The Titan Cronus and Generational Replacement
Most people know about the Greek gods, but many are unaware of how they came to be and how they maintained their status as the deities in power. Greek mythology is told in generations. To simplify the story, first was Chaos, from which every Greek mythological entity was born, with Chaos’s first offspring being the primordial gods. This included Gaea who with Chaos produced Uranus. Together, Gaea (the earth) and Uranus (the sky) produced the titans, including Cronus (time and harvest) and Rhea (fertility). The two gave life to the beginning of the next generation with the first six Olympian gods we know and (sometimes) love, including in birth order: Hestia, Demeter, Hera, Hades, Poseidon, and Zeus.
But at the time of the Olympian gods’ birth, the ruler of the world was Cronus, the titan of time and harvest. Cronus came into this position by defeating the preceding ruler, his father Uranus, with his powerful harpe sword, or scythe, and thereby separating the heavens from the earth and ruling all.
Cronus was presented with a prophecy that he would also be overthrown by his own son, and in taking preventative measures, resolved to swallow all six of his godly children after each birth. His wife Rhea managed to save only Zeus, after catching on to Cronus’ plan, and fed her husband a rock covered in a blanket to save her youngest son. After growing up and becoming powerful enough to finally free his siblings, Zeus forced his father to throw them up. As fully grown gods, they fought against Cronus and all the titans in a ten year war.
Eventually coming out victorious, the gods casted the titans, including the dismembered Cronus, into Tartarus, a deep pit in the Underworld/Hades. From this point on, the Olympians ruled the Greek world, receiving all the attention and praise they craved, fulfilling their father’s prophecy.
The story of the Olympian replacement of their ancestors reminds me of how society actually does work in many ways, just without all of the violence. Society only functions because it replaces itself every generation or so- with new parents, workers, and leaders. Yet the example of the Greeks discounting their elders reminds me a lot of the tone set in western society in general. From learning small pieces about other societies, many times the elders are preserved and looked to as wise guides for the following generation. Contrarily, in the U.S. we often ship our old parents and grandparents off to nursing homes in which they are sometimes ill-treated but no longer our financial or personal burden.
The story of the gods, although much more power-dynamically complicated, sets the tone for throwing away what is no longer immediately useful to us. Although it is a very capital-minded and insensitive way to approach the subject, who can say that it is not based in truth? I don’t know where I will end up in 60+ years, but I would hope our generation looks to move away from our practice of discounting and replacing to have more care for those older than us, even if we onced viewed them as vague representations of power-hungry titans.
Narcissus, The Misunderstood
The story of Echo and Narcissus tells us of human desire, warning us against our own being. Echo was a nymph, meaning a spiritual earth creature, on Mount Cithaeron. Although many gods took a liking to Echo, Zeus used her talent for being a long-winded speaker, intriguing any audience, in order to distract his wife Hera during his affairs. Eventually, Hera caught onto his strategies and cursed Echo for helping promote Zeus’ disloyalty to the marriage. As punishment, Hera removed Echo’s weapon, her own voice. Yet, Echo still could repeat words spoken by others.
Moving away from Echo, one day, an enchanting man named Narcissus was given a prophecy that he would only live a long life if he never “knew himself,” which can be interpreted as never viewing himself physically or as never seeing himself without a lens of humbleness.
Narcissus was deemed to be the most beautiful of mortals, and many pursued him due to the intensity of his handsomeness. One of these followers became Echo when she came across Narcissus while he was hunting deer. The nymph immediately fell for the beauty.
Yet in her curse, Echo could not communicate her feelings aside from repeating others’ words, so she only watched Narcissus go about his day. Eventually, empowered to express her love, Echo came out of her hiding to face Narcissus. Yet, in his love for only himself, Narcissus did not care for Echo’s emotions and was cruel to her.
As the rejection destroyed the nymph, she faded away, leaving just her echo, which can still be heard in caves like that she hid from Narcissus in.
