The society that we live in would always pay tribute to the people who have made a significant mark in society. Characters in stories and in mythology, which have been an important part of society, were also given much importance. Their stories have been retold either in the movies or in television. One of these movies was Troy.
The movie, Troy, directed by Wolfgang Petersen, was about the mythological story of how war was caused by the most beautiful woman during that time, named Helen of Sparta. As the title implied, the story was focused on the war that occurred between the Greeks and the Trojans. The mythological version wanted to show what happened years ago, and how the Gods were able to influence the decisions humans made at that time.
In addition to this, the mythological version showed how the Trojan War begun, with the corresponding reasons. The origins of the main characters and the lives of their families were also given much importance for the readers to fully comprehend the story. Furthermore, the participation of the gods was also evident throughout the whole story. The gods were considered immortal, but were given power to interact and converse with the humans. They also had the capability of manipulating the lives humans, especially in dealing with others.
Furthermore, the epic also showed that the people and the gods could co-exist with one another. The gods were free to do what they wished, and were even given the privilege of having relationships with humans. Thus, many of the characters in mythology were somehow connected with the gods. The story of the Trojan War was considered as one of the most important epics in mythology, for it covered many events in the lives of humankind.
The film adaptation, on the other hand, only magnified the war that occurred between the Trojans and the Greeks. Not much was given about how the war originated, and the great influence the gods had on the humans. In addition to this, many parts of the original epic were omitted in the film. Other characters and parts of the epic were omitted in the film, to give more room for the war. The presence of the gods in the epic was omitted in the film. The adaptation only mentioned the gods in some of the lines, and sometimes showing their support to the humans. However, their human bodies were never seen in the film.
I could definitely say that the original version of the myth was altered in such a way that the film version would be appealing to the audience. The setting of the story was in the 12th century, away from the technological advancements that the viewers were accustomed to. Instead, viewers were sent back to a time when everything else was simple, and war was common among powerful and influential kingdoms.
Mythology explained that Paris was tricked into choosing who the fairest among the three goddesses was. Armed with different gifts, Paris was manipulated by the goddesses and was blinded by what Aphrodite had offered him, which was the love of the fairest woman in the land. In the film, Paris was implied to have loved Helen from the very start making the film adaptation pace faster.
Another alteration made in the film adaptation was that of the real personality of Patroclus. He was identified as one of the closest cousins of the great Achilles, while in the epic, Patroclus was only identified as one of the closest cousins of Achilles. The written version also implied that Patroclus was a strong and good warrior. This may be the reason as to why the Trojans had mistaken Patroclus as the great warrior, himself. The film adaptation, on the other hand, showed Patroclus to be a young boy, who wanted to follow the footsteps of his great cousin, Achilles. This step was done to show the viewers that although Achilles was arrogant and strong, he had a good heart for his family and friends. The two stories were unified to the original plot, when Achilles was enraged knowing about the death of his beloved Patroclus.
The film adaptation also lacked the presence of the gods and goddesses during the war. To make the adaptation more humanistic, people were shown to have been slain by the important people in their society. This is in contrast to the big roles that the gods and goddesses had in the written version. The film showed that Hector was killed, lying helplessly in the ground, with the Greeks keeping his body. His father, King Priam, soon went to Achilles to retrieve the body of his slain son.
In the written version, however, Hector’s soul left his mortal body. The soul was able to reach Hades before Achilles retrieved the armor that Hector wore. The gods were infuriated, causing an intervention. The film adaptation showed King Priam come to Achilles on his own will, convincing Achilles to let him bury his son. The written version showed something different. The gods instructed King Priam to retrieve the body of his lifeless son, Hector, from the hands of the great Achilles and paying him loads of riches.
The film adaptation also made Paris and Helen’s characters unimportant. In comparison to the written version, Paris and Helen were the primary reason as to why a war emerged. Helen, who was married to Menelaus, the ruler of Sparta, fell in love with the young prince, Paris, who hailed from Troy. It was disappointing to actually see these two characters act like young children in the film adaptation. I felt that their pivotal role of the lovers in the Trojan War was disregarded, so their good looks may be given much attention.
