9 minute read
Rebellion in Epics
4.2 Gonzalez-Rychener. Rebels’ Gradient: A Comparison of Different Kinds of Rebels and Rebellion in Epics 39
sins. Primo Levi has a different viewpoint; he writes, “...I can affirm that you did well, in this situation, to refuse your pardon to the dying man. You did well because it was the lesser evil: you could only have forgiven him by lying or by inflicting upon yourself a terrible moral violence” (pg 191). This is apparent by Wiesenthal’s restlessness; he did not listen to the story in complacent silence, he was deeply uncomfortable the entire time. He is already wracked with guilt, to the point of visiting the Nazi’s mother after the war. If Wiesenthal went the route of forgiving the man, the reaction would cause himself further pain, which is the greater evil. Levi continues, “The act of ‘having a Jew brought to him’ seems to me at once childish and impudent. . . Did Himmler not believe something similar when he ordered the suspension of the Lager massacres. . . ?” (pg 192). This connection is the strongest point of the argument, solidifying the Nazi’s utter disrespect for human life. The demand to talk to anyone about his experience hints to the idea that he is motivated by a desire to repent for fear of imminent death. Would he acknowledge his crimes if he continued living? While I have not personally met a survivor, my generation will likely be the last to have that opportunity. Nonetheless, I have a personal connection to the Holocaust. I recently learned that my great uncle was killed in a concentration camp. My mom always says he was in the wrong place at the wrong time whenever I bring up the topic, but I’ve never been satisfied with that. I do firmly believe my great uncle was intentionally sent to a death camp for being a Polish Catholic. In the grand scheme of things, it is unrealistic, borderline nonviable, to hold one person or nation responsible in the legal sense. However, it is well understood among citizens of Germany that they are responsible for what happened during the Holocaust. This generation is not guilty of any crime, but bear the burden of reckoning with their past to come to terms with the atrocities committed by their fore-bearers. I don’t hold any German personally responsible, but I maintain that this genocide was perpetrated by an entire country, with many other complicit countries. A question brought up in a past discussion stuck with me: how was an entire nation and people readily willing to kill?
Advertisement
For crimes as hatefully motivated and as systematically perpetrated as ones committed by the Nazis, forgiveness is not an option. The time to reprieve was years ago, before the first act of genocide was committed, before it was conceived. It is unfair to appeal to the descendants of survivors to take decisive action or on behalf of their relatives. The time for repentance is now and a forevercontinuous undertaking. As a community, the world is rightfully beyond forgiving. There can only be understanding of the past, how Germans today are responsible, and a desire to uphold the legacy of those who fought back and condemn those who murdered for a living.
Reference [1] Simon Wiesenthal. The Sunflower. Schocken (cited on page 38).
By Vanessa Gonzalez-Rychener ’24
Nothing monumental ever happens without someone doing something against the rules or norms, and because this is such a vital element of change, it is also a vital element of stories. The novels Signs Preceding the End of the World by Yuri Herrera [1] and The Odyssey [2] by Homer are very different, yet their protagonists are both rebellious. In The Odyssey, the main character, Odysseus, is on a journey to return home from the Trojan war. On his way, he encounters many challenges and creates quite a few challenges for himself. The way he combats these obstacles is through rebellion (in the form of trespassing on property, killing people, etcetera) and enlisting the help of the gods – who favor him greatly. In Signs, Makina is on a journey from Mexico to the United States illegally to find her brother and bring him home. The story is also an allegory for the Aztec underworld, where each level corresponds to one chapter in the book. In this book, the journey itself is an act of rebellion, but there are many specific cases where Makina’s rebellion shows in other ways too – such as standing up to sexual harrassment and helping those who have previously hurt her.
According to the Cambridge English dictionary, the definition of rebellion is “action against those in authority, against the rules, or against normal and accepted ways of behaving” [3]. While rebellion is often used to describe the breaking of rules and the disregard for authority (both of which are blatantly present in Signs especially), the third part of the definition – going against societal norms – is displayed again and again as Makina navigates the macho crime world. The definition of rebellion almost every dictionary has very closely matches Makina’s journey, but Odysseus’ journey is a less close fit. These definitions, however, leave those in power in charge of setting the standard for rebellion. How can authority rebel from authority, or the norm-maker rebel from norms? In order to fully hold powerful people accountable, I will be using a slightly different definition: “action against those in authority, against the rules, against morals, or against
40
normal and accepted ways of behaving.” By making this small change, Odysseus’ reckless actions go from being compliant (a statement which does not seem to fit at all) to being rebellious. Odysseus’ and Makina’s rebelliousness is vital to their respective epics, but their rebelliousness shows up in profoundly different ways because of their respective levels of power, individual journeys, and personalities.