Finally, as many mortals and immortals alike called on the gods to punish Narcissus for his cruelty towards those he rejected, the god of revenge, Nemesis, stepped up. Nemesis made Narcissus view his reflection one day when he drank from a pool. Fulfilling the prophecy, Narcissus, in seeing himself, fell in love, for his only love was himself. In staring at himself, Narcissus neglected all his human needs and eventually died in sadness, since he could never touch his love, which was only a reflection. Left in his place after death was the Narcissus flower, giving reason for the flower’s name.
This story tells the origin of three ideas: why echos exist, the creation of the Narcissus flower, and what it can mean to be a narcissist. But this story makes me wonder, was Narcissus’ fate justified? Narcissus, although rude in his rejections of many men and women, lived with a personality disorder, narcissism, which was beyond his control. He was portrayed as a fake human, one who could not have human empathy or feeling. So the gods punished him for his existence. There are many disorders that people cannot control that they are punished for living with. For example, lots of people with mental or personality disorders are written off as non-contributing members of society, but I feel this is a very harmful way to view individual situations. I believe it is certainly a testament to the time of the myth that Narcissus was punished for his personality disorder rather than allowed to live his life as long as not hurting anyone. I hope that going forward we are more understanding of people’s differences rather than wishing harm on them, as Echo did.
The Myth of Sisyphus and Absurdity
![GREEK MYTHOLOGY: 5 INTERESTING CHARACTERS I'D LIKE TO MEET [PART ONE] | Greek mythology art, Mtg art, Mythology](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/b1/30/cd/b130cda52e5d03ca1218a8757c400e04.jpg)
The King of Corinth, Sisyphus, was the Greek character most famous for his punishment in the afterlife. Sisyphus spent his mortal life attempting to deceive both humans and the gods, and escaped the consequences for his actions many times through his sly actions.
Sisyphus’ first acts of deceit were his lack of adherence to Xenia, giving hospitality to those who pass through one’s land and home. Instead, Sisyphus killed these people to prove his power. From these actions, the leader of the gods, Zeus, began to pay special attention to the King of Corinth. Sisyphus further enraged Zeus by revealing that the god kidnapped a woman, Aegina.
Angered by Sisyphus’ acts, Zeus sought to punish the king through the personification of death in Greek mythology, Thanatos. Thanatos was instructed to chain up Sisyphus, yet in his trickery, the king ended up chaining Death, escaping it for himself and preventing all mortals from dying for a time. This only ended when the god Ares stepped in by releasing Thanatos and trapping Sisyphus.
In working to further escape death, Sisyphus instructed his wife to throw his body into the middle of the city upon his death, which was extremely against Greek beliefs of proper burial. His body eventually found its way to the River Styx in the Underworld, where Sisyphus was able to interact with Persephone, the wife of Hades. Through his story and his cunning language, the king was able to convince Persephone to release him back to the overworld for a time so he could punish his wife. But Sisyphus refused to go back to the underworld and continued to escape death until another god, Hermes, brought him back.
Finally, Sisyphus met the consequences for his cunning lifestyle against the wishes of the divine. His punishment was to push a rock up a hill which, when it reached the top, would roll back down only for the action to be repeated again.
The story of Sisyphus has been reclaimed by Philosophers across the world, especially in the case of Albert Camus in 1942 in his writing “The Myth of Sisyphus.” In this paper, Camus explored the philosophy of absurdism, which is the belief that the world is irrational and has no inherent meaning. Camus asserted that individuals must not try to force order onto this existence and instead should revolt against this purposeless life and live in revolt of it, living for oneself even with no meaning.
The writing by Camus connects to Sisyphus because he asserts that Sisyphus understands that his punishment will never end. Upon his walk back down the long hill towards the rock, Sisyphus is completely conscious. He knows not to have hope because he understands that his task is unending. To Camus, the way to live is to revolt against the idea of struggle in life by finding peace and enjoyment in pushing up the rock. By reclaiming this struggle, Camus argues that people can find themselves and create self in a world that gives humans no inherent essence, and Sisyphus, to Camus and philosophers alike, represents this essential revolt against the absurd.
King Minos, Daedalus, and Philosophy??
