Recent orders
Analyzing two texts, King Oedipus by Sophocles and Macbeth by Shakespeare
Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Greek Mythology
Greek mythology has spurned on for centuries. The tales of heroes, gods, war, and love make a good reading for lovers of literature. It is interesting to note that most Greek literature follows a repeated pattern. A Greek myth cannot be complete without the above-mentioned themes and motifs. These themes and motifs inform us about the culture of the Greek. By analyzing two texts, ‘King Oedipus’ by Sophocles and ‘Macbeth’ by Shakespeare, this essay is going to look at the motif of Prophecy in Greek myths and how it informs my knowledge of Greek culture.
Prophecy forms a huge part of Macbeth’s life and future. It is the prophecy of the witches that drives the plot of the play to a very complicated and unfathomable stage. From this, we learn about the centrality of prophecies in the Greek mythology. According to the Greek mythology, supernatural beings delivered prophecies. These prophecies emanated from different gods. It is clear from the mythology that human beings could do nothing to change the fate of prophecies. These aspects of the prophecies are seen to dominate Macbeth’s life from the word go.
The play Macbeth is one of Shakespeare’s masterpieces. The play highlights the life and events of Macbeth. This man was brave and had fought to victory. His victory in the war led to his promotion and honor. Macbeth’s heroic acts please the gods, and they reward him with a greater price. Although his family was not in the line of attaining power, he was favored, and his lineage was chosen for the throne. This information is delivered by the three witches to Macbeth on his return journey to his kingdom after conquering and saving the king’s son.
However, as the Greek mythology clearly stipulates, a simple mistake can cause a great ship to sink (David 4). The way Lady Macbeth receives the news of his husbands causes her sleepless nights. She begins to forge a plan that would later see Macbeth ascend to power way before his time. The presence of Lady Macbeth is seen as an obstacle for Macbeth’s success. This aspect presents the reality of the Greek mythology where women were thought to be weak vessels.
Macbeth’s prophecy also opens the reader to the Greeks culture and beliefs. Among the cultural aspects of the Greeks that have been brought out in this play are power and leadership. In the mythology, leaders were special and honored. The handling of kings and their affairs was also a matter of importance and utter secrecy. The kingship was supposed to be honored and respected too. This nature of the kingship is seen in the way King Duncan is received at Macbeth’s estate. There was an array foods and decorum was observed on the eve of the king’s visit.
The prophecy in this play was delivered just like all the other Greek’s prophecies. The witches were instrumental in letting Macbeth know his future (David 12). This was after his performance in the war was extemporary. In his return, the witches tell him of the possible promotion to the Thane of Cowdar. This information reaches Lady Macbeth, who starts drawing up a strategy that they would later follow and ascent to power.
Macbeth is a strong and brave warrior. This continues for a long time until when the woman of his life turns things around. Lady Macbeth seems to carry the weight of the prophecy and delivers it right at the doorstep of his husband. Prophecies from the gods castigated against greed and misuse of power. In this play, Lady Macbeth appears as a greedy with an insatiable appetite for power. Critics of the play remark that she longed for the queen’s throne (David 43). This longing and lust shrouded her thoughts and thus landed Macbeth in the murky waters, which was not the wish of the gods in the beginning.
King Oedipus’ life centers on a prophecy that the gods had given at his birth. King Oedipus was born to King Laius and queen Jacosta of Thebes. Upon his birth, the gods prophesied that Oedipus would kill his father and marry his father. King Laius decided to kill his son to avert the prophecy. He orders his soldiers to kill Oedipus. He and his wife bask in the knowledge that they are safe from the prophecy.
Oedipus survives the death that his father had planned for him. The soldiers pinned his ankles together and left him to die. Oedipus, who grew up to become King, did not know of the prophecy given at birth. However, his life took turns that ensured he followed his destiny. Although he does not know it, his life moves steadily in the direction that the prophecy had predicted (Austin 34). He has a permanent scar on his foot as a constant symbol of the prophecy. At the end of the tragic play, King Oedipus unknowingly, slays his biological father and takes his biological mother as his wife. He fulfills the prophecy that his father had tried to avert.
This tragedy by Sophocles reflects the role of prophesies and gods in the Greek society. As with the case with many literary pieces, the playwright observed the society of the time and drew inspiration from the culture of the people. The playwright gives the impression that prophecies were god given, and not even kings and noble men could change the words of the prophets (Austin 54). King Oedipus had all the power and influence at his disposal, but this did not erase the prophecy from the gods.
The use of prophecies also reflects the power of religion in the Greek culture. The Greek society imbedded itself in beliefs about gods and supernatural beings. All the sectors of life revolved around the religious calendar. The planting, harvesting even the athletic seasons were all dependent on the religious calendar (Austin 28). Philosophers cite that the religion was rampant at the time because science had not yet taken root in the Greek society. Science had not yet grown to the levels where people could look up to science for answers. Therefore, people looked to religion to answer questions that they had no answers.
