Several facets of the manner which Odysseus employs in his efforts to achieve his goal of reclaiming his power in Ithaca would be commended by Machiavelli, while others would be condemned. Judging the success of a prince by only considering the outcome of their actions is a theory Machiavelli poses on page 86 of The Prince. This particular passage at the top of the page explicates that it is not prudent to judge a prince on the means by which they came about their success; one is only to judge the ultimate result. Here, Machiavelli makes the argument that a prince must do whatever is necessary to secure and maintain power. This principle is prevalent in examining some of the actions of Odysseus on his journey to regaining his power. One such …show more content…
instance is when Odysseus resolves to conceal from the crew the fate that awaits a selection of their members when they sail beneath the cave of Scylla. Odysseus allows for six of his men to perish, and elects not to warn them beforehand in his efforts to return home and regain his power as the king of Ithaca. While this resolution calls for the unwitting sacrifice of six men, the result is that more of the crew is saved than would have been if Odysseus had elected to pass through Charybdis and Odysseus becomes closer to reclaiming his seat of power. Another prominent principle of Machiavelli’s pervasive in the Odyssey is that cruelty is sometimes justified and necessary in accruing fear rather than love from one’s subjects.
On page 78, Machiavelli asserts the belief that cruelty was necessary in Cesare Borgia’s reconciliation of Romagna and that it made Borgia a commendable leader, especially in comparison to the leaders of the Florentine people, who, electing not to employ cruelty in their reign, allowed for an entire city to be destroyed. Machiavelli’s argument for a preference of fear over love is found on page 79. In questioning whether it is better to be feared or loved by one’s subjects, Machiavelli resolves that it is in fact safer to be feared because people will remain loyal out of fear of punishment. Odysseus combines these two principles in his rule of Ithaca as evidenced by his execution of the women servants who slept with the suitors. This act of cruelty was necessary in securing Odysseus’ power in his household in that it made an example of those who proved disloyal to him while he was away. Executing the women servants instilled some measure of fear in those servants who were left, ensuring their unwavering loyalty in the future as they are now afraid to meet the same fate as the executed …show more content…
servants. While the execution of the women servants would have been seen as a prudent action in the perspective of Machiavelli, Odysseus’ massacre of all of the suitors would have prompted condemnation from the esteemed political theorist. In expressing his opinions on a prince’s cruelty towards subjects on page 80, Machiavelli explicates that killing people is a permissible punishment because a son will forget about the murder of his father as long as his property is left untouched. However, later, on page 88, Machiavelli articulates that a prince must also refrain from attacking the honor of his subjects for fear of retribution. In killing every suitor, Odysseus assaults the honor of the noble houses of Ithaca. Massacring the sons of all the noble houses leaves Odysseus open to an uprising comprised of a coalition of the murdered suitors’ families as Odysseus realized when he orders that Penelope and Telemachus go with him to their farm to hide. In Machiavelli’s perspective, Odysseus acted rashly, in a fashion that inspires hatred, and leaves Odysseus venerable for an act of retaliation that has the potential to usurp his power. Similarly to Odysseus, Frank operates in several fashions that would be lauded by Machiavelli as well in other manners that would be regarded with disdain by the prolific political theorist.
According to Machiavelli, a prince need not actually be a virtuous individual, however, they must appear to honorable to their subjects so as to maintain the favor of the common people. On page 85, Machiavelli conveys this principle of maintaining power in expressing that it is judicious of a prince to deceive his subjects by appearing appear merciful, faithful, humane, religious, or upright in that this duplicity garners the respect of the common people and therefore strengthens his power over them. On his crusade for power, Frank often employs this exact principle. In the episode where Frank travels to South Carolina to manage the peach debacle, he is in danger of losing the favor of the people there, and thus his power secured through their votes. To salvage the situation, Frank gives a sermon about his grief after the death of his father and his faith in God that enabled him to move on. This sermon develops the illusion that Frank is virtuous in that it asserts that he shares a similar sense of grief over a loved one and a faith in God that the people of his hometown in South Carolina have. In actuality, as evidenced by his aside to the viewer, Frank is an atheist and was apathetic about the death of his father. However, this sermon accomplishes its goal in that it projects the image
of Frank as a virtuous man and accumulating the respect of his constituents, thus securing the power afforded to him through them. Additionally, Frank adheres to the principle set forth by Machiavelli that a prince must debilitate someone to such an extent that they are unable to exact vengeance. On pages 8 and 9, Machiavelli argues that to maintain power, a prince, in inflicting injury on another person, must absolutely crush them so as to avoid the threat of retribution. Killing Peter Russo is one instance in which Frank strictly applies this principle. Throughout the season, Frank deceives Peter which ultimately culminates in the destruction of Peter’s reputation, current way of life, and future. Repeatedly, Frank causes injury to Peter and, near the end of his life, Peter becomes exceedingly discontented with this arrangement. When Peter threatens Frank with exposing Frank’s manipulation, Frank murders Peter. In doing this, Frank crushes Peter to the point where there is no need for fear of retribution. Dead men cannot retaliate and thus Frank secures his power.
