I will be summarizing the argument of “Jupiter’s Aeneid: Fama and Imperium” by Julia Hejduk. I will do so by first deciding what exactly she’s arguing, cataloguing her evidence, fitting the argument and the evidence, then discussing her intellectual influences. Given that Hejduk uses The Aeneid more than any other source, it’s clear that scholars look to primary sources rather than relying on each others’ work. Hejduk argues that Jupiter has a complete dismissal for human life, and only cares about his own imperium (power) and fama (fame), and he does this in a number of ways. His words he chooses are never with remorse, regret, or guilt which are the natural human sentiments to feel when people are murdered, his gleefulness when Aeneas is
…show more content…
He sees himself as morally and physically superior and Hejduk points that out: “Jupiter himself is saeuus [savage]; the mortals are aegri, ‘sick, weak, troubled’; the death and disease he brings are horrificus, ‘horror-inspiring’.” Prior to the use of this quote she demonstrates that the narrator’s only implication of Jupiter giving justice is suggested in the block quote used before. Since the noun is separated from its adjective, she suggests that Virgil strategically placed it there to keep up Jupiter’s reputation of being savage. She uses both the Latin language and Virgil’s ways of narrating as her own evidence for this, which makes it more believable to audiences; even audiences with little Latin …show more content…
Some of her points come out of her discourse community, but most scholars cited she tries to question. She relies heavily on the Latin version of The Aeneid since that is the first edition without any meanings that can get lost in translation, so instead she translates on her own to make her own interpretation. Jupiter is thoroughly proved to have a lack of empathy for humans and their emotions and it is well argued that his only care is of power and fame. Hejduk argues her point well with thorough scholarly
He sees himself as morally and physically superior and Hejduk points that out: “Jupiter himself is saeuus [savage]; the mortals are aegri, ‘sick, weak, troubled’; the death and disease he brings are horrificus, ‘horror-inspiring’.” Prior to the use of this quote she demonstrates that the narrator’s only implication of Jupiter giving justice is suggested in the block quote used before. Since the noun is separated from its adjective, she suggests that Virgil strategically placed it there to keep up Jupiter’s reputation of being savage. She uses both the Latin language and Virgil’s ways of narrating as her own evidence for this, which makes it more believable to audiences; even audiences with little Latin …show more content…
Some of her points come out of her discourse community, but most scholars cited she tries to question. She relies heavily on the Latin version of The Aeneid since that is the first edition without any meanings that can get lost in translation, so instead she translates on her own to make her own interpretation. Jupiter is thoroughly proved to have a lack of empathy for humans and their emotions and it is well argued that his only care is of power and fame. Hejduk argues her point well with thorough scholarly