Final Exam Paper, due by December 9th

The Final Exam paper is pasted below if you missed class on Tuesday (or simply lost it). Note the due date: no late papers will be accepted since grades are due very soon after this! Let me know if you have any questions. 

Humanities 2113

Final Exam Paper: Echoes of Tragedy

On our last day of class, I asked you to respond to the following question:

“Who do you think the Oedipuses, Medeas, Jocastas, and Jasons are today? What makes them similar, and what makes them tragic? Are these people the equivalent of heroes and kings and queens? Or can tragedies be about even ‘nobodies’ today? Can anyone’s suffering be tragic with the right approach or storyteller?  Where have you heard their stories, and why do people relate to them?”

And that’s the very subject I want you to write about in your Final Exam paper. Find a modern tragedy, or a modern tragic figure(s) who you think echoes some of the tragedies we’ve read about in Hamilton, Medea, and/or Oedipus Rex. How are we telling some of the same stories, about some of the same characters, in tragedies that sound (to some extent) remarkably the same? How do modern tragedies remind us that the story remains the same…only the names and locations change? Your modern example doesn’t have to be exactly like one of the plays or myths, but it should have some slight resemblance to a character, an idea, a struggle, or a theme of those works.

Your paper should do the following things:

• Clearly explain the modern tragedy or tragic figure, and explain why you read their story as tragic, rather than just as unfortunate or sad. What makes it a story for the ages, that could teach us lessons about our own humanity through pain and suffering?
• Make a SPECIFIC connection to one of the works in class, whether one of the tragic myths in Hamilton, or one of the plays. You can do more than one, but you must do at least one. QUOTE from the text and help us see how the modern tragedy is a slight (or a clear) echo of the older work.
• Assume that you’re writing to someone who doesn’t know either tragedy, so explain it in a way that teaches your readers about it. Don’t assume, and don’t skim over the important details. Imagine yourself in the role of a teacher: what would you have to explain to make the ideas stick?

DUE NO LATER THAN FRIDAY, DECEMBER 9^th BY 5pm

For Thursday: Greek Tragedy, Sophocles' "Oedipus Rex"

Read the second play in the Greek Tragedy, "Oedpius Rex" that begins on page 71. Remember, this play is based on the events of Oedipus recounted in the "Royal House of Thebes" chapter that we read for Tuesday. Since you know the overall plot, pay attention to how Sophocles tells the story, and what he specifically focuses on that Hamilton couldn't include in her brief summary of the overall myth. 

Answer two of the following:

Q1: How does the Chorus differ in this play compared to Medea? Does it have more of an active role in this play? Or is it merely watching the play unfold from the sidelines? Does it tell us how to feel or think about the characters? Does it share privileged information with us, or is it just as clueless as we are?

Q2: When Oedipus threatens Creon with death for (in his eyes) betraying him with a false prophecy, the Leader tells him that "Quick thinkers can stumble," and that he should think carefully before acting. Oedipus responds that "when a conspirator moves/abruptly and in secret against me...I must out-plot him and strike first." What does this response reveal about Oedipus' philosophy in life? Why is he so impulsive and quick to judgement? 

Q3: Both Oedipus and Jocasta are quick to dismiss prophecy, and Jocasta even tells her husband that "In their very dreams, too, many men/have slept with their mothers./Those who believe such things mean nothing/will have an easier time in life." This is a strange passage, since it suggests that it is better not to question things or to know what they mean. Is that the true message of the play: that it's better to live with a lie than die with the truth? In a sense, do you think she has always guessed the truth, and simply preferred to lie to herself? Is happiness always based on not knowing?  

Q4: In the chapter about "The House of Atreus," we learnt that later authors, such as Euripides, claimed that "if the gods do evil they are not gods." But aren't the events of this play evil? Didn't the gods curse Oedipus to destroy his own family and ruin the kingdom of Thebes? Or does this play and its events have nothing to do with the gods at all? Is this another example of men blaming their bad decisions on the gods? 

For Tuesday: Hamilton, Mythology: Part 5, Chapters 17 & 18

For Monday's class, we'll take one more look at our Mythology book to read about the Royal Houses of Atreus and Thebes. Both of them play into two plays in our book, Agamemnon and Oedipus Rex. 

Read Part 5, Chapter 17 "The House of Atreus" and Chapter 18 "The Royal House of Thebes" (pp.354-393)--it reads quickly, so don't worry! 

Answer two of the following: 

Q1: One of the most common themes in many myths (including The Odyssey) is when people "thought [themselves] strong enough not only to deceive the gods...but to defy them openly" (349). Why do you think the Greeks were so obsessed with this plot device? Why, in a world of gods and torments, would people keep testing them?

Q2: Orestes is a bit like Hamlet, written so many centuries later: both men have to avenge the untimely murder of their fathers. However, unlike Hamlet, Orestes faces a moral dilemma that makes Agamemnon one of the greatest Greek tragedies. What is this dilemma, and why is it a riddle without a solution (unlike the Sphinx's riddle in Oedipus)? 

Q3: Hamilton reminds us that "The thirst for blood--It is in their flesh. Before the old wound Can be healed, there is fresh blood flowing" (353). Why do the innocent children of people who defy or anger the gods have to be punished for the sins of their fathers? Wouldn't this be an example of sacrifice, which the Greeks felt would disqualify any god from being a true deity? Or does this have a more allegorical meaning?

