In the context of Cyrano de Bergerac’s character, I think it is fair to say that the play is, to a large extent, an example of art about art. In all aspects of this play, it does seem as though Christian and Cyrano are no more than actors, putting on a show for the audience that is Roxane. The importance of acting and pretending in this play amounts to a level of precedence that ultimately fuels the conflict that is recognised as the foundation for the story to mould itself upon. The very opening scene of a play-within-a-play already contributes to this idea of constant action and chaos (the immediate fighting, making out), in a rather Shakespearean manner as similarly done in Hamlet. It instantly highlights the theme of appearance affecting identity, and how the idea of all the world being a stage was so heavily instilled in the culture of the French nobility and the French arts. As Shakespeare himself put it, “all the world’s a stage”, except in the case of Cyrano, it is up to the individual to decide the role it is that he wants to assign to himself. Cyrano being the middle man within French society who ‘puts on performances’ for both the lower classes, as shown by his flogging of Montfleury and duel with Valvert, can at the same time mix with the more noble classes shows the modernity of his character through his desire to be an ‘actor’ to the people. His entrance to the play is unforgettable, in the way that he literally usurps a rival performer and showcases his talent of oratory; Cyrano is a showman from the very start, and the sets out to carry on this show of his through his life.

In my opinion, nothing highlights the idea of this play being an example of art about art more than panache. Everything that Cyrano does reveals this need to live life with a sense of flair and flamboyance, a characteristic attributed to the arts of the text’s contextual time period as well. Cyrano’s love of art, and his belief that bad acting is more or less a crime as we see in his incident with Montfleury, shows the importance given to the preservation of the art of the arts. The actor instinct within Cyrano’s character, who uses the resources at his disposal in order to please the people creates the idea that, in fact, art is something inherently apparent about society as a whole. Cyrano is the middle man of French society, yet wants to put on a show for all; this shows potential for being a commentary on the status of the arts within society. Perhaps the arts are not meant to be inextricably tied to certain classes, rather art is a necessity for society’s prosperity.

Cyrano’s art of oratory is proven to be the most authentic form of love, ultimately. A man who lives for moral fulfilment, as art’s purpose is to create a feeling as close to this moral fulfilment as possible. Perhaps Rostand is attempting to communicate the idea that art is the most sincere form of flattery, at the end of the day. If a man like Ragueneau can give up his livelihood for the prosperity of the Muse’s messengers that line the streets of France, he must be chasing some form of fulfilment and inherent enlightenment that is derived from the arts and the messages of the Muse. It could thus be a nod into the successive Enlightenment period as well; the idea that the arts can fulfil and create new paths for mankind to tread down. It is no surprise that characters in this play were able to feel some sense of self-recognition of their own character due to the presence of the arts. Roxane finally knew what she truly loved, and therefore who she truly loved; the art of poetry. Art helped her set her priorities straight and discover herself as a person. In the same way, Cyrano realised the fulfilment that he received was enough by just having the ability to write to Roxane, shedding away the more physical aspects of love for the intellectual and artistic aspects of it; ultimately, this was what won Roxane over.

On First Looking into Chapman’s Homer (1816)

Immediately, this text is conventional as poetry because one notices the rhyme scheme present. Additionally, the 14 lines of the poem signify it follows the structure of a sonnet; it is as though it is an ode to Chapman’s interpretation of the Odyssey, following the conventions of sonnets being about love. There is arguably a Volta present as well (“Till I…”); this Volta seemingly separates the world before Keats reads Chapman’s version, and the world after. However, it presents itself as unique, since it follows a sonnet’s convention but is a love poem to another author for his work, not for him as a person (feeling of direct love). The tension raised in this poem is whether it is really about just Chapman’s interpretation of The Odyssey, or if it is about poetry as whole. While Keats does mention how “many goodly states and kingdoms” have been seen through the other interpretations of The Odyssey through many “bards” who “in fealty to Apollo hold”, he enjoys Chapman’s translation the most. It represents the idea of how the way you tell a story matters; while one is presented with the original texts and ‘evidence’, if you will, the way that story is then communicated and represented is what highlights its level of insightfulness. His comparison to Cortez staring out at the Pacific, having just landed in the New World shows the feeling of being an explorer with his crew who has just gone somewhere others haven’t; the same way that Keats now sees this work in a way that he hasn’t before, thanks to Chapman.

