Skip to main content

The Rare Exception of Dido-Rachael Gregson

 


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.

Comments

  1. Ian BlairNovember 16, 2020 at 5:10 PM

    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

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Aristotle Might Not Like Me...Or Jesus//Haylee Lynd

      Aristotle says that the man who does not get angry at the things he should be angry at "is thought unlikely to defend himself; and to endure being insulted and put up with insult to one's friends is slavish" (Aristotle 41). While he states that passivity is preferred to excessive anger, he still gives great criticism to it.  In contrast to Aristotle, the man who Christians believe to be the most just is Jesus who states in Matthew 5:39-40, "...do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well." Essentially, arguing that one is not to respond in anger when insulted or hurt, to not defend one's self. Most individual's are unable to achieve this. Our natural instinct is to defend ourselves, especially in physical cases. However, Christians strive to be like Jesus in this way. I would also argue that it is a very admirable wa...
2 comments
Read more

Oedipus’ Children/Siblings—Lily Caswell

Ok, so Oedipus is a bit of a train wreck to say the least. I love the fact that even after Oedipus found out about his less-than-appealing relationship with his mother, he still tried to look after his children/siblings. After he gouged his eyes out, his children came to him at which point Oedipus talked about how that when they were old enough to marry, no one would want them due to them being products of incest. He said for the people not to condemn them based on what their father had done. Even after he knew what he had done and what his children were, he still wanted the best for them. I commented on Logan’s and Ian’s posts.
3 comments
Read more

Overanalyzing Everyone's Intentions Here-Rachael Gregson

 First off, I'd like to say this is going to be a two part blog post, because a lot of things happened in this reading assignment that demands to be discussed.  As with any war I've realized, it's tricky not to fall into the initial perspective I am given. I began this book skeptical of Hector because I was bias toward the movie Troy, which was told mostly through the eyes of Achilles, but neither were what I was expecting. It's actually funny that they both hold values completely opposite from one another. Hector represented everything related to city-state pride, honor, and humility whereas Achilles was everything wild, reckless, and unpredictable solitary. This isn't to say that Hector is all good and Achilles all bad. Both had instances where I rooted for the other more or less. I just thought it was interesting how their two personalities represented something that basically causes all wars: the clash between civilization and savagery.  Secondly, I'm not de...
2 comments
Read more