Daedalus, taught by the goddess Athena, was the most talented inventor in all of Greek mythology, and many were threatened by his skills, including King Minos. The story of Daedalus and his son, Icarus, became more complicated when Daedalus was asked by King Minos of Crete to fashion a labyrinth to trap and hide the great monster, the Minotaur. The Minotaur was a shameful creature for King Minos because it was the spawn of his wife, Pasiphae, and a bull. As the story goes, a bull was sent to Crete by Poseidon for sacrifice, yet when King Minos did not kill the animal, Poseidon took his revenge on the King, making Pasiphae fall in love with the bull; their affair led to the birth of the Minotaur.
When the incredible labyrinth, composed of thousands of rooms and ancient relics, was completed, the Minotaur was placed inside so that no one could ever see the creature which brought Minos and his marriage deep shame.
After all of his hard work, Daedalus was not rewarded. Rather, he was thrown inside the labyrinth, his own creation, and imprisoned there with Icarus in order for King Minos to keep secret the knowledge of both the maze and the Minotaur.
In order to escape their imprisonment, Daedalus and Icarus fashioned wings made from feathers and wax in order to fly away from the island Crete. Upon their departure, Daedalus instructed his son to be wary of flying too close to the sun, yet Icarus, in his excitement from flying, forgot his father’s warnings. The wax holding his feathers together quickly melted, and Icarus, in a hopeless state, fell and drowned in the sea below.
The story of Icarus is one of the most well known from Greek mythology for teaching people “not to fly too close to the sun” or to not become too reckless while losing sight of reality. This is why Icarus is so famous. But the idea I want to explore further is the concept of using others as a means for one’s own ends, as King Minos did to Daedalus.
By this concept, I mean was it justifiable for the King to use the skills of Daedalus as a tool for his own benefit in the end? In looking into my question, I read up on Immanuel Kant’s take. According to the philosophy proclaimed by Kant, one should “act so that you use humanity, as much in your own person as in the person of every other, always at the same time as end and never merely as means.” Kant reasoned that as a rational person you would never consent to being used as simply a means to someone else’s ends, so because of universal actions, you should never use someone else as a mere means.
Although it is pretty obvious that what King Minos did was morally wrong, delving into philosophical thought, especially as a philosophy major, it was interesting to connect such an everyday question to the philosophical reasoning of Kant’s rationality.
Atalanta: A Women Breaking Barriers
Atalanta was the female hero of Greek mythology. She was the hunter known to be better than many men, and her name even means “equal in weight,” displaying her equal abilities, even in a time when men dominated the stories of Greek myth.
Atalanta was favored by the goddess of archery, Artemis, for her skills as a hunter, and the hero swore to virginity in the name of Artemis. From the beginning of her life, Atalanta was compared to men. Born in Arcadia, Greece, Atalanta was abandoned by her father and left to die since she was a woman and boys were favored. Atalanta, with her innate connection to wildlife and nature, was found by a female bear who protected and watched over her until she was saved by a group of hunters who took in the infant girl. Raised by hunters, Atalanta had the ability and teaching to develop her skills. She lived and fended for herself and vowed to her life alone, for she needed and desired no man.
Atalanta is seen in many mythological stories, the most known of which is the story of the Calydonian Boar Hunt. The boar, a sacred animal to Artemis, was a punishment sent by the goddess in her anger towards the Calydonian people for failing to honor her. Among all the men summoned to kill the boar before it destroyed the lands, there was only one woman: Atalanta. Atalanta was first to wound the monster, breaking gender stereotypes, and was given the head and skin of the animal after it was killed.
The other popular story of the Greek hero Atlanta was the story of how she was pushed to marry by her father who suddenly, in Atlanta’s widespread fame, re-entered her life. Atalanta, being one of the fastest people in ancient Greece, which was one of the factors that made her so great a hunter, challenged any man who wanted to marry her to a footrace. If they won, they were permitted to marry her. If not, she would often kill them. Although she was reluctant about marrying, Atalanta believed she could beat any mortal man and never marry.
