# data[].attributes.body
Aegistus has managed to get Clytemnestra to kill Agamemnon because he wanted revenge on his father and power for himself. In the play written by Shakespear entitled “Othello'', we can witness something similar happening: Iago, who is one of the characters as well as Othello’s companion, will manage to make Othello believe that his wife, Desdemona, is being unfaithful. During the entire play, Desdemona will try her best to prove to Othello that she is all about him and not at all about Iago. Othello on his side, will not believe anything she says while Iago is feeding him with lies. In both cases, we can witness Aegisthus and Iago doing the same thing, which is leading their close ones to believe something and take actions that will benefit them whenever it is done. Moreover, it is important to note that these people they are trying to manipulate are both considered in a higher position than they are, which is surprising because they are supposed to know better. I think that they are falling easier to the manipulation since in both plays love is involved and love is something that pushes us away from being rational: Othello loves Desdemona so he does not want to be hurt; Clytemnestra loves Aegistus, so she puts all her trust in him. Surely, Aegistus did get Clytemnestra to kill her husband and thought that he would be the one with all the power after that. In the other play, it is Iago who hates Othello because he chose Cassio instead of him, to become Othello’s lieutenant.

# data[].attributes.body
Cassandra has been one of the characters that I will certainly remember when it comes to the play "Agamemnon" because she was able to make me reflect through her actions. As we all know, she can see in the future and at some point in the play, she was entering the house of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra and she could tell that she was going to be killed along with Agamemnon. What surprised me when she knew that was the fact that she accepted to be killed and did not try to escape her fate in any kind of way. This is something that relates to my beliefs as I am also a huge believer in fate. However, I feel like people believe in it only when the outcome is positive, which is the issue. Accepting our fate when something bad is happening to us is really difficult and this is when we tend to think that fate is not a real thing or we just decide to fight it, when it truly is real. As it has been explained in the TED talk, everything happens for a reason and it is all going to make sense at the end. When Cassandra accepted her fate, she chose the best decision for herself and for Agamemnon because she knew that nothing could save her from death. I believe that even if she tried to escape, that would be exactly her fate still and she would eventually end up dying at some point. Most of the time, accepting our destiny is the easiest option and this is something that takes courage to do especially when we are going through hard times.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dispelling the Theory of Fate | Luke Dow | TEDxYouth@WIS

# data[].attributes.body
The sacrifice of Isaac is a very good way to illustrate what happened in the play “Agamemnon”. The fact that Agamenon killed his daughter before the Trojan war as a sacrifice can be mirrored through this painting. What is happening here is similar as we have Abraham about to kill his son Isaac, only to prove to God that he is a genuine and religious person. The motivations are completely different but I thought the action of Agamemnon could be illustrated through this painting as well, the only difference is the outcome of both stories. Also, the angel that is appearing on the right side made me think of what Clytmenstra would have done if she was present during the events; moreover, we can note that the angel stopped Abraham from killing his son which is what Clytemnestra would have done. If this case scenario happened in the play, I believe that the entire plot would have been completely different.

# data[].attributes.body
Orestes and Electra teamed up to kill their mother as well as Aegistus since they believed both were responsible for their father’s death. At first, when I saw that this was happening, I would have never believed that it was something that could be related to the real world; however, I was wrong. Children are actually able to kill their parents at a very young age and this is something I knew, but I was not sure to what extent it could go. If we think about it, it must be easier for children to make such actions while they are not fully grown yet and when they still are not conscious about what life is about: therefore, they are not able to understand the entirety of a situation. What is meant to be said is that when you are a child and if your parents do not satisfy your needs, no matter how meaningless they can be, the feeling of anger will rise fast in them and this is something that can go wrong. If time passes by and parents are not taking this feeling into account, it will end up growing in the children and they will not be able to separate their emotions from their actions nor find any clear thoughts. In this video, we can see that teenagers are killing their parents for reasons that are not worth killing them. But because they may have affected their children emotionally and did not really consider them, the children will act on revenge, which is  the feeling that has taken over. This is exactly what happened in the play, as we can see that Orestes has a lot of anger in him towards his mother, for not taking care of him.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 Kids Who Killed Their Parents, And Why - Very Real | Oxygen

# data[].attributes.body
The title of this play is really interesting because it does not directly resonate with the context of the play itself. However, I feel like during this play, Electra as well as the chorus have been the ones mourning the death of their king, Agamemnon. Surely, Electra has been the one performing the libation bearer at the tomb of her father and this is the reason why I chose this picture. I feel like this picture of a veiled woman in black would represent how Electra was feeling during the entire play as she was mourning her father, while everyone else was preoccupied with revenge. Additionally, the chorus has also been reminding us about Agamemnon's death and mourning him.

