Who is right? The Furies are trying to perform justice, but what defines their intentions as justice? Clytaemnestra and Orestes are both guilty of murder, and both murders are within the same household. Why is Clytaemnestra free from murder only because Agamemnon was not a blood relative? Would the murder not be considered a treason in that time period? On another note, the plea against Orestes is demanding a death for a death. The whole situation is flawed considering the reason Orestes killed his mother is for another murder. He takes an eye for an eye. Should Orestes be charged with murder, or did he act in justice?
P.S. I commented on Natalie and Daniel's posts.
The system is flawed and there is just going to be a continous circle of what ifs? and blame because of the self-determined ethics that each character posses.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you. I think Orestes was wrong in killing his mother but it doesn't make sense that the Furies are so adamant that Orestes should pay for the murder of his mother and yet Clytemnestra does not have to pay for the murder of Agamemnon.
ReplyDeleteBloodshed always calls for bloodshed it seems, in our flawed human minds. It should never be that way. At this point, because his mother is now dead- perhaps the Furies consider that price to be paid now and believe that the same should be done to Orestes.
ReplyDeleteWith the eye-for-an-eye mentality, the Furies would have been tied down in an endless cycle of murders trying to seek "justice" for the previous murders.
ReplyDelete