The difference between Makina and Odysseus’ social status causes a world of difference between the ways in which they can be disobedient and still get away with it. When Odysseus wants something done, all he has to do is round up his army, tell a fantastic story of his adventures, or call on Athena – the Greek goddess of wisdom and warfare – to help. In the final battle against the suitors who have taken over Odysseus’ house when he returns home, the war hero and his three sidekicks have a great advantage over the pack of over a hundred suitors they are facing. His men throw their spears and all hit, thanks to Athena. Then, again with her help, the suitors throw and all miss (Homer 484-485). Because of his fame and power, Odysseus is able to employ powerful allies, including the gods themselves. He gets to openly murder hundreds by plotting a very preliminary plan, and not have to worry about details or consequences, because the gods do the rest. Even if Odysseus did not have the gods’ help, his great riches would get him quite far anyway. Because this superhuman hero has so many supporters, and norms of the day encouraged such actions, only a modern, critical eye would even call it rebellion.
In contrast to Odysseus’ highly subsidized recklessness, when Makina wants to get things done, she often has to resort to much more backhanded, sneaky strategies. She reacts assertively – but not as destructively –when harassed by a young man on the bus. Herrera writes, “Makina turned to him, stared into his eyes so he’d know that her next move was no accident, . . . and with the other hand yanked the middle finger of the hand he’d touched her with all the way back” (31). Though Makina’s act also shows her thirst for revenge, she teaches a lesson by causing temporary pain, not ending anyone’s life. However, even if Makina was as bloodthirsty as Odysseus, she simply could not get away with a huge massacre. She has no political clout or weaponry, and her only way to get around the law is by hiding. In addition to being of a lower social status, being a woman forces Makina to take the law into her own hands when the macho culture and governing powers refuse to do anything about it. For this reason, too, she has to discreetly bend the boy’s finger back to get her point across.
Another reason Makina’s rebelliousness differs from that of Odysseus is because her journey simply requires a different kind of unlawfulness. Even if the two were Chapter 4. Social Science
of the same social class and had the same power, their journeys are in many ways quite different, and different types of rebellion must be used to achieve their final goals. Because he had been told to be wary of murderous plans upon returning home, Odysseus goes to great lengths to hide his identity until the last moment. At one point, when his childhood nurse discovers who he is, the savage hero threatens death. “Nanny!” he whispers angrily, “Why are you trying to destroy me? . . . Be silent; / no one must know, or else I promise you, . . . I will not spare you when I kill the rest” (Homer 440). On Odysseus’ journey back home, he is set on keeping his identity secret from his wife in order not to be killed. If that part was not so trivial to his journey, Odysseus might not be as set on killing loved ones to keep with his plan. If Odysseus had not been gone as long as he was, threatening the woman who raised him would not be necessary and therefore this rebelliousness against bonds would not either. Though as a slave she is technically property, Odysseus’ nanny is close enough to be loved when it is convenient.Threatening her life must require some serious resolve. If it weren’t for Odysseus’ lofty situation in life, he likely could not afford to be as bold as he is here either. He has the ability to choose this strategy, which in some ways is easier. Makina, on the other hand, does not get that kind of choice.
In Signs, the only way Makina can fulfill her journey is to let other, powerful men like Odysseus make the rules by which she must play. Though even if she had the option, Makina most likely would not choose to be so reckless (this will be covered later), she simply never gets that as an option. After her arrival in the United States, Makina has to deliver the mysterious, illegal package that has financed her journey to a shady underlord. Even as he tells her she has nothing to fear, the man pats his knife possibly as a subtle threat (Herrera 61). Makina’s journey does not involve taking over governments or even a household; instead her job is to get around pre-existing boundaries. Because of this, she has to work with people for whom sneaking around the law is second nature, and this makes her rebellion (which is actually breaking laws in this case) a lot more stealthy, too.
It is clear that Odysseus and Makina’s lives and journeys are set in vastly different contexts, but in truth the characters have very different dispositions too. Out of all the differences between Makina and Odysseus, the most significant difference is probably their personalities. In The Odyssey, while Odysseus is recalling his voyage to King Alcinous of Phaeacia, he shamelessly tells of sacking the town of Cicones as if it were a typical day. Boastfully he states, “I sacked the town and killed the men. We took their wives and shared their riches equally among us” (Homer 241). The fact that Odysseus still shows no regret for his actions in the war many years