Furthermore, a make believe character, in the form of Boagrius, was killed in the start of the film. In comparison with the written version, the Boagrius was no great warrior, but rather, a river that calmly witnessed the things that happened to the people at that time.
The changes made from the written version to the film adaptation were very much evident all throughout the course of the film. Many of the important scenes were deleted, while a few other characters were added in the adaptation for more theatrical effect. The monumental fight scenes were impressive, given the technological advancements present. The battle scenes were specific, from the smallest to the biggest detail.
I believe that these production specifications were all done to add more effect and drama to the story. These actions were purposely done to keep the viewers entertained and alive. If the writers and the director decided to stick to the original context of the written version, the viewers might have not enjoyed the adaptation. The special effects also showed a detailed version of how the director envisioned the Trojan War. This technique is advantageous to both the director and the viewers, for creativity and the imagination are honed through the scenes shown in the film.
The present society dictates that people should be up-to-date with the advancements that occur in their day-to-day lives. Although this is society’s way of moving forward, it is still important for everyone to remember their past, especially the impressive works left for people to study. The Trojan War was one of the mythological epics created to enhance the imagination of the readers, and at the same time, make them realize the importance of gods and goddesses in the lives of humankind.
In addition to this, the film adaptation also made the viewers realize that power is not everything in this world. Numerous people died fighting for honor, pride, greed and revenge. These can still be related to the present lives people endure. The advancements in the lives of people make them pace with time, and with their professional lives. Sometimes, the search for more power and wealth may lead to the destruction of many. This is very much similar to the life people had during the 12th century. The only difference is that people nowadays live a highly advanced and complicated lifestyle than those of the olden times.
Myths are to be considered to be an epitome of how people control their existence on earth. Some may live a simple yet fulfilling lifestyle, while others would rather choose the hard yet ego-boosting life. Either way, these are still mere reflections of how people, regardless of time and location, would face their life, in general.
References
Wilson, C., Rathbun, D., & Petersen, W. (2004). Troy. United States: Warner Bros. Home Video Entertainment Group.
Myth Of Equality: Social Prejudices
Social prejudices are rampant in all walks of life. It has persisted throughout history in many different forms, but all displaying the same characteristics: discrimination, oppression and aggression. Liberal groups and administrations have moved to eliminate these prejudices, and, at certain point of view, were successful at least in minimizing the violence that arises in social prejudices. Nevertheless, it continues to thrive in many societies as groups that were oppressed before still continue to be oppressed; there are people who still believe they are superior to some other and would isolate themselves against such inferior groups. Vincent Parrillo enumerated the psychological and sociological perspectives of prejudice, of which, unless corrected, the concept of equality will remain a myth. C. P. Ellis’ account is an example of racial prejudice that confirmed Parrillo’s theories and attests that the correction of perspectives may eliminate prejudice.
When the Founding Fathers of the United States of America declared their independence, they held “that all men are created equal.” Such were the ideologies that lead to one of the wars that shaped the nation and of the whole world: the American Civil War. Its primary cause may have been political; nevertheless, the topic that stirred its imminent inception was the debate on slavery, which was rampant especially in the southern states. Anti-slavery proponents believed it to be a contradiction that America as a nation had fought for liberty on the grounds that “all men were created equal” and yet it was the largest slaveholding nation. On the other hand, some pro-slavery proponents claim that African Americans, which composed primarily the slave population in America, were of an inferior race and enslaving them has some divine justification.
The result of the Civil War has decided the future of the nation, which ultimately eliminated slavery. The white discrimination against the blacks, however, would not. Until the ratification of the Civil Rights Act in 1964, social acceptance of blacks in a nation dominated by whites was not realized. But even in these modern times, racism and other forms of social prejudices still exist. “Old habits die hard,” so they say.