# data[].attributes.body
This quote by Martin Luther King fits well as a lesson to what has happened during “The Libation Bearers”. Whenever we find ourselves in darkness, we can not put ourselves into an even darker place because that will never be the solution. In this case, Orestes and Electra are the ones concerned since they are being motivated by the death of their father to do bad actions that will surely not bring him back and they were about to put themselves into very bad situations. Instead of answering the wrong with the wrong, they should have known better, which is complicated to do when something tragic happens to someone that was related to us, but they will eventually realize that it was not the best option for them to seek revenge. I understand the fact that they wanted to seek justice for their father, but they should have done it in a better way that would not require any violence and they should have reflected more about the consequences of their actions.

# data[].attributes.body
Freud has made analysis about how sexual desires can cause psychic troubles. I thought that this was something I could relate to the play “Oedipus”, because Oedipus married his own mother, which means that he found her attractive as a woman. The fact that he did not know she was his mother plays a huge role in his decision, but I think that he felt worse when he knew that he killed his father unintentionally. According to Freud’s study, there is a possibility children hate their father because they can feel a sexual attraction towards their mother and they are mad about the fact that the father gets to be closer to the mother at a level that they can not reach being the child. I think that Oeudipus was lucky he did not have to deal with the truth during the entire time he was alive because that may have caused him serious mental issues that he could not be able to handle. Nevertheless, because he did not know the truth, it makes everything easier until the truth comes out. The truth will reveal a lot about him and will make him face another version of himself that he never thought he was. Finally, I believe that all of this reveals a lot about the way he reacted when the truth was revealed.

# data[].attributes.body
The oracle in the play that is informing Oedipus’ parents about their child is something I would compare to something that is happening in real life. In Nigeria, parents have abandoned their children because they have been told by people that their children will cause them bad luck. Surely, witchcraft is something that is still huge in Nigeria and people believe in it. In this case, parents decide to even abandon their children because they are going to bring bad luck for the family. This situation is the same that is happening in “Oedipus”, but it looks like their bad luck happened anyways even though they thought that they got rid of it. In the case of Nigeria, parents may have escaped it by living away from their children, but they have thrown their children away without even knowing if the information they have been told is true or not. If they choose not to abandon them, they can save them by bringing them to a religious place and asking for someone to save their soul; however, as I have seen in the documentary, parents still refuse to keep their children in their homes and would rather them to completely leave their lives.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nigeria: The Plight of the Witch Children I ARTE.tv Documentary

# data[].attributes.body
In this play, Oedipus will have pride that is not well placed and that seems to have taken over other traits that he may have. Surely, this all begins because he is a king and this fact plays a huge role in his pride. Moreover, we must remember that Oeudipus had a fate that the oracle predicted for him. He thought it was something that he was able to escape; therefore, this gave him even more confidence about who he was because the way his life was going was giving him the impression that he succeeded in escaping it. Since he was pretending to be this person he is not, Oedipus has created an identity that is not his true self and we can tell that he is lacking in self- awareness. All of this coming together just shows that he is a person with a lot of pride and we can see that this trait did not play in his favor.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pride has many flavors - they all make life unpleasant

Pride is an emotion that can be both nurturing or poisonous.

It's okay to feel proud when you accomplish something great. Feeling proud tastes delicious - it inspires positive behavior.

Being proud is a different thing - it can make you come across as arrogant and self-centered. Being proud is about creating an inflated self-image. It makes life unpleasant, especially for those around you.

"Generosity is giving more than you have, and pride is taking less than you need." ― Kahlil Gibran

So, is it better to not feel proud at all?
Pride becomes poisonous when used in significant quantities. Excessive pride leaves a nasty aftertaste - use it with moderation.

