Dishonor on You, Dishonor on Your Family, Dishonor on Your Cow
After Ajax takes his own life for having failed to kill his former friends, his brother Teucer defends Ajax’s honor by demanding he receive an honorable burial. The final stasimon of Sophocles’ tragic play Ajax revolves around the question of Ajax’s integrity and what it means to be honorable. While Agamemnon relies on societal definitions of nobility and alliance to denounce Ajax’s honor, Odysseus stands up for his new enemy claiming that his actions have earned him honor despite his treachery. Because of the mercurial nature of culturally ascribed understanding of honor, Sophocles contends that instead of relying on those superfluous and abstract notions that people should instead …show more content…
Teucer opens his argument by reminding Agamemnon that when their enemy Hector had successfully stormed Agamemnon’s battleships that it was Ajax who saved Agamemnon’s life when he “volunteered to face Hector in single combat/of his own free will, not because he was ordered” (1282-1283). This level of selflessness and sense of duty exemplifies not only Ajax’s skill as a warrior but also his commitment to protecting his homeland and his comrades. Under no obligation to let the fate of everyone he ever knew and loved to rest on his shoulders, Ajax recognized his unique ability to prevent more death on account of his incredible mastery of one-on-one combat, challenged Hector to a duel, and won. For Ajax, such acts of bravery was common place. According to Teucer Ajax consistently displaced acts of great courage “time and time again” (1270) earning him the reputation of being “the best fighter” (1341) of the Greeks. Ajax’s reputation sprung from his own successes, giving him a title that warrants more honor than the nobility of the Greeks who inherited their honor. While Ajax acted on behalf of the welfare of others, members of Agamemnon’s “noble” family allowed themselves to let ego rule their actions. Teucer recounts how, mad with jealousy, Agamemnon’s father turned Agamemnon’s …show more content…
Although Odysseus recognizes Ajax as his enemy, he argues in favor of the burial because despite the current alliances, Ajax “was also a noble man” (1355). The use of the word “noble” in this instance calls to mind the argument between Agamemnon and Teucer over what it means to have a noble family. By referring to Ajax as noble, Odysseus echoes Teucer’s belief, and thus Sophocles’ belief, that true nobility stems from the deeds of one’s life. When asked why he holds his enemy in such high esteem, Odysseus replies that Ajax’s “excellence denies hatred” (1357), providing further proof of Sophocles’ argument that honorable actions of an individual transcends societal definitions of ally and enemy because “a friend today could always be a foe tomorrow” (1359). Thus, the social definitions of friend and foe which one chooses is just as fickle and fragile as the definitions of noble that the class system forces upon society. Labels such as friend and enemy can change so swiftly that, according to Odysseus, they should not be used as the main method to determine the integrity of a person, but rather the actions of a person should. Because of the
After Ajax takes his own life for having failed to kill his former friends, his brother Teucer defends Ajax’s honor by demanding he receive an honorable burial. The final stasimon of Sophocles’ tragic play Ajax revolves around the question of Ajax’s integrity and what it means to be honorable. While Agamemnon relies on societal definitions of nobility and alliance to denounce Ajax’s honor, Odysseus stands up for his new enemy claiming that his actions have earned him honor despite his treachery. Because of the mercurial nature of culturally ascribed understanding of honor, Sophocles contends that instead of relying on those superfluous and abstract notions that people should instead …show more content…
Teucer opens his argument by reminding Agamemnon that when their enemy Hector had successfully stormed Agamemnon’s battleships that it was Ajax who saved Agamemnon’s life when he “volunteered to face Hector in single combat/of his own free will, not because he was ordered” (1282-1283). This level of selflessness and sense of duty exemplifies not only Ajax’s skill as a warrior but also his commitment to protecting his homeland and his comrades. Under no obligation to let the fate of everyone he ever knew and loved to rest on his shoulders, Ajax recognized his unique ability to prevent more death on account of his incredible mastery of one-on-one combat, challenged Hector to a duel, and won. For Ajax, such acts of bravery was common place. According to Teucer Ajax consistently displaced acts of great courage “time and time again” (1270) earning him the reputation of being “the best fighter” (1341) of the Greeks. Ajax’s reputation sprung from his own successes, giving him a title that warrants more honor than the nobility of the Greeks who inherited their honor. While Ajax acted on behalf of the welfare of others, members of Agamemnon’s “noble” family allowed themselves to let ego rule their actions. Teucer recounts how, mad with jealousy, Agamemnon’s father turned Agamemnon’s …show more content…
Although Odysseus recognizes Ajax as his enemy, he argues in favor of the burial because despite the current alliances, Ajax “was also a noble man” (1355). The use of the word “noble” in this instance calls to mind the argument between Agamemnon and Teucer over what it means to have a noble family. By referring to Ajax as noble, Odysseus echoes Teucer’s belief, and thus Sophocles’ belief, that true nobility stems from the deeds of one’s life. When asked why he holds his enemy in such high esteem, Odysseus replies that Ajax’s “excellence denies hatred” (1357), providing further proof of Sophocles’ argument that honorable actions of an individual transcends societal definitions of ally and enemy because “a friend today could always be a foe tomorrow” (1359). Thus, the social definitions of friend and foe which one chooses is just as fickle and fragile as the definitions of noble that the class system forces upon society. Labels such as friend and enemy can change so swiftly that, according to Odysseus, they should not be used as the main method to determine the integrity of a person, but rather the actions of a person should. Because of the