Vincent Parrillo, in the article “Causes of Prejudice,” held that there are two causes of prejudice: that of an individual’s psychological perspectives which “focus on the state of mind of individuals” and the sociological perspectives which “focus on the objective conditions of society as the social forces behind prejudicial attitudes…” (503). Furthermore, there are also three levels of prejudice, namely, the cognitive level which “encompasses a person’s beliefs and perceptions of a group”; the emotional level which “refers to the feelings that a minority group arouses in an individual”; and the action-orientation level which refers to the “positive or negative predisposition to engage in discriminatory behavior” (Parrillo 506-507). Parrillo also held that “prejudices shape our perceptions of various peoples and influence our attitudes and actions toward particular groups”.
Parrillo held that prejudice is enforced with self-justification. He believes that “if we can convince ourselves that another group is inferior, immoral, or dangerous, we may feel justified in discriminating against its members, enslaving them, or even killing them”. Parrillo explained, based on a number of investigations, that “frustration tend to increase aggression towards others”. He further explained that because the real cause of an individual’s frustration is “often too nebulous to be identified or too powerful to act against…, the frustrated individual or group usually redirects anger against a more visible, vulnerable, and socially sanctioned target, one unable to strike back”. Suitable targets of scapegoating, as the blaming of others is called, include, among others, those who were “a past target of hostility for whom latent hostility still exists” and those who were “the symbol of an unpopular concept”.
Self-justification and frustration, along with personality, are the causes of prejudice from the psychological perspective. As already specified, these are based on an individual’s perception against a group that the individual has prejudice. However, the society also plays an important role in an individual’s perception, hence, his or her prejudice against another. Parrillo believed, as Herbert Blumer suggested, “that prejudice always involves the ‘sense of group position’ in a society”. Parrillo further explains that as a product of the socialization process, “individuals acquire the values, attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions of their culture or subculture, including religion, nationality, and social class”.
Economic competition, as according to Parrillo, is another social cause for prejudice. He explained that “people tend to be more hostile toward others when they feel that their security is threatened”. Like any beliefs and virtues, an individual’s prejudice most often than not also conforms to the social norms.
Parrillo’s assessment of prejudice can be clearly seen in the racial discrimination in America prior to the Civil Rights Act. C. P. Ellis’ narration on overcoming his discrimination against African Americans confirms Parrillo’s assessment. C. P. Ellis confessed that his hate for African Americans emerged from his frustration in improving his social status which he could not do. He said:
“I really began to get bitter. I didn’t know who to blame. I tried to find somebody. I began to blame it on black people. I had to hate somebody. Hatin’ America is hard to do because you can’t see it to hate it. You gotta have somethin’ to look at to hate… The natural person for me to hate would be black people, because my father before me was a member of the Klan. As far as he was concerned, it was the savior of the white people. It was the only organization in the world that would take care of the white people. So I began to admire the Klan”.
This account of C. P. Ellis already confirms what Parrillo was stressing. This alone displays the most of the psychological and sociological perspectives of prejudice. As already specified, Ellis was already frustrated and was looking for someone to blame. This confirms Parrillo’s theory that wherein frustration plays an important role in one’s prejudice. Ellis’ frustration was due to the “lack of resources or rewards in one’s standard of living” that Parrillo predicted to result on “displaced aggression”. Parrillo also stated that “individuals with low self-esteem deprecate others to enhance their feelings about themselves”. He had the black people as scapegoats, who have been regarded by many as an inferior race. This confirms Parrillo’s theory that the choice of a scapegoat would usually be a “past target of hostility and for whom latent hostility still exists” which was definitely true for black people during Ellis’ time. Parrillo suggested that, as part of the socialization process, an individual often learn the prejudices of others, especially the individual’s parents . Ellis’ basis for hating the “blacks” was his father’s hate for them, never from any direct experience he may had. Eventually, Ellis became a member and soon the president of the Ku Klux Klan, a secret organization against black people, where he was associated with fellow “black” haters. Parrillo also explained as part of an individual’s psychological perspectives, the individual would not want to associate and mingle with the group who is the object of the individual’s prejudice, which was clearly exhibited by Ellis, though his perspectives would change in the end. He stated that a few times that he wouldn’t want to be associated with black people. It was imminent that Ellis’ hate for the “blacks” would result in aggression as exemplified in one scene Ellis himself related, and it was still due of his frustration. This confirms Parrillo’s and other investigators’ claim that “frustration tends to increase aggression towards others”. Even the economic competition theory was confirmed when Ellis described the Klan:
“The majority of ‘em are low income whites, people who really don’t have a part in something… Maybe they’ve had bitter experiences in this life and they had to hate somebody. So the natural person to hate would be the black person. He’s beginnin’ to come up, he’s beginnin’ to learn to read and start votin’ and run for political office. Here are white people who are supposed to be superior to them and we’re shut out.
