimately makes her decision for her. If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website:
Ordercustompaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