‘King Oedipus’ and ‘Macbeth’ both have prophecy as a recurring motif. This shows the importance that the Greeks accorded to gods and prophecies. The motif also shows that religion controlled the Greek culture. Most people depended on gods, prophecies, priests and even witches to learn about the will of the gods. The Greek also used religion as a way of programming their lives. If the gods gave a prophecy on a person’s destiny then they had no choice but to live their lives accordingly.
Works Cited
Austin, Malibbard. The Greek Culture: Lessons from ‘King Oedipus’ . New York: NightOwl, 2011.
David, Elloway. Macbeth by William Shakespear. New York: MacMillan, 2005.
Analyzing the Evidence Argument Essay
Analyzing the Evidence: Argument Essay
Read the following articles:
HYPERLINK “http://www.bakeryandsnacks.com/Processing-Packaging/Half-of-US-food-goes-to-waste” http://www.bakeryandsnacks.com/Processing-Packaging/Half-of-US-food-goes-to-waste
HYPERLINK “http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-06-16-column16_ST1_N.htm” http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-06-16-column16_ST1_N.htm
Then, write a 1,000 – 1,500 word essay that makes a claim about which of the two assigned articles is more persuasive, based on your analysis and evaluation of the evidence and reasoning.
The basic form of your thesis will be very simple and straightforward:
Article X is more persuasive than Article Y.
However, it should also give some indication of the reasons (without going into detail). For example:
Although Article Y has more evidence, its evidence is less representative and its assumptions are not valid, making Article X the more persuasive essay.
Although this paper will support a thesis, the basic structure is that of a compare and contrast essay. It will compare and contrast the evidence and reasoning in each of the two articles, and discuss which is more persuasive.
There are different ways you can organize it, but the paper will always have these elements, whatever order you put them in:
A brief introduction and summary of both articles.
An analysis of the evidence in both articles. This is where the paper describes the evidence and reasoning provided (how much is there, what kind of evidence is it, what points is it supporting, etc.). Also, describe some of the key assumptions made by the authors.
An evaluation of the evidence and reasoning in both articles. This is where the paper states which article’s evidence and reasoning is more abundant, relevant and representative, and why. State which article’s assumptions are more true, valid or reasonable, and why.
At least two of your own assumptions, identified as such. (Part of the task is to demonstrate that you understand the difference between a supported claim, an assumption and evidence.) The assumptions should be clearly identified—for example, “I assume that …”—and underlined.
Your paper should support its thesis with examples drawn from the two articles. These examples should be sufficient (there will be enough of them to support each claim), relevant (they should really illustrate the point they are intended to support) and representative (they should be typical or common examples of whatever set they represent).
All paragraphs should be organized around a single point, supported with illustrations (evidence, examples) and explaining how the illustrations support the point, and how the point supports the thesis.
The paper as a whole can be organized in different ways. For example, it might discuss one article in its entirety first (summary, evidence, reasoning), then discuss the second article, and then compare the two. Or, it might discuss evidence first, comparing and contrasting the two articles, and then compare and contrast the articles’ reasoning.
However you choose to approach it, the essay must meet these requirements:
The paper should introduce and briefly summarize each article.
The thesis should be expressed as a complete statement early in the paper
The thesis should be understandable, coherent and arguable.
The paper should analyze the evidence in each article.
The paper should evaluate the evidence in each article.
The paper should analyze the reasoning in each article,
The paper should evaluate the reasoning in each article,
The paper should include at least two of your own assumptions, identified as such, on which your argument rests. (Part of the task is to demonstrate that you understand the difference between a supported claim, an assumption and evidence.) Your assumptions should be clearly identified—for example, “I assume that …”—and underlined.
All parts of the essay should help to support the thesis.
The paper should proceed in a logical fashion through a series of steps to prove the thesis.
The thesis should be supported with evidence that is sufficient, relevant and representative.
The paper should explain how or why the evidence supports the thesis.
Grading
An “A” paper will perform most of these tasks superbly, without flaw.
A “B” paper will exhibit minor flaws in most areas—for example, a somewhat vague or obvious thesis, evidence that is somewhat insufficient, imperfect explanation of how the evidence supports the conclusion; unlikely or unconvincing counter-argument; less relevant assumptions.
A “C” paper) will exhibit noticeable flaws in most areas—for example, a confused or unfocused thesis; evidence that is not sufficient, relevant or representative; difficulty showing how the evidence supports the thesis; under-developed counter-argument or rebuttal; assumptions mis-identified or poorly explained.
A “D” paper will exhibit significant flaws in most areas—for example, a thesis split between two different ideas; seriously insufficient, irrelevant or unrepresentative evidence; reasoning that largely fails to explain how the evidence leads to the conclusion; 1-sentence or missing counter-argument; failure to identify assumptions.