Ellis’ transformation from a “black hater” to someone who was able to willingly work with them and accept their humanity confirms the social norm theory. Parrillo explained that “people’s prejudice should decrease or increase significantly when they move into areas where the prejudicial norm is lesser or greater”. Ellis’ nomination and winning the co-chairmanship in the AFL-CIO was the start of his transformation. His interaction with many black individuals eventually shifted his general view of them. It was there that he began to associate himself with black people as fellow human beings with the same thoughts, problems and feeling as he.
Psychological and sociological perspectives can cause an individual to have prejudices against another group. It may also be noted that as a result of this perspectives, an individual may or may not realize these prejudices. But as exemplified by Ellis’ account, and according to Parrillo’s suggestion, prejudices may be decreased, if not eliminated at all. Correcting psychological and sociological perspectives are sure to change an individual’s attitude from having discriminatory inclination towards another group of people to learning to live with and among them. History itself is a witness that changing the sociological perspectives has changed people’s attitude towards a group that was an object of prejudice, though there are still a lot to be done to eliminate it completely. Until such time, the concept that “all men are created equal” will remain to be a myth.
Works Cited
Parrillo, Vincent N. “The causes of prejudice.”
Terkel, Studs. “C. P. Ellis.”
The Myth Of Phaethon Short Summary
The ancient Greek myth of Phaethon and the sun chariot gives a dramatic account of the intense global heating that resulted from the combined effects of the activated Sun and the dust-congested solar system.
Keeping this in mind, let us now see what the ancient Greek myth of Phaethon tells us about conditions that once prevailed in the solar system.
Helios, the sun god, and Clemene, a mortal woman, produced a mortal son named Phaethon. The child lived on Earth, where he was raised by his mother. One day at school, hoping to impress his classmates, Phaethon proclaimed that Helios was his father, but the others did not believe him. Instead he received back only ridicule. At the advice of his mother, the troubled Phaethon one night journeyed to the Palace of the Sun to meet his father. He explained to Helios how his classmates teased him and asked him if Helios could find some way to give him proof that he was really his father. To accommodate him, Helios swore by the river Styx that he would grant Phaethon any wish he desired. Phaethon’s choice was that his father let him drive the sun chariot across the sky for one day.
Helios very much regretted Phaethon’s choice because driving the sun chariot was a very tricky task, unsuitable for a child. He tried to persuade Phaethon to choose another wish, but Phaethon would not give in. Having sworn by the river Styx, Helios could not go back on his word, so he finally consented. He took Phaethon to the stable and had his winged horses yoked to the chariot. He anointed Phaethon with ambrosia juice so that he might better endure the greater heat of the sun chariot. Then he cautioned him that he must keep to his course, that if he drove too high, he would set fire to the heavenly constellations, and if he drove too low, he would consume the Earth.
Having received these words of advice, Phaethon eagerly mounted the chariot, took the reins, and departed into the sky. At first everything went well. However, as Phaethon drove the steeds higher, the horses sensed that the chariot was lighter than usual and began to realize that their master was not in control of the reins. Becoming bold, they left the beaten track and began to rush where they chose. On their wild course they passed various constellations, causing them to warm up. As they passed Scorpius, Phaethon happened to glimpse the barbed point of the Scorpion’s tail wet with black venom. He panicked and let go of the reins. The horses then began to stampede and range at large, first soaring up to the very top of the sky, then plunging downward close to the Earth.