Pride Is Nothing to Be Proud Of

Aristotle described pride as the 'crown of the virtues.'

For the Greek philosopher, pride implies greatness. He considered a proud person as someone who is and thinks to be worthy of great things.

Avoid vices. To think we are worthy of great things when we are not is vanity. Whereas to think of oneself to be worthy of less than we are worthy of is cowardice.

Pride is an emotion we experience when we've achieved something great. Or when someone close to us has. It's the recognition for a job well done.

So, is pride something virtuous or evil?

Modern psychologists split pride in two emotions: hubristic and authentic.

Authentic pride is feeling confident and competent about who you are. Hubristic pride is letting egocentrism and arrogance take over. The latter encourages aggressive behavior; the first, affiliation.

Experts argue they are not two separate emotions - the dosage separates authentic pride from hubristic pride. Pride itself is not a problem -  excessive pride is.

Arrogant people tend to score high on narcissism. Excessive pride diminishes self-awareness. Like an arrogant leader who's always exaggerating his achievements to denigrate his rivals.
Excessive pride is an exaggerated appreciation of oneself by devaluating others - we turn other people into our competitors.
While pride can undoubtedly lead to arrogant displays, it can also motivate us to give our best.

"I know" is teenagers' response by default. They are not wired to listen. Adolescents believe they have all the answers. That's not an issue unless they carry that arrogant behavior into adulthood.

Excessive pride makes us ignorant. It harms our relationships too - nobody likes being with a know-it-all.

Pride is like a condiment - it adds flavor to your life. A little touch can make it more pleasurable or exciting. In excess, it makes everything unpleasant.

Excessive Pride Tastes Like Poison

As C.S. Lewis wrote, "True humility is not thinking less of yourself, but thinking of yourself less."

Feeling proud is not the same as being proud.

Acknowledging your strengths and achievements reinforces positive behavior. It inspires you to give more.

However, being proud is living under a distorted notion. We exaggerate our perception of self to feel superior.

Pride is rooted in the same principle that envy  - we define our self worth by comparing to others. But, unlike envy, rather than wanting what others have, we need to disparage them to feel superior.

Buddhism recognizes six poisons that harm our perception and behavior. Pride is the most pervasive.

Pride is a poison because it's the basis for disrespecting others and for creating suffering in our lives.

Excessive pride is an exaggerated appreciation of oneself by devaluating others. It is often driven by poor self-worth.

We are so insecure that we compensate by feeling superior. And look for others' flaws as a way to disguise our own.

We spend too much time competing with other people. They taught us that winners take all. Most people believe that being successful requires humiliating or defeating others.

As Thubten Caldron said, "Why do we have to put someone down to feel good?"

Buddhists encourage confidence and honesty with oneself. Pride is demeaning other people or feeling an aversion to others. Instead of nurturing self-growth, we compete and want to defeat others.

Excessive pride prevents the growth of other virtues. It becomes too uncomfortable to recognize our shortcoming or mistakes. Pride makes us believe we are always right.
How can we become more compassionate if we are already so great?
The Seven Flavors of Pride

"Behind every argument lies someone's ignorance." - Louis D. Brandeis

Pride has many flavors - actually seven, according to Thubten Chodron.

In one of her teachings, the American Buddhist explains the different flavors that pride takes. Each has self-indulgent nuances. But, they all leave a bitter aftertaste.

1. Pride over the inferior:

The first type of pride is the most common. We compare ourselves to others in terms of education, social standing, health, beauty, physical attributes, or other aspects

This happens when we, in fact, are better than somebody else in one of those aspects. We compare our strengths to someone else's weakness. And look down on them.

2. Great Pride:

This happens when we can't accept that we are equal to others in a particular aspect. Our competitive mode doesn't leave us in peace. We see others as competitors that we must defeat.

Great pride is a culture view, especially in America. That's what kids learn from their parents. They associate getting recognition to beating someone else.

Even when we go for a run or bike ride, we need stats to prove that we are better. All we care is bragging about our superior performance, not the joy of exercising.

As Chodron explains, parents don't ask their children if they had fun during a match. But, praise their kids when they beat others. Children learn that recognition matters more than having joy.