An “F” paper will be one that simply does not respond to the assignment.
Format
Your paper should follow proper MLA document format with reference to font size, style, pagination, placement of headers, etc.
Analyzing and Argument
Name
Mid-Term
AJ 499:01
Fall 2019
Analyzing and Argument
The Author’s Argument
The author is arguing that Otto T. Goat’s argument that blacks are correlated to the high crime in the United States is racist because crime is instead reliant on various confounding variables such as socio-economic status.
How the Author Constructs His Argument
The author uses an implicit argument. He weaves together facts, stories, logic, statistics, and experiences without using a clear thesis. He endeavors to sell his argument to the reader by using evidence of different kinds.
Evaluation of the Author’s Argument
The author’s argument is mostly fair and balanced, with little aspects of emotion and the use of loaded language. The author does not exhibit bias on the basis of interest because it is not evident that he is black. However, it is obvious that he does not like racists and to a point, gets emotional although he tries to downplay this by actually mentioning he is not going to be moved. A little bias is also evident in his use of loaded language, where he refers to Otto as Hitler. This argument is more one-sided than two-sided, with little contradictory information included. The author gives himself enough space and avoids distractions. The counter-argument presented in the form of Otto’s replies, and such is so minimal that the reader does not get the time to relate or make any importance of Otto’s claims. The author uses a considerable chunk of the information in favor of his stand on the issue. He does little to highlight the criticism or any information that favors the point of view taken by the opposition. However, the author does not do this because he is unable to refute these claims since he does with a lot of energy. Maybe he does this to maintain clarity and consciousness, which sells his credibility to the reader. The author takes it as his obligation to represent the idea that associating crimes with race is a misplaced notion that is nothing short of racist. His positive bias does not allow him to risk educating the reader about the information that supports the opposite view that has not already been considered.
The author uses a very reliable and relevant premise. He then goes on to explain these premises profoundly and thoroughly. The argument does not present contradictory points. The author moves step by step, maintaining the same course for the argument. The evidence explains why alternative views are subordinate to what the author supports. The premises the author uses are fulfilling and do not require further justification, and they do not beg any questions.
Additional Materials Used and how each is related to the Author’s Argument
The author does not ignore the burden of proof. In various instances, however, he makes assertions but the most part of the argument, especially where evidence is relevant, he offers. He uses evidence to allow for professional judgment and understands its usefulness in strengthening his claim and providing support for his point to generate a conclusion. One example is meta-analysis done by one Professor Miron Zukerman, whose relevance to the topic is not clear. The author, by this point, does not clearly connect the evidence with the argument, and if he does, he has already lost readers because they can honestly not discern what he is looking for with citing this reference. One research by Ulmer et al. supports the author’s claims by indicating that there are other factors stronger than race that influence the possibility of acting violently. Another by wiki shows that as the author had mentioned earlier, socio-economic factors, notably poverty, is the reason blacks have more crime statistics.
He also uses the conclusion of a study from 1996 and two from 2003 that say the difference in privileges is the reason for different rates of crime between white and black people. The author, however, uses various statistics, which can be translated as evidence throughout the paper but does appropriately cite them to give them professional value. By just providing statistics and information without connecting them to a credible source, to a certain level, renders them valueless. Although using the kind of information the author uses makes the premises more than assertions, ignoring proof of origin and providing a logical relationship between an argument and conclusion, the author neglects his duty to support his assertions.
Objective(S) Best Related To This Article
Evaluating the purpose of arguments
The Administration of Justice
After completing this takedown exam, the role of racial profiling and discrimination in the delivery of justice has become more clear. Because of the mindset of people like Otto who believe black people have the disposition to commit a crime, they are profiled during an investigation, mistreated during apprehension and in custody, or harsher sentences being imposed on this population. Because people believe that black people are violent, police officers have to use brutal force to apprehend a black man despite how he acts during an arrest. Also, in the face of a jury, one that especially has a group of white people as jurors, the black man is never offered the benefit of the doubt, and the law that one is innocent until proven guilty is considerably undermined. When a black man is at the center of a criminal investigation or is a person of interest, the discriminatory response from white people most is that they must have committed the crime. “Guilty until proven innocent.”
Black people have been subject to unwarranted surveillance, abuse, discriminatory sweeps, and searches. The reason why most African Americans are arrested with marijuana as compared to white people who use the drug by a bigger proportion is the fact that police are more willing to apprehend a black man, search his pockets and go through his car. If white people faced the same level of scrutiny, then most would go to jail for possession of marijuana as compared to the current statistic. Also, it is easier for a police officer to believe that a white person has weed as a prescription than he would with a black man. It will be easier for them to arrest the man take time to reason with them the same way an officer would with a white man.