In other words, the venom from the Scorpion’s stinger – the cosmic dust propelled inward by the cosmic rays from the Galactic center – triggered an exponential increase in solar activity.
The myth’s description of the Sun surrounded by smoke and pitchy darkness portrays the Sun surrounded by a cocoon of cosmic dust vaporized into submicron smoke-like particles. The sun chariot’s unusually intense heat signifies the excess infrared radiation that the Sun was emitting while in its activated T Tauri state. The myth then describes how large quantities of moisture evaporate from the land surface, rivers, and oceans.
Earth pleads to Zeus, king of the gods, to do something to save the earth and heavens. Zeus then hurls a mighty bolt of lightning at Phaethon, killing him and knocking him from the chariot. The frightened horses tear themselves free, and “fragments of the chariot, torn in pieces, are scattered far and wide.” Phaethon wrapped in fire, streaks through the air like a shooting star and falls into the river Eridanus. Zeus finally ends the holocaust by sending down a torrential rain that causes the Deluge.
The myth goes on to relate that Cygnus, king of Liguria, grieved deeply for the dead Phaethon. He continuously plunged into the river to retrieve pieces of Phaethon’s body. Taking pity on Cygnus, Helios transformed him into a swan and placed him in the heavens, where he appears as a constellation by that name. The Cygnus constellation, also known as the Northern Cross, is located on the galactic equator near Sagitta. Interestingly, it depicts Cygnus flying in the direction of the Galactic center.
Further on, the myth describes a period of darkness in which the Sun was heavily obscured.
The myth then relates that all the deities stood around the Sun and entreated him not to be determined to bring darkness over the world. At length they succeeded in inducing him to resume his task. The Sun returned and the Earth was restored with Zeus’s help: The springs and rivers began to flow, grass returned to the ground, and green leaves to the trees. That is, the Galactic center activity subsided, the cosmic dust was expelled from the solar system, and things returned to normal on Earth.
The Phathon story has often been understood to commemorate some great flashing event in the skies, whether comet or meteor. Everyone rushes by instinct more accurately, habit for a so called natural explanation. But on examination, the case turns out not to be so easy. The narrating of the cataclysm may be fanciful and impressionistic, as if the poets enjoyed an emotional release from the regularity of celestial orbs, but their account also makes technical sense, as anyone would suspect who has read Stegemann’s solid inquiry into Nonnos as the heir to Dorotheos of Sidon’s tightknit astrology. As for Ovid, his standing as a scholar is by now unchallenged and, in fact, he hints at rigid cosmological formulae with surprising authority. In his description of the hidden mountains emerging from the waves, when the seas shrank into sand they rise as new islands. How much better does this image of mountain peaks and islands illustrate the stars of a constellation rising, one after the other, than for instance, the Icelandic wording of the emerging of a new earth.
The image of Phaethon suggests the role of the eternal youth in our cultural fascination with new technology and its power. This represents a technicized variety of the idealism and boundless energy evoked by myth’s imagination of youth.
The myth of Phaethon could represent any of the several celestial phenomena. Perhaps Venus path crosses to either side of the sun and is in some ways erratic is intended by the allegory. Or perhaps some dramatic, unexpected, and unwelcome cosmic visitor inspired the myth. A comet may seem wayward and sun settling. Some evidence in the myth implies that the story concern the order of the year ant the fear the sun might abandon its normal path, an anxiety akin to the notion that the sun threatens just to continue its way south and maroon the world in winter. Although the chariot’s departure with Phaethon was styled as a sunrise in the sun’s daily course, the sun’s annual motion on the ecliptic may be the story’s real core. Helios advised Phaethon the road would pass by the Bull, the Archer, the Lion, the Scorpion, and the Crab. These constellations define the better part of the zodiac, territory the sun would never encounter in but one day’s travels.
Reference
Allister, M. C. (2004). Eco-man. New perspective on masculinity and nature.
Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.