If the Emperor’s advisers had told him that he did not have any clothes on, then maybe his humiliation in front of his subjects would have been prevented. However, this is understandable for the advisers, because if they could not see the clothes, they would be deemed unfit for their positions. The real mystery lies in the fact that none of the adults in the crowd said a word until one child spoke up, which has a lot to say about the structure of belief in a given society. In The Flies, Jean-Paul Sartre creates the pious city of Argos whose social attitudes and traditions stand on a pillar of religion that has lasted for fifteen years. Like the child in the famous fairy-tale, Sartre exposes the religion as a farce; it is based solely on guilt …show more content…
through public confessions of the citizens. In order to save the people from a preconceived life of lamentation, Orestes breaks away from society’s conventional behavior in order to uncover the purpose in his own life, thereby leading Argos by example. Early in the play, Sartre makes it clear that the city of Argos is strongly bounded by a religious devotion to the gods of ancient Greece, specifically Zeus. The people are constantly mourning for their sins, the greatest of which was committed fifteen years ago. It was at that time that Agamemnon, the current king, returned to Argos from the Trojan War only to be murdered the same night by Clytemnestra, his wife, and Aegistheus, her lover. The city knew what was going to happen, but they “held their tongues,” looking forward to “a violent death” (52). Thus ensued Aegistheus’ reign over the kingdom, and a new way of living for the citizens: in constant lamentation. Early on, Sartre shows this constant mourning to Orestes with the first scene in which “A procession of OLD WOMEN in black, carrying urns, … make libations to the statue” (49). The black, signifying deep regret, occurs throughout the entire play representing the people’s devotion to the religion and Zeus. Their behavior of self-contempt only suggests that their sole focus is on repenting, and Sartre tries to focus on the fact that this is a good city. Meanwhile, all of this is new to Orestes because he “was nearly three when [the] usurper’s bravoes carried [him] away” (58). Being absent for such a long time, Orestes is surprised to see this pious city still in remorse of what happened fifteen years ago. As the play evolves, Sartre uses the perceived righteousness of religion to evoke sympathy for the Argives, who seem in torment from their deeds. Sartre’s use of communal reconciliation provides a mood of sorrow and grief. However, this goodness of religion is soon abolished with a deeper understanding of the people’s actions. As it turns out, guilt and lamentation are the only forms of expression in this religion. Sartre’s effort in this is to reveal the deception of religion and the evils still present among the Argives. Through Electra, Sartre explains to his audience that “the game of public confession” is essentially a “national pastime” for the people, automatically giving a negative connotation to the citizen’s constant mourning (68). Comparing the religion to a mere game presents a questionable attitude to what the structure of belief is based on in Argos. Sartre further plays on this notion of a fake religion by exposing the sins the people commit while being so religious. For example, on holidays, a shopkeeper screams that he is “ a murderer, a libertine, [and] a liar” (68). A young women admits that she “fooled [her husband] to the top of his bent” and that she had many other lovers (78). Another proclaims that she is afraid of the dead coming out on Dead Men’s Day because “[Her husband] will come with his slit throat, the man [she] loathed so bitterly” (75). The people of Argos “have sinned a thousand times” and they continue to do so (75). However, it seems everything is alright if only they remember to lament and call out, “Mercy!” at ceremonies and rituals (78). The people are involved in a religious hypocrisy. Sartre exposes the city for what it really is: evil citizens that do not understand the true meaning of goodness; these people are trapped in their own beliefs. Even the children are brought up to fear their god and view themselves as unworthy; in fact, the say they “didn’t want to be born” to please the Dead (78). As Sartre calls attention to the realities of the so-called religion, he reveals that the people are not devout. They do nothing to change their behavior and only put on a show in expectations of being forgiven. Sartre, therefore, introduces an element that is to be part of his existentialist perspective: external forces. The external force of a communal worship, or putting on a show, proves that people are bound by societal behaviors and dare not stray away from the shared path they are on. Zeus and Aegistheus use this religious institution and the fear of leaving it against the people; the religion, therefore, acts as a tool to maintain power.