When Hippomenes came along, he was prepared to win, even though he truly was a slower runner than Atalanta. Using the gods to his advantage, Hippomenes asked Aphrodite for her help. Being the goddess of love, Aphrodite was delighted to assist the young suitor and offered him three golden apples which any mortal could not resist picking up when dropped in front of them. These helped slow down Atalanta and give Hippomenes the opportunity to beat her in the race.
Holding to her promise, the two married and became hunting companions. In that way, Hippomenes never attempted to infringe on Atalanta’s independence as a woman and hunter, and the two lived well together.
The story of Atalanta reminds me of living beyond the notion of a woman’s place in society. Although stereotypes flow strongly through most civilizations, Atalanta’s legacy of feminine strength and equality took place during ancient times. Atalanta never attempted to sacrifice or hide her womanhood, she embraced it for what she wanted to do and became an inspiration to Greek women. For this reason, I wonder why women were still considered less than men oftentimes in Greece.
Atalanta’s story also teaches me that I never have to restrict myself to the positions pushed upon women in society. For example, it is seen by many as a normalcy for women to give birth and raise families today. Personally, I have never felt as though this societal constrict has fit me. Although Atalanta, according to some myths, did have one child, her life story displayed the theme of living her life regardless of preexisting perceptions of women. In light of Atlanta’s inspiration to my own life, I want to learn to live in the way that would make me most happy and not live solely for those around me.
Oedipus and His Complex
Oedipus, who was the son of King Laius of Thebes and a woman named Jocasta, was destined to create the Freudian theory of the Oedipus Complex. One day, the king received a prophecy from the Oracle of Delphi that Oedipus was going to kill his father, the king, and proceed to replace him in society and position by marrying his mother Jocasta.
To prevent such a tragic and frankly embarrassing ending to his life, Laius ordered a servant of his to tie up Oedipus’ feet and leave the newly born child on a mountain to die. In this way, no one was directly killing the child and therefore not committing murder, an act worthy of godly punishment. Yet when the servant reached the mountain where he was supposed to leave the child, he could not bring himself to abandon Oedipus. Instead, the servant gave the child over to another servant who passed Oedipus off to the King of Corinth who raised the child as his own. The king gave him the name Oedipus, meaning swollen feet, after the baby’s hurt feet that were originally tied up to prevent him from surviving on the mountain.
Oedipus never knew that his true father and mother were not the King and Queen of Corinth who raised him. When he one day traveled to Delphi to receive his prophecy from the Oracle, he was appalled when he was told his destiny was to kill his father and marry his mother. To avoid killing these parents who he loved, Oedipus traveled far away to the land of Thebes, where his true parents lived, unknowingly to him.
During his trip through Thebes, at a crossroads, Oedipus came across a chariot with a man and his servants inside. The man in the chariot, which happened to be King Laius of Thebes, threatened Oedipus’ and began a fight with him. Fearing for his own life, Oedipus fought back and ended up killing the man who he did not know was his father. Therefore, Oedipus fulfilled the prophecy, at least the first half of it.
Oedipus further fulfilled the prophecy by marrying his mother, Jocasta. This happened when the creature Sphinx proclaimed that whoever solved their riddle first would take the empty place of the dead King of Thebes’ throne. Oedipus won, married Queen Jocasta, and had four children. Yet later in life, Oedipus consulted the Oracle again for help in running his kingdom and was told that the killer of Laius must be punished to restore the land to peace. It was discovered that Oedipus killed Laius and, coming to know the fulfilled prophecy, Jocasta and Oedipus both killed themselves.
In my reading of this mythological story, I came to finally understand the origin of the Oedipus Complex. I had discussed this theory many times in school, both in my Introduction to Psychology class and in my AP Literature class. The Oedipus complex, as well as the Electra Complex were a theme in AP Lit., as we read many works of literature that had references to incest. Although it is an uncomfortable topic, it made me question how such a theory was so prevalent in literature and if there was any truth behind it. And my questioning led me to the infamous Freud.
Although my major is not Psychology, I have always been fascinated by psychological theories. Psychologist Freud who pronounced how