The Penelopiad (2006) – A Low Art

This text finds its convention as fiction due to the allusion to the Odyssey, and it being an ekphrasis in a certain way through its ideas representing another piece of art. It aligns itself with other works of fiction through tinges of Romanticism, highlighted by teh fact that the 1st person/monologue speaker is speaking from the dead. Therefore, it leads the reader to attempt to ascertain their relationship with the narrator; who are they as the reader of this text? The conflict is represented through Penelope’s perspective that her story has been misrepresented; her lack of questioning of Odysseus’s tricks and plans led her to being the passive, considerate wife that Greek society came to accept as the archetypal wife. Additionally, her anger at Odysseus’s betrayal as well as the conflict of female representation within society are raised. Penelope is angry at the idea that she is at a state of helplessness, all because she has lost the physical presence that has taken away her voice; it seems to nudge at the idea that a woman’s voice is not heard without her having some physical recognition (especially from males). This gives the text a much more relevant, modern feel as it is in recognition of a much more contemporary issue, which is gender representation. This is supported by the use of a word such as “factoid”; not necessarily regular in ancient Greek literature. She is angry at people’s misperception of her as wise, when she just wants to let out her emotion without intending to preach. When she tries “to scream,” she “sounds like an owl”. The text also seems to play on the fragility and dependence of women in Greek society; she constantly tells her visitors in The Odyssey, for example, that she lost her beauty the day Odysseus left for Troy. This is as though to say she requires the male reassurance from the one male that really matters for her to feel beautiful; she can’t feel it herself. The fact that she says that she owes it to herself to tell this story, shows that she can now finally live and feel for herself; on earth, she was living for Odysseus and Telemachus but now she can live for herself after losing her duties through the loss of her physical presence. Penelope says, “so I’ll spin a thread of my own,” to symbolise that she can finally give her own voice to her own story; the alluding to the spinning of the thread seems to say that Athena was the one spinning her thread this whole time.

“But whether he comes home to take revenge or not, is with the gods.”

This quote seems to represent Odysseus as an instrument of fate, rather than the creator of his own fate. This shows the conflict of fate versus free will. Athena entails that the act of Odysseus taking revenge on the suitors, and the manner in which he does it, is solely dependent on the decision of the gods. Therefore, we are left believing whether Odysseus has any real free will in taking the decision to come back home and slaughter the suitors, or if he is only doing so because the gods have destined for him to do so? Is it because they have put Odysseus on this path and decided that this is the man he will be, or has Odysseus chosen his path for himself?

“Even gods cannot protect people that they love, when fate and cruel death catch up with them.”

The concept of fate being the overarching judgement of what someone deserves and what they ultimately end up with transcends even the power of the gods, according to this quote. The idea is that fate will always determine when and where a person will go to their final destination, but at the end of the day the only thing the gods can do is manipulate the journey that a person takes to that final destination. While gods may choose to take out their anger towards certain groups of men or certain individuals, it is up to the free will of the man to decide how he gets out of that situation.

“Her heart could not decide if she should keep her distance as she was questioning her own dear husband, or go right up to him and kiss his face and hold his hand in hers.”

This line seems to highlight the prominence that is Penelope’s loyalty, that she is even choosing to defy her perceived reality or the situation that the gods have set for her. Her loyalty to Odysseus is so intense, she believes that this potential could be a trick by the gods to betray her loyalty and for her to give in to her desires. She shows amazing self-restraint (reminds me of someone else) to restrict herself until she realises the sincerity of the gods and of her husband in this moment. Her suspicion of her husband is merely out of her loyalty, and she has to use deceit to finally discover the sincerity.

“Parable of the Hostages” is a poem written by Louise Glück in 1996. It depicts the Greek soldiers of Odysseus’s crew, sitting on the beach during the Trojan War who are wondering what they are going to do after. However, little do they know that the war would last 10 years and that the journey home would be something that they would never expect. This is represented through the poet’s use of  foreshadowing and dramatic irony, to signify to the reader something we know already through the events of the Odyssey which these soldiers are yet to undergo. The idea of archetypal roles and desires in Greek society is represented through the men wanting a “little more of what there is in Troy, more life on the edge that sense of every day as being packed with surprises.” It depicts a conflict that caused the downfall of many Greek soldiers and heroes, which is the idea of choosing glory and conquest over family and home. The fact that the Odyssey focuses so much on the idea of homecoming characterises this as the main flaw of Greek male society, as though it is a practice they undertake to distract themselves from the bigger responsibilities present for them at home. As Glück puts it, “what if war is just a male version of dressing up, a game devised to avoid profoundly spiritual questions?” Is war just an excuse to avoid the truth? By drawing a parallel between the contradictory wartime masculine mindset and the peacetime feminine mindset, Glück attempts to communicate that what we do on the outside and the ways we act in order to satiate such desires are in fact excuses from answering the bigger questions and roles that we have to fulfil.

