Book Four definitely brought something to my attention, and that is the fact that aside from the goddesses the females in the Aeneid just aren't that special. Excluding Juno and Venus, who both play major roles moving the writing forward, the women are very dull characters that are only there for a scene or two. To put this into explanation, Creusa would serve as a great example. She's only there for a few seconds in Book II to clarify the existence of the son, and her purpose is to merely die so that Aeneas's character can be strengthened.
With all this in mind, can you really blame me for getting excited when Dido is introduced? It's even more interesting once readers realize that she's one of the few characters with enough gall to defy fate and the gods themselves. Despite it being set in stone that Aeneas is leaving for Carthage to start a new empire, Dido doesn't care to object against the will of the gods; her love for him surpasses her fear of the gods.
However, the presence of Dido serves much deeper purposes than just the add-in of a very unique and courageous female during those times. The relationship between her and Aeneas is the personification of the relationship between Rome and Carthage itself. Through Dido, Vigil is able to show how truly human our protagonist actually is, regardless of how perfect the book portrayed him before. There's a moment where he is torn between love and his duty, and he becomes so much more relatable as a character when he chooses to carry on to Carthage.
While Dido does make Aeneas stand out even more as the main, I think she's a notable hero herself. Even though she never had the blessing of the gods in the first place, she never let that stop her from sacrificing everything she has for love.
Commented on posts by Abbie Hedden and Kaitlyn Terry.
I think Dido as a character could have been used as more than just a cause to get Aeneas out of Carthage. It seems as though Virgil excluded having a consistent mortal female character, maybe he was afraid of what Roman society would think? I'm not entirely sure how the Romans would have reacted to something like a female lead, but it may be that, like the Greeks, men and women were supposed to have assigned "roles" in society and breaking those roles caused dissension. Good post!
ReplyDelete