Machiavelli’s advice to a prince who wanted to hold power is that they have to instill fear into the people. He believes fear is important because it restrains men, as they fear being punished. Love will never help you hold power because it attaches people to promises. Machiavelli believes that since humans are wicked, they will break these promises whenever their interests is at stake. Men will devote everything to you if you serve their interests, but as soon as you need help, they turn on you. Therefore, creating fear in them is the perfect strategy. I feel like Machiavelli is being sarcastic and did this to get attention. He knew his way of thinking was different and would get the attention of the people.
Machiavelli believes that a government should be very structured, controlled, and powerful. He makes it known that the only priorities of a prince are war, the institutions, and discipline. His writings describes how it is more important for a prince to be practical than moral. This is shown where he writes, "in order to maintain the state he is often obliged to act against his promise, against charity, against humanity, and against religion" (47). In addition, Machiavelli argues that a prince may have to be cunning and deceitful in order to maintain political power. He takes the stance that it is better for the prince to be feared than loved. His view of how a government should run and his unethical conduct are both early signs of dictatorship.
Machiavelli’s views were drastically different from other humanists at his time. He strongly promoted a secular society and felt morality was not necessary but stood in the way of a successfully governed state. He stated that people generally tended to work for their own best interests and gave little thought to the well being of the state. He distrusted citizens saying, “In time of adversity, when a state is in need of its citizens, there are few to be found.” In his writings in The Prince, he constantly questioned the citizens’ loyalty and warned for the leaders to be wary in trusting citizens. His radical and distrusting thoughts on human nature were derived out of concern for Italy’s then unstable government. Machiavelli also had a s...
Niccolò Machiavelli was a man who lived during the fourteen and fifteen hundreds in Florence, Italy, and spent part of his life imprisoned after the Medici princes returned to power. He believed that he should express his feelings on how a prince should be through writing and became the author of “The Qualities of a Prince.” In his essay, he discusses many points on how a prince should act based on military matters, reputation, giving back to the people, punishment, and keeping promises. When writing his essay, he follows his points with examples to back up his beliefs. In summary, Machiavelli’s “The Qualities of a Prince,” provides us with what actions and behaviors that a prince should have in order to maintain power and respect.
“There is no safety in unlimited hubris” (McGeorge Bundy). The dictionary defines hubris as overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance. In The Odyssey, Homer embodies hubris into the characters Odysseus, the Suitors, and the Cyclopes. Odysseus shows hubris when he is battling the Cyclopes, the Cyclopes show hubris when dealing with Odysseus, and the Suitors show it when Odysseus confronts them at his home.
In the epic poem, The Odyssey, Odysseus finally found his way back home during the hardest time of his life. Over the course of 10 long years, Odysseus encounters monsters, gods and suitors who strive to interfere with his return to Ithaca. The strength of this war-hero aided his journey home, but his intelligence and love for his family allowed him persevere through barriers that stood in his way. In the Odyssey by Homer, Odysseus shows the importance of cunningness and trickery to overcome deteriorating obstacles.
According to text 2 one of Machiavelli's quotes came up about being feared more than loved and the response to that was " A leader must build his relationship with the people upon mutual respect, more than any other thing. It is not fear or
and when it (danger) comes nearer to you they turn away? (649). Machiavelli reinforces the Prince?s need to be feared by stating: ?? men are less hesitant about harming someone who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared?? (649).
He expresses that Agathocles’ “modes may be used to acquire rule but not glory” (66). The fact that Machiavelli does not celebrate Agathocles, despite his other virtuous characteristics, displays how important glory is to the Machiavellian definition of virtue. Agathocles is excluded from virtue and fortune because he rose through the ranks in each step of his career through wicked deeds (65). However, Valentino, Theseus, and Moses also participated in “wicked deeds” and are still viewed as completely virtuous men. Valentino gives power to Remirro de Orco but beheads him in order to win the approval of the mass majority because of the hatred they had for Orco. Theseus and Moses also participated in the murder of people and mythological creatures in order to establish their principalities. Machiavelli fails to recognize these aspects that make this trio of leaders less virtuous then they may seem based on his original definition. Machiavelli’s exaggeration of Valentino’s virtue and minimal acknowledgement of Agathocles’ virtue prove that other factors such as compassion and faith discreetly determine what it means to be fully
Although Machiavelli gives numerous points on what it takes to excel as a prince, he also shows some raw examples of how he feels a prince should act in order to achieve maximum supremacy. First, when he says, "ought to hold of little account a reputation for being mean, for it is one of those vices which will enable him to govern" proves Machiavelli feels mighty adamant about his view that being mean will help a prince achieve success (332). It is absurd to imagine the meanest prince as the most successful. Also, when Machiavelli states, "our experience has been that those princes who have done great things have held good faith of little account, and have known how to circumvent the intellect of men by craft" revealing his attitude to manipulate people into fearing and respecting the prince (335). Also, Machiavelli shows that for a prince to be successful, he must not think about good faith.