As I read this, what stands out to me immediately is the way communication occurs between the gods and the mortals. Athena has to disguise herself as Penelope’s sister to go down and comfort her and tell her that everything is going to be okay, and I get that there is a sense of reassurance when it comes from your sister. However, I feel like I would be much more reassured if a god herself came down, in her true form whether in a vision or dream, and told me that everything is going to be okay. I guess what I am getting at is, why is Athena, among other gods, so adamant about influencing and talking to mortals in the form of a disguise or as another mortal? Surely she could make what she wants to happen, happen herself, as herself? Why the need for disguises, and why the need to change fate to your whim and fancy through the influence of others rather than make change happen yourself? As Alcinous said to Odysseus, the gods used to be much more direct and would just come down directly in their true forms whenever they wanted to say something or need something of the mortals. With this said, has their society changed as well? To put it frankly, what changed?

Another point that is raised is when Calypso reacts in anger to Hermes telling her Zeus has asked her to release Odysseus. The way that Calypso suddenly disassociates herself from the gods, addressing them as “you gods” and the double standard in which they live, showing an obvious patriarchal dominance within their divine society makes this interpretation of the book a lot more relevant to social issues within our own world. The way that Calypso raising a point about double standards when it comes to gender getting its own panel stands out to me, and it seems that the author/illustrator has attempted to isolate/intensify this issue and make it more than just another point of the book, as though to say that it is something that is present in our very own societies as well.

Another interesting part of this interpretation is the way in which Odysseus reacts firstly to the news from Calypso that he is free, how he reacts when she helps him build a raft, and then as Poseidon unleashes a storm upon his raft. He is, at first skeptical as he has every right to be that Calypso is out to trick him, seeing as she has kept him on the island with her for all these years. When she does in fact help him to build the raft, he claims that he will never forget her and thanks her profusely. However, as soon as Poseidon unleashes a storm upon his raft, Odysseus’s first thought is that Calypso has set him up. What stood out to me is that the first person he chooses to blame is Calypso, even when she told him to watch out for Poseidon and he knows that Poseidon controls the seas. I find it surprising he did not think Poseidon himself was the one that was at fault for this, and the author/illustrator chose to represent the moment as Odysseus blaming Calypso for his misfortune at that moment. I think that I see a minor connection between this and the panel where Calypso is berating Hermes and the other male gods for having double standards regarding female goddesses and who they take as lovers. I think this author was trying to communicate the main theme of gender dynamics within ancient Greece, and the idea of males blaming women for their misfortune or looking down upon them as causing conflict, as Odysseus immediately blaming Calypso represents and the presence of double standards in their society as well when it comes to taking lovers. It is resonant with the way in which many issues have been raised regarding gender dynamics in our society today; for example, the way men are considered “heroes” by their friends for having slept with many women, and women are instead shamed for their promiscuity.

• What was the hardest part of the task?

To not look at my notes consciously, and make sure I do not go off on a tangent and stay relevant to the global issue that I was discussing. It was also a bit hard to remember to use textual evidence consistently and synthesise along with analysis.

• What do you feel was the most successful part of your effort?

The most successful part was making connections between the two texts; I think I was able to make clear cut connections in reference to the global issue as well.

• In what ways was your outline incomplete? What did it leave you to keep track of in your head? 

My outline was incomplete in talking about the more literary aspects of the texts, I believe; while I was able to analyse the more thematic aspects of the two texts, I think I could have drawn in more regarding the literary devices used by the poets as well.

• What did you “leave out” that you wanted to say (or wish you’d said)? 

I wish that I had talked more about the other extracts for JHAT, I focused on only one of the pages out of the three which housed my main idea but I think I could have alluded to other themes present as well that were closely related to the main theme of discussion.

• How do you feel the questions went? Were you taken by surprise? Able to speak well? 

I was able to speak with fluency and clarity for the most part, but I think that for the question asked to me if I had taken a little more time to think about it before answering it would have been more clear to my audience. I was a bit taken by surprise the connections that I noticed on the spot, while talking about the two texts. I felt that there were certain parts where I got muddled up with myself because I was afraid that I was repeating something that had already been said before.

1. Gradual Impact is more of an apostrophe than the Sappho fragments are; it is as though older Bechdel is addressing her younger self like she is informing her of the regret that she will come to feel in the following years. Although it is not directly addressed to younger Bechdel, the mix of perspectives make it seem as though older Bechdel tries to directly address her younger self and make her realise that she will regret what she is doing while at the same time attributing herself with the role of younger Bechdel. Sappho’s fragments, however, are more directly addressed to Sappho’s former lover as well as Atthis.
2. There are distinct connections between both poems/fragments. For example, Sappho can be represented as the Tamar of her fragments; this is because in the first part of the fragments, she is the unrequited lover who does not receive the same amount of love from Atthis (Bechdel in this context). The way that Sappho tells her former lover to be reminded “of our wonderful times” is similar to the forced manner in which Bechdel says, “but this has been so much fun” when ending her tryst with Tamar. Additionally, the way Sappho recollects the way her ex lover had “garlands of flower” around her soft neck is strikingly similar to Bechdel noticing the pearls that Tamar always used to wear. It is surprising to see the innate sense of universality Sappho has achieved through these poems, striking similarities between the two.
3. Both poems address the idea of unrequited love from two different perspectives; Sappho from the perspective of the unrequited lover, while Bechdel from the perspective of the person who fails to reciprocate. Sappho represents her lovestruck persona, and the side of her that fails to receive the same amount of love that she gives. On the other hand, Bechdel is the one who fails to reciprocate, and is the one who takes more than she gives back in the case of Tamar; she is never able to feel the same way.