The people are given a sense of forgiveness, something that they do not deserve. Sartre purposefully creates this king and god pair to be the head of the internal force governing and enslaving the Argives. While talking to Aegistheus, Zeus explains this enslavement, but Sartre has him do it in such a way that it appears as a burden, “the bane of gods and kings” (100). Sartre puts Zeus in the form of man to appeal more clearly to Aegistheus about their shared “passion for order” so that Aegistheus maintains rule of his kingdom (101). Sartre’s technique here is to insert a character that manipulates with words. Therefore, all of this is simply an act. Zeus’s true intentions are selfish and corrupt; he only desires praise and suffering from his subjects. He doesn’t want to lose the “profit” of twenty thousand lamenters that he bargained for with the life of Agamemnon (100). Sartre provides the audience with a moment to think about religion in general. If Zeus behaves like this and “[likes] crimes that pay,” then maybe the real god is the same (99). Sartre imparts to the audience that religion is flawed in itself. He continues to have Aegistheus exploit his power
to
The difference in Agamemnon’s and Odysseus’s approach of their homeland is a reason for their differing fates. Agamemnon, the king of Argos, returns from Troy after a safe journey. Once he lands on the shores of his native earth, his false sense of security renders him unsuspecting of the possible danger that lurks in his own home. His naiveté leads him to approach his home directly to show his people that he has returned. Since his subjects were no longer loyal to him, his exposure leads to his demise. Their disloyalty is revealed when Aegisthus, the man who plots to kill Agamemnon, gathers the town’s best soldiers to ambush the king. Agamemnon meets Aegisthus, who organized a banquet where the king and his company are mercilessly slaughtered. Because he fails to assess the danger that exists in his homeland, Agamemnon meets his end soon after his return.
In Sartre's Anti-Semite and Jew, he makes reference to the notion that anti-Semitism arises not against individual Jews, but against the " idea of the Jew." That is to say that the Jew is recognized only as a member of a group associated with fear and disgust, not as an individual capable of being anything but the stereotype of the Jew. I agree with Sartre's theory as I have seen first hand the disgust associated with being Jewish. The Jew is judged not by his action or words but simply by the fact that he is a Jew, and the preconceived idea of what this means. As discussed in class, Jews have been used as scapegoats throughout history.
Emile Durkheim As An Idealist In "Elementary Forms Of The Religion Life" Durkheim's most important rationale in The Elementary Forms was to explain and clarify the generally primordial religious conviction identified by man. However, his focus as a consequence irk a number of outside connection for historians as his fundamental rationale went distinctly ahead of the modernization of an old culture for its own accord; quite the opposite, Durkheim's interest in The Division of Labor and Suicide, was eventually both contemporary as well as workable as he asserts that if prehistoric religion were taken as the topics of investigations, then it is for the reason that it apparently appears “to us better adapted than any other to lead to an understanding of the religious nature of man, that is to say, to show us an essential and permanent aspect of humanity”. Durkheim's doctrine studies that the society must abstain from reductionism and think about social phenomena- sui generis, disqualifying biologist or psychologist explanations; he focused concentration on the social-structural elements of mankind's social problems. Even though in his previous work Durkheim defined social facts by their constraint, massing his main part on the execution of the legal system, he was afterward moved to shift his views considerably. He then emphasized that those social facts and moral codes become potent guides and controls of behavior only to the extent that they become internalized in the cognizance of individuals, while persisting to subsist exclusively of individuals. This, compulsion is not a customary restraint of distant controls on individual will, but rather a moral commitment to conform to a rule. Durkheim attempted to study social facts not onl...
How do we, as humans, define civilization? What is it that exemplifies our commonality as a species and sets us apart from the common beast? Is it art, science, literature, technological advances, or the philosophical mind? In the Lord of the Flies, Golding successfully unravels our delicate perceptions about what makes us human through a series of haunting and powerfully constructed symbols; among the most integral are the beast, the Lord of the Flies itself, and the fire. Through his narrative, illumination is cast upon the evil inherent in human nature, and society is revealed as a weak and easily penetrable façade. Furthermore, our level of refinement is given light as an instrument for incomparable malevolence, enhancing our powers of destruction beyond that of any of our primal ancestors.
The myths which prove the contradictory behavior of the gods, acting as both benefactors and tormentors of man, can readily be explained when viewed in light of the prime directive for man, to worship the gods and not “overstep,” and the ensuing “Deus ex Mahina” which served to coerce man to fulfill his destiny as evidenced by the myths: “Pandora,” “Arachne, and “Odysseus.” Humankind and it’s range of vision over the gods beauty and power portrayed them to be benefactors but unseemingly it depicted their affliction towards humans.
Much of history’s most renown literature have real-world connections hidden in them, although they may be taxing uncover. William Golding’s classic, Lord of the Flies, is no exception. In this work of art, Golding uses the three main characters, Piggy, Jack, and Ralph, to symbolize various aspects of human nature through their behaviors, actions, and responses.
Civilization struggling for power against savagery was shown throughout Lord of the Flies. These opposite mindsets are shown battling while determining who had the right to speak during assemblies, when the group hunted pigs, throughout the struggle over Piggy’s glasses, and finally with Simon’s death. These polar opposites are shown throughout these examples and reveal the desperation of clinging to civilization while savagery took over the actions of the some of the boys in Lord of the Flies.