The most astounding aspect of The Prince is Machiavelli’s view that princes may indeed, be cruel and dishonest if their ultimate aim is for the good of the state. It is not only acceptable but necessary to lie, to use torture, and to walk over other states and cities. Machiavellianism is defined as “A political doctrine of Machiavelli, which denies the relevance of morality in political affairs and holds that craft and deceit are justified in pursuing and maintaining political power (Def.)” This implies that in the conquest for power, the ends justify the means. This is the basis of Machiavellianism. The priority for the power holder is to keep the security of the state regardless of the morality of the means. He accepts that these things are in and of themselves morally wrong, but he points out that the consequences of failure, the ruin of states and the destruction of cities, can be far worse. Machiavelli strongly emphasizes that princes should not hesitate to use immoral methods to achieve power, if power is necessary for security and survival.
Machiavelli wants a prince to place himself above his subjects, act deceptively whenever necessary, but also maintain the front of a religious man. This appearance would allow the prince to manipulate the church in Florence if believed and done well, thereby granting the prince ultimate power. This idea, combined with the other two, make Machiavelli appear exceptionally audacious and distinctive. This courageous move allows Machiavelli the possibility of becoming famous, with little risk of repercussion — especially since he ensures to protect himself with cautious humility intertwined throughout his
This key paragraph of advice is given by Machiavelli to all aspiring rulers who are contemplating the act of obtaining a principality through the use of criminal methods. Macbeth is an example of someone who obtains his kingdom in a criminal manner, as he and his wife conspire together to kill the present king and blame his murder on his drunken guards, but in order for Macbeth to be considered completely Machiavellian, he would have to partake in all of the characteristics that Machiavelli urges for leaders of his sort to display. While Macbeth exhibits certain Machiavellian characteristics, he does not heed Machiavelli's advice regarding rulers who desire to obtain their principalities through crime, and through either the ignorance of, or disregard for, this advice, Macbeth cannot be considered Machiavellian.
Both Niccolò Machiavelli and Plato, in their works The Prince and The Republic (respectively), address the concepts of seeming and being in relation to political power and leadership, however they do so in two distinct manners. In the Republic, Socrates insists that seeming is bad, and being is good. Using a parable of people in a cave, he states that the only way to know the difference between what seems and what actually is reality is to experience it in its purest form, instead of through images. Machiavelli, on the other hand outlines the different ways that a prince could rise to power, and justifies any and all means that a prince could take. He states that a prince only has to seem good when it fits his purposes, not actually be good. He encourages an aspiring prince to be deceitful and conniving in order to gain and maintain power. Before concluding which political theorist is correct, it is interesting to examine whether it would be better to remain in the cave with Machiavelli or see the light with Socrates.
According to Niccolo Machiavelli “if you have to make a choice, to be feared is much safer than to be loved” (225). Machiavelli was the first philosopher of the Renaissance, and wrote The Prince which argued that leaders must do anything necessary to hold on to power. The main reason it is better to be feared is because men are evil, rotten and will only do things that benefit themselves. Men only think of themselves and it is for this reason fear can control them and keep them loyal to a leader. Since loyalty through love can be easily broken because it involves no punishment, loyalty through fear is the better choice because it involves the “dread of punishment, from which [the subjects] can never escape” (Machiavelli 226). Machiavelli goes on to say that the great leader Hannibal took control of his immense army, because the soldiers saw Hannibal as a fearsome and cruel person, thus, making them loyal to him. Machiavelli in addition gives an example of a leader who chose not to be feared and cruel: “Scipio, an outstanding man not only among those of his own time, but in all recorded history; yet his armies revolted in Spain, for no other reason than his excessive leniency in allowing his soldiers more freedom than military discipline permits”(226). Failure to be cruel and fearsome will cause a leader to lose control of his soldiers, and it will cause the leader’s soldiers to revolt. Hannibal was the better leader; even though he was cruel, he was more merciful in reality than Scipio because he did not allow any disorders to happen.