1. I prefer Julia Dubnoff’s translation to Anne Carson’s. This is because I think that the lovestruck persona of Sappho represented through Dubnoff’s translation is one that is more resonant of the Sappho developed through the fragments that we have gone through, and it clearly highlights the aspects of this persona that Sappho tries to deliver to the reader that we can identify as unique to her.
2. The similes as well as the language consciousness/diction are what truly characterise Sappho in this excerpt. For example, the way that the poem has been translated represents an ulterior idea of love that Sappho is so known for. Instead of representing the archetypal tenderness of love, the choice of description allows us to delve into Sappho’s mind and how differently she perceives love as one would usually consider her to. With words such as “again”, one cannot help but wonder whether falling in love is a rather repetitive process for Sappho who cannot seem to escape this endless cycle. Additionally, the comparisons to nature show us Sappho’s belief of love as a natural longing, rather than a more forced abstract concept.
3. Sappho’s voice may be described as quite sincere and earnest, the way she is generally as a poet. She is not afraid to shy away from the more painful parts of love, a concept one might tend to associate with joy and fervour while overlooking the more painful aspects of it. The persona that Sappho chooses to cultivate of herself is one of being lovestruck and overcome with infatuation for another soul, but at the same time it is also representative of the idea that due to external forces sometimes things just cannot work out. The tone of sincerity in Sappho’s poems is clear, with her former lover having to leave her “against my will”. Sappho realises that sometimes love will not work out no matter what, and this is extremely different to the archetypal poem about love where everything always works out in the end.
4. In my eyes, there is a shift in persona between the fragments of 15-18 and 19. From 15-18, Sappho is represented as nothing but lovestruck, eager for the one she loves to love her back and refusing to admit that her feelings are unrequited or rather spiting the very fact. However, from fragment 19, we see a more accepting persona of Sappho represented; she realises that sometimes love cannot work out no matter how hard we try, and that sometimes external forces make things working out practically impossible. There is a slight shift in the way Sappho perceives love in these two sets of fragments, as though she has understood that love will not always work out the way that she wants it to or the way that her partner(s) want it to, for that matter.
5. Sappho’s work seems to imply that love is a natural longing, and that it is not always something that will work out no matter how good it may be/feel. The way that Sappho so regularly uses nature as a comparison to love shows her belief that falling in love/being in love is a form of natural longing; a process that everyone will go through at some point or another in their lives. The way that she loved Atthis even when she seemed to her “a small graceless child” shows how no matter the flaws the person we love has, we still love them and there is nothing to overcome that feeling of longing. Her poem seems to be a celebration yet a cry of pain. Talking about how love can be so grandiose as she reminisces to her lover who has to leave her against her will, how from no holy place or dance they were absent, shows the more positive and enjoyable side of love. However, it also seems to be a cry of pain in the way that it is her revelation of love not always being the most enjoyable thing. The fact that sometimes no matter how hard we try, and how much we want something to work, there may still be external factors that do not permit this from happening.
6. Sappho’s poems achieve universality because as time has developed, generations have come to realise and pay attention to the darker side of things as well; we do not only recognise the positivity of love nowadays, in fact we may recognise the more painful side of love nowadays through art more than we do the beautiful part of it. As we have developed as a society, we have come to realise that what feelings we once thought to be completely one sided are not as jolly as we want them to be/thought they were. Sappho is not afraid to address both sides of the spectrum, and this is why her poems achieve such a sense of universality; she does not shy away from recognising the more painful parts of this feeling that so many considered to be one-sided.
7. There is tension in the poem; there is a constant tension between love and external forces. Sappho realises that sometimes love will just not work out because of circumstances, but what these circumstances exactly are is something hard to explain in Sappho’s view. There is always a constant tension between personas as well; Sappho feels love for an individual who feels love for another individual. In the same way, Sappho and her lover have to break up because of these aforementioned circumstances that cannot be explained (arguably something like an arranged marriage?) and there is tension between their feelings for one another yet this incapability to be together at the same time.