Great pride is the enemy of collaboration - instead of thinking of the group welfare, we want to win.

3. Pride of Pride:

This is when we compare ourselves to others - in any aspect - and are actually inferior.

Instead of accepting the fact, we look for something that will make us proud. For example, you might say, "I might not be as good taking pictures as X, but I'm a more honest person."

You focus on another quality that will help overcome your weakness. One that will make you feel morally superior. You defeat the other person by attacking their virtues.

It can be something insignificant, but still, you find a way to discredit your 'opponents' by finding their moral flaw.

4. Pride of the sense of "I":

This is thinking of yourself as being perfect.

You turn one experience into something that makes you feel the king of the world. Like when you break a rule or do something that makes you feel unique.

5. Evident or manifest pride:

This is where we are proud about the qualities or abilities that we don't have. But we think we do.

You see it all the time - people get attached to an illusion. They think they are proficient at something but are clueless.

Manifest pride is when we believe we are better, wiser, more spiritual, or virtuous than we are.

6. Feeling slightly less pride:

This is when we feel proud of our weaknesses. It's the case of those who play the victim role because it gives them power - others pay attention.

We make ourselves insignificant by putting ourselves down. We make a big deal of small flaws to feel at the center of the world.

The need to compete with others makes us cling to an exaggerated image of ourselves - in this case, a negative one. We become proud of being a victim.

7. Distorted pride:

The last type of pride is about bragging about our non-virtues.

It's the feeling of superiority when someone cheats and doesn't get caught. Think of those who lie in the tax declaration or frame someone else at work for a mistake they did.

Distorted pride is when our morality is full of holes, but we feel superior because we got away with it.

The Antidote to Excessive Pride

Unfortunately, there's no simple cure. We spend our entires lives feeding our ego - it takes time to reframe that relationship.

Start by reflecting on the role pride plays in your life.

Acknowledge the difference between feeling proud and being proud. The first is the joy of a job well done. The latter is an exaggerated, distorted version of who you are.

You can turn your pride into a means for development. Inquire your pride and see how it manifests. Excessive pride signals what we must further develop.

Do you feel insecure about a particular aspect of yourself? Do you have a distorted perception of your strengths or abilities? Do you see others as rivals or collaborators?

As Sophocles said, "All men make mistakes, but a good man yields when he knows his course is wrong and repairs the evil. The only crime is pride."

Buddhism teaches to overcome excessive pride by cultivating equanimity and love for others. An appreciation for life and people removes the need to defeat them - there's no need to compete.
Reconnecting ourselves with what we don't know keeps our ego in check.
Intellectual humility can help overcome our pride too. Do you think you know a lot about a particular topic? Focus on something complicated that you don't master. Surround yourself with people who know more than you do.
Pride is being attached to an exaggerated image of our self - we must let go of that dependence.
Thubten Chodron recommends contemplating that everything we have came from others.

Reflect that everything you do, know, are or have it's not yours to start with. Everything happened due to the efforts and kindness of somebody else.

Do you feel proud of your body? Your parents gave it to you. Are you proud of your car? Reflect on everybody involved in designing, building, and distributing the vehicle. Somebody else created it - not you.

Trace the origin of whatever you feel proud - consider everyone who participated in the process.

Your knowledge is not yours alone. Your parents, teachers, professors, coaches, and many more contributed to your learning experience.

The world is an interconnected whole - no person or nation can be truly isolated. Reflecting on that will keep your pride under control. Everything we own or achieve is a consequence of collaboration with others.

Pride poisons our life. It creates an inflated version of self that we must defend at all costs. We take everything as criticism - we are under attack.

Don't turn life into an unpleasant experience. Work on deflating your ego. When your identity no longer is at stake, you won't need to fight with others.

Recover the pleasure of playing - life is not a match to be won, but enjoyed. Acknowledge the good, avoid the pressure to defeat others.

You wouldn't accomplish anything without the help of other people. Pride has no room when we understand it's better to be surrounded by collaborators rather than competitors.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Pride Is Poison for Your Soul | By Gustavo Razzetti

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pride is an emotion that can be both nurturing or poisonous. It's okay to feel proud when you accomplish something great. Feeling proud tastes delicious - it inspires positive behavior. Being proud is a different thing - it can make you come across as arrogant and self-centered. Being proud is about creating an inflated self-image.