Q4: In drama, tragedy usually results when people make important decisions in ignorance, or without enough context/information to foresee the results. And yet, every story in this book has at its heart a prophecy, usually from the Oracle at Delphi, where Apollo would tell people the future through a riddle. If the characters knew the future in every story, why do they still make such tragic mistakes? Why might a prophecy be its own form of blindness in one or more of these stories? 

For Thursday: Euripides, Medea, Part 2

 NOTE: Since we're a little behind on the schedule, we're going to spend another day discussing Medea in class, so if you haven't finished it, please do! I'll give you an in-class writing over it on Thursday--not a Reading Exam, exactly--to help us discuss some of the larger issues of the play. 

I'll also allow you to turn in your Medea questions by Thursday if you haven't done them already (and many of you haven't!). So please be careful and don't fall behind at the end of the semester.

Take care and see you on Thursday! 

For Thursday, Greek Tragedy: Euripides, Medea (see note)

NOTE: Remember, I have to cancel class on Thursday due to the Interscholastic Meet, which will take over the entire building on Thursday. So we'll reconvene on Tuesday to discuss our next work, the Greek tragedy, Medea. 

If you want to know more about the backstory to this play, read pages 160-180 in Hamilton's Mythology on "The Quest of the Golden Fleece." Basically, this is the story of the Greek hero Jason's quest to obtain the magic Golden Fleece, and how Medea, the daughter of King AEetes helps him obtain it, sacrificing her own family--and literally, her own brother--to save him. According to the myths, while they were being chased by her father in ships, "Medea herself struck her brother down and cutting him limb from limb cast the pieces into the sea. The King stopped to gather them, and the Argo (his ship) was saved" (Hamilton 175). However, once they return successfully to Greece and have a few kids, Jason decides to marry for money and cast her off to start a new family. The play, Medea, is about her revenge against Jason for forcing her to abandon her family simply to be abandoned in the end. 

So read the play and then answer two of the following as always:

Q1: What is the role of the Chorus in the play? Unlike a song, the Chorus is actually a character that both talks to the audience and interacts with the characters. What relationship does the Chorus seem to have with Medea, and why is it a necessary/important voice in the drama? Think about the role of tragedy in general as we discussed on Tuesday.

Q2: How does Medea compare to some of the dangerous women in The Odyssey, such as Calypso and Circe? How does Euripides characterize her as a woman, rather than merely as a myth or a 'witch'? Are we supposed to feel sympathy for her?

Q3: Similarly, how might Jason compare to other heroes in The Odyssey, such as Odysseus and Telemachus? Is he the true victim in this play, or like Odysseus, another cunning trickster/deceiver? How much credence should we give to Medea's lament in the play that "when a man is base, how can we know?/Why is there no sign stamped upon his body?" 

Q4: In this play, we almost expect something to stop Medea from killing her children or someone to reconcile the two, almost like Zeus in Book 24 of The Odyssey. Instead, the unthinkable happens, and Jason cries out, "the gods have sent the vengeance/that you deserve to crash down on my head." Why is Medea allowed to escape without punishment or penalty? Why do only the children die in this play? Is this justice...or is it like The Odyssey, the strange will of the gods? 

Class on Tuesday: No Reading, but Introduction to Greek Tragedy

 NOTE: We DO have class on Tuesday, though there is no scheduled reading. Instead, I want to give an introduction to Greek Tragedy before we start reading two Greek Dramas to round out the class. Be sure you have the book Greek Tragedy before we start reading for our next classes. 

Your papers will be returned to you via e-mail in the next few days, so keep checking your e-mail. If you don't get my comments back by Thursday, please let me know (since it might have been blocked/gone to spam). 

See you on Tuesday! 

For Tuesday: Finish The Odyssey, Books 23 & 24 (and see Note about Tuesday's class/due date for paper)

NOTE: Remember that I changed the schedule to give you an extra class day to work on the paper. So we DO have class on Tuesday, but not on Thursday, the 27th, when the paper is now due. The paper assignment is posted a few posts down from this one.

Answer two of the following for Tuesday's class:

Q1: In Book 23, Telemachus accuses his mother of having a heart “colder than stone,” and even Odysseus claims that she has “more than…any/Other woman, an unyielding heart.” How does Penelope defend herself against these charges, and why might she have continued to test Odysseus to the very end?

Q2: After the slaughter, Odysseus, much more clear-headed, informs his son that “When someone kills just one man,/Even a man who has few to avenge him,/He goes into exile, leaving country and kin” (217-218). Do you think Odysseus is ready to act ‘heroically’ here and take responsibility for his heinous actions? Or is he still looking for a way to get off scot-free?

Q3: In Book 24, Zeus solves the problem of revenge by making the islanders conveniently forget Odysseus’ crimes. This way, they can “live in friendship as before,/And let peace and prosperity abound” (241). Is this a satisfying or even fair ending to the poem? Why do you think the gods would take such an active role in the story when they typically only advise or create illusions?

Q4: Some scholars believe that Book 24 is not one of the original books of the epic, but was tacked on by a later writer or tradition. Besides the strange intrusion by Zeus, why else might this book sound ‘off’ compared to the rest of the story?