... of hope for rescue and the destruction of their ties to former human society; and the Lord of the Flies, used to represent mankind’s “essential illness”: inherent human evil. Ultimately, Golding’s symbols, simple in appearance yet burdened with the weight of human savagery, violence, and inner darkness, do more than frighten. As these symbols are ingrained into our minds, so, too, is responsibility: the responsibility of recognition, understanding, and action. If we do not take heed of the messages behind Golding’s symbols, then our ignorance may be more than unwise—it may be fatal. For if we do not soon take steps to confront our inner evil face-to-face, we may eventually find ourselves trapped in Golding’s harrowing depiction of human society: one bound only by rules far too fragile that, when broken, lead only to chaos, self-destruction, and total savagery.
“Everybody has good and evil within them. All we're trying to say is that people are not all good or all bad. People are more complicated than you think, and one has to be more knowledgeable about the complexities.” This quotation from Stephen Schwartz establishes that even the best of people can be bitter by their own nature. In the novel, Lord of the Flies, William Golding removes the restraints of society to prove that it is human nature to live primitively and that evil lies within all of us. The sanctions of society begin to deteriorate due to the loss of communication, Jack’s obsession with hunting, and the inhumane nature of Jack and his “tribe”.
The two topics of religion and hypocrisy in the play go hand in hand. The overall play is intended to ultimately bring to light religious hypocrisy, but not to necessarily demoralize it. The play aims to make fun of religious hypocrisy, while hinting that it’s problem or flaw is the way it slanders and makes one question the grandeur of pure religion. Tartuffe’s character portrayal is made up solely by his outspoken and unapologetic displays of religious devotion. Through his actions and displays of religious devotion he gains Orgon’s trust and manipulates him into overlooking his family's wellbeing and overall safety. He used Orgon's want and need to feel close to God himself against him, which left Orgon blinded by ignorance and own self
of Louis XIV was that he thought human nature would always be the same. The
The gods in power, like Zeus, exhibit bias, dishonor, betrayal, deception, and many other humanly characteristics. One memorable scene is when Zeus and Poseidon are in conflict with each other over the Achaens versus the Trojans. Zeus controls the battle by “lifting the famous runner Achilles’ glory higher,” (Homer 13: 404). Zeus plays both sides in this scene, acting like a double agent which is dishonorable. Zeus’s bias is prevalent throughout the poem; specifically, he is “bent on wiping out the Argives, down to the last man,” (Homer 12: 81-82). Just like mortals such as Agamemnon and Achilles view each other with suspicion and intolerance, the gods experience identical emotions of wariness, anger, and irritation. This human-like behavior is not restricted to Zeus. Later in the text, Hera lies to Aphrodite to use her powers to manipulate her own husband Zeus. If one looks at Hera as a heavenly entity, her reaction may not make sense, but when it is viewed as a manifestation of human emotion, it become almost reasonable. Her scheming response to Zeus’s meddling with the war is spurred by her support for the Trojans. Hera’s manipulation and Aphrodite’s ego don’t stand alone as examples of this divine humanity. These instances suggest that the deities are being presented in this unique way to help explain behavior of the humans in The
Nietzsche's critique of religion is largely based on his critique of Christianity. Nietzsche says that in modern Europe, people are atheistic, even though they don't realise it. People who say they are religious aren't really and those who say they have moved on haven't actually moved on. Certain people in society retain features of Christianity. For example, socialists still believe in equality in all people.
He basically calls the people of Argos fools for following Zeus and repenting their sins. Here he is removing the people of free will, making them blindly follow this religion. I do think free will is often restricted, but by the person themselves, because they feel like they need to conform and follow this power. Sartre, through Orestes, makes it seem like you can only be free when you are free from power over you, therefore free from religion. I think this is a skewed view of life. Sartre generalizes followers of religion, specifically Catholicism, so much that they all seem like mindless clones. I am not religious, but I think people who follow religion don’t give it all the power. Rather than letting it have a hold over them, they work with it to make their decisions. Here is where I think Sartre fails. He is hypocritical. Sartre makes it seem like searching for answers or validation through religion is foolish, so instead, he gives us the answers he thinks are correct, he gives himself the power over the reader. He essentially makes himself into a god and existentialism into a religion, completely counteracting his previous points. Sartre is telling the reader that they are stupid, and existentialism is the right way, but since according to existentialism there is no right way, it all just becomes a never-ending, pointless
“Gods can be evil sometimes.” In the play “Oedipus the King”, Sophocles defamed the gods’ reputation, and lowered their status by making them look harmful and evil. It is known that all gods should be perfect and infallible, and should represent justice and equity, but with Oedipus, the gods decided to destroy him and his family for no reason. It might be hard to believe that gods can have humanistic traits, but in fact they do. The gods, especially Apollo, are considered evil by the reader because they destroyed an innocent man’s life and his family. They destroyed Oedipus by controlling his fate, granting people the power of prophecy, telling Oedipus about his fate through the oracle of Apollo, and finally afflicting the people of Thebes with a dreadful plague. Fundamentally, by utilizing fate, prophecies, the oracle of Apollo, and the plague, the gods played a significant role in the destruction of Oedipus and his family.