# data[].attributes.body
“Antigone” is a play that I have been reading since high school and the more I read it, the more I understand the lesson behind it. Antigone is a very hard headed character that will do anything to achieve what she has in her mind. She is determined and she is not scared of taking actions for the sake of people that she loves. In her I could identify Skeeter, the journalist from the movie “The Help”. This latter has decided to expose white families and their actions towards the maids in a book that she eventually published anonymously. By doing this, she went against the laws that were still valid at the time, in which Black people did not have the right to say anything and they did not have a voice that could be heard. In these two women, I can see that they are not intimidated by threats that are coming from a higher position because when it comes to something that really matters to them, and if they think that a situation is unfair, they will take action to fix that no matter what the consequences are. They are also taking full responsibility in their actions.

# data[].attributes.body
Whether or not Antigone was doing the right thing during this play could be an entire discussion where people would be agreeing or disagreeing with each other. In my opinion, Antigone was on the right side when it came to claiming the rights that one of her brothers had applied to the other one too since they both died anyways. When talking about this, Immanuel Kant is a great example. This latter said: “Morality is defined by duties and one’s action in moral if it is an act motivated by duty”. So, here what we can understand is that all of us, as human beings, have several duties in our lives that we must fulfill no matter what. In Creon's case, he had duties as a father and he did not know how to manage that nor separate that from his personal feelings. I think that what is important when Immanuel Kant says this is that duties should never be mixed with emotions because they can challenge them and make us forget what is right. The fact that they can challenge them is not good because a duty is supposed to have a good essence: they are morals and they are our foundation. Because Creon was not able to do so, Antigone was there to remind him of what needs to be done and he did not appreciate this. The reasons why Creon would not complete his duties are not strong enough to justify his actions as the boys are already dead and there is nothing he can do to change that. Therefore, there is no need to dwell on hatred and he should have fulfilled his duties.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Heather Wilburn, Ph.D.

Morally speaking, Kant is a deontologist; from the Greek, this is the science of duties. For Kant, morality is not defined by the consequences of our actions, our emotions, or an external factor. Morality is defined by duties and one's action is moral if it is an act motivated by duty.

According to Kant the only thing that is good in itself is the "good will." The will is what drives our actions and grounds the intention of our act. It is good when it acts from duty. To clarify, Kant thinks the good will is the only thing that is intrinsically valuable. If we think about the other goods and things that we value, such are not good without qualification. For example, we value knowledge, but such can be used to commit atrocities in the world, so knowledge is good sometimes. The same can be said of courage. We value courage, but a suicide bomber also exhibits courage. So, courage can only be good sometimes. We can think of other examples as well. This leads Kant to claim that the good will is the only thing good without qualification-or the only thing that is intrinsically good. Accordingly, the will is a good will provided it acts from duty.

Kant recognizes that it is difficult to determine one's intentions, so he makes a distinction between acting in conformity with duty and acting from duty. To illustrate this distinction, let's take the example of three young men who see an elderly woman needing help across the street. Man A decides he will help the woman across the street because if he didn't he would feel guilty all day. Man B decides he will help the woman across the street because he recognizes her as his neighbor, Mrs. Wilson and Mrs. Wilson makes the best cookies in the neighborhood. So, Man B helps her because he reasons that he will be rewarded. Man C decides he will help the woman across the street because it is the right thing to do; he understands that he has a moral obligation to help others in need when he can.

The results of all three individuals are the same-the woman is helped across the street. If we were looking at this from a utilitarian perspective, all three of the young men would be morally praiseworthy because in all three cases, happiness or well-being is increased (or pain is relieved). However, for Kant, only one of the young men's actions have moral worth and it is Man C; he understands what his moral duty is and he acts from it. The other two act only in conformity with duty-they are driven by some other goal or desire aside from duty itself.

Duties are principles that guide our actions. Duties are imperatives in the sense that they tell us what to do. Kant recognizes that there are different types of imperatives in his distinction between a hypothetical and a categorical imperative. An imperative is essentially a ought; something I ought to do. Hypothetical imperatives are the oughts that direct my actions provided I have certain goals or interests. In fact, these oughts are entirely dependent upon my goals or interests. For example, if I want to be a good basketball player I ought to practice free throws or if I want to go to law school I ought to take a logic class. If I change my goal and decide to be a baseball player or a welder instead then my oughts may also change. Hypothetical imperatives have nothing to do with morality. However a categorical imperative does not depend upon my desires or wants. These are necessary and always binding and are the oughts that determine what our moral duties are. Even if I don't want to help the elderly person across the street, if I have a duty to do so, my ought is binding. We should all be familiar enough with feeling we must do something even if we'd rather do something else.

Kant's moral theory has three formulas for the categorical imperative. So, if you're facing a moral dilemma you must determine whether or not your action is permissible according to the formulas. Simply put, think of the formulas as tests that have to be passed in order for a principle or act to be moral.

Formula one states that we ought to act in a way such that the maxim, or principle, of our act can be willed a universal law. If your maxim cannot be universalized then that act is morally off limits. For example, if I am considering stealing a loaf of bread, I have to ask myself if my maxim can be made a universal law. This would look something like this: Is it okay for all people to steal all the time? The answer is no; the maxim itself would be self-defeating because if everyone stole all the time there would be no private property and stealing would no longer be possible.

The second formula states that we ought to treat humanity (self and others) as an end and never as a mere means. Essentially, this entails that I treat all persons with respect and dignity; I help others achieve their goals when possible, and I avoid using them as tools or objects to further my own goals. For Kant, since humans have the capacity for autonomy and rationality, it is crucial that we treat humans with respect and dignity.

The third formula states that we act on principles that could be accepted within a community of other rational agents. The third formula, "the kingdom of ends," moves us from the individual level to the social level.

In brief, Kant's moral philosophy focuses on fairness and the value of the individual. His method rests on our ability to reason, our autonomy (i.e. our ability to give ourselves moral law and govern our own lives), and logical consistency. He also offers an objective sense of morality in the form of absolute duties-duties that are binding regardless of our desires, goals, or outcomes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Heather Wilburn, Ph.D. Morally speaking, Kant is a deontologist; from the Greek, this is the science of duties. For Kant, morality is not defined by the consequences of our actions, our emotions, or an external factor. Morality is defined by duties and one's action is moral if it is an act motivated by duty.

# data[].attributes.body
Part of the reasons why Creon did not want to listen to what Antigone was thinking of doing is because she was a woman, and as we all know, women have always been struggling to make their voices heard. What Creon is doing is reminiscent of Codella’s tweet where he was attacking the former White House CIO because of what she was wearing. He was saying that her clothes are too distracting for him to be able to understand what she was saying. This is all to say that she is a woman and it is bothering him that she is being seen and expressing her words. This comes back with Creon as he was arguing with Antigone, he was making several statements about her being “just a woman” and him being the man, so she has nothing to say to all of this as well as he is the only one who has the right to decide.

# data[].attributes.body
When thinking about the Odyssey now that I have entirely read it, I feel like it is a play that I would compare to the concept of " an escape room", but in this case a lot more challenging and real. Surely, Odysseus along with his crew have been through a lot: they had to go through a lot of different islands and places to be able to get back home. In every single place in which they stopped, there was something that would either keep them for a long time there or something that they had to run away from. The fact that they had to confront something at every single place they have been to is the reason why it made me think of an escape room, which is going from room to room after you have solved the riddle of the room. However, I would still say that Odysseus has been through much more than just solving riddles as he also lost some of his crew members along the way and actually risked his life the entire time. In some escape rooms, you can also lose one of your friends on the way to be able to get on the next room, which is very similar.

# data[].attributes.body
Odysseus has been one of the most stubborn heroes I have ever seen and I think that he is very similar to Thor since this latter has a lot of pride and ego, just like Odysseus does. Indeed, Thor has shown us that he is capable as a hero and he has the required qualities to be one, but the fact that people let him know that will lead to the rise of his ego and pride. Thor also has a protective side when it comes to his friends and he might be very hard to convince when it comes to making decisions about something that will affect his closed ones. Odysseus is the exact same way in that sense as he will also be very stubborn, has a lot of pride because he is in control and he is smarter. He will also show loyalty to his close ones and commitment, even though sometimes it might just shows stubbornness.

# data[].attributes.body
Finally, I would like to compare a moment of this play, which I thought was very interesting, with the sirens. During this moment, Odysseus was told not to listen to them because they have the power to control and enchant men with their voices; nevertheless, Odysseus perceedds to let his greed take over and not listen to what he was advised to do. The fact that he did not want to miss out on the experience of the sirens simply shows how greedy we are as human beings. I think that this is something that I can relate to the real world. He was told that those voices were amazing and he did not want to miss the experience, so he put himself, as well as his companions, through a potential danger only to satisfy his own desires. I think that this is something that we do, as human beings; being selfish in the worst way possible only for us to have the best experience and not missing out. This is not something we constantly do, but we surely do have movements where we fear missing out on something so bad that we are putting ourselves in danger as well as people surrounding us. Therefore, this could be a lesson.

# data[].attributes.body
This quote from Maya Angelou explains a lot about how heavy bearing stories that only you know must be and how challenging it can get sometimes. In this play, Aeneas is the leading character but he is also taking a lot on him since the fall of Troy. During his journey, we can see that he has been struggling finding a balance between his personal life and his duties as a leader, but this is not something he explicitly mentions nor mentionned at all. He also gets into small conflicts with his own family in addition to all the hidden thoughts that affect him. Although he might hide a huge part of himself, he does not hesitate to always rely on fate, which I believe was his way of deciding between the personal needs and the duties whenever it was too much.

# data[].attributes.body
“The Stranger'' from Camus is a book that I would compare Aeneas’ journey to, as the protagonist of this story, Mersault, is experiencing isolation because he cannot fit into the rules of society as well as the rules people are supposed to follow. Aeneas during his journey also had to go through a lot of questions related to the meaning of life as well as destiny and the fact that he seemed to question himself about that can be related to the fact that Mersault also was reflecting on that side of his life. Because they both did not feel like they belonged to a certain society, they have both experienced the feeling of being isolated either in society in general or during his journey, when it comes to Aeneis.

# data[].attributes.body
Because the whole purpose of Aneas’ journey is to basically create a new home for his people and because he is so devoted to that mission, I thought I could relate this to the real world by comparing it to the concept of humanitarian actions/ missions. Surely, I know that being a humanitarian is a really hard work that will call for sacrifices and choices that we did not ask for, as well as obstacles that we need to face even though we did not need them. But in this case, it is their duty to face every single challenge just like Aeneas did for his people because that is the duty of leaders. During his journey, Aeneas will discover a lot of things and will experience another perspective of what life can be not only for him but also for people around him. Humanitarian actions are also about getting yourself involved into a world that you are not used to and a world that is different from the one that used to surround you. The only goal is to first serve people who are in need and eventually that experience will be beneficial for our own selves.

# data[].attributes.body
The concepts of passion, love and desire have never really been considered a “normal” topic of conversation in our society, which has made authors like Ovid memorable for what they did since he was able to talk about it explicitly even though it was not tolerated. I would like to compare this fact to the trilogy that everyone knows about and that is known around the entire globe, “Fifty Shades”.  This trilogy deals with the same issues that Ovid is talking about in his poems and is putting it out in the world through a visual perspective which can be more triggering than words written down. Either way, I think that both of these oeuvres have had the ability to normalize subjects that we avoid talking about in our society that in fact needed to be more exposed. Talking about something that is part of our nature and that we will have to accept either way must be done and rejecting it will not make us feel any better. I would also like to add to that the fact that people are willing to talk about the subject and the proof is how famous the movies were as soon as the first one was out; however, they choose not to because of society.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that comparing Ovid to Beyonce will be a good idea in this case since they are both expressing themselves about the same topics but in different ways. Desire and sexuality are the topics they both have in common and the song written by Beyonce called “partition” is a great example where she talks about a very passionate relationship between  two human beings, just like Ovid did in most of his poems, especially ‘Metamorphoses’. I believe that what is interesting here too is the way they are both sharing about the subject through different arts but that can also be related to the fact that they are not part of the same generation: Ovid is

# data[].attributes.body
Michelangelo has been one of the most important figures when it comes to the renaissance period, and one of his work which is called “David” can be a good connection with the work of Ovid as at that period of time, nudity was not as common as it is in our society now. Surely, the fact that Michalngelo was able to expose such work was a huge step and it is also a way of showing how desire and sexuality does not have to be related to the body directly. For instance, in Michelangelo’s case, he is not associating sexuality nor desire, to his work at all, which is a really creative way of showing people that desire is not always related to the body nor nudity. What I wanted to show here is how his work has helped break a common thought that everyone had and that now has changed, which can also create a new lens to Ovid’s work as well as his work.

# data[].attributes.body
I think “The allegory of the Cave'' has made me think about the topic of aliens that has gone viral for a few months because their existence has been confirmed. People will have their own opinions about aliens and will believe in their existence or not. I think this is a good comparison with the allegory of the cave because in this latter, the men who are chained only have either perspective of what life is and if someone comes and tells them there is more than what they see, they will probably choose not to believe that person. In the case of aliens, because we are so used to seeing human beings everyday, we would never think about living with aliens on planet earth, but how do we know that if we only have our daily perspective? Furthermore, there were stories about people testifying the existence of aliens and how they saw them. Those testimonies have not changed much on people’s thoughts and they will simply not believe those people, which in "The Allegory of the Cave” is something that happened, since the other prisoners were still skeptical about what the free prisoner was telling them.

# data[].attributes.body
All of this talk made me link the text of “The Allegory of the Cave” to the concept of existentialism because it made me think about the actual meaning of life and what everyone else thinks of it. Maybe my definition of life will not be the same as my friends. It also made me question the perspective that people have when it comes to  leaving life, my own perspective and ask myself if there is more that I actually do not know, when I think I know everything and if all of this is true. It also made me think about how we ended up defining what we are living now and how we manage to convince ourselves that this is real life and nothing else. I think “The Allegory of the Cave” explains this in some ways and it is giving us advice basically saying that we should never settle for what we know, always be open to discover more and seek beyond what we see as well as what is given to us.

# data[].attributes.body
All of this talk made me link the text of “The Allegory of the Cave” to the concept of existentialism because it made me think about the actual meaning of life and what everyone else thinks of it. Maybe my definition of life will not be the same as my friends. It also made me question the perspective that people have when it comes to  leaving life, my own perspective and ask myself if there is more that I actually do not know, when I think I know everything and if all of this is true. It also made me think about how we ended up defining what we are living now and how we manage to convince ourselves that this is real life and nothing else. I think “The Allegory of the Cave” explains this in some ways and it is giving us advice basically saying that we should never settle for what we know, always be open to discover more and seek beyond what we see as well as what is given to us.

# data[].attributes.body
Talking about Sappho reminded me of another song by Beyonce called “Formation”, which is a song celebrating women empowerment as well as sensuality and independence. This song has a really deep meaning to it and it encourages women to never be afraid of assuming who they are and who they want to be. She also uses a cultural context that might differ from Sappho, but this does not take away the fact that they are both talking about the same subject. In her song, Beyonce challenges societal beliefs on women: what they should look like or what they should do, which is the exact same thing that Sappho is doing in her poetry, which I thought was a very interesting comparison. Moreover, the fact that they are talking about the same subject shows that it is still a topic that needs to be addressed even today.

# data[].attributes.body
What Sappho has done in her poetry can be one of the outcomes of what the LGBTQ+ movement is nowadays. Surely, this movement represents everything a society hates and has been a constant battle for years now, that people were always scared to face. I would like to compare Sappho to this movement/community, that would have been part of, to show that we have been a long way dealing with the emancipation of people when it comes to their sexuality, and even though today it is still a fight, but the progress is there and the more it is talked about, the more are the results.

# data[].attributes.body
Lastly, I would like to compare Sappho with the iconic figure of Grace Jones, a Jamaican-American singer, actress and model that was able to break stereotypes and introduce the world to an expression of sexuality through art and fashion. Sappho has done her job in expressing and embracing sexuality between two people sharing the same gender, but Grace Jones was able to bring that further and represent each LBTQ+ individuals of the community as well as the androgynous figure. Comparing both has given me two different perspective of what these two figures were able to do during their own time, what challenges they faced and how it has an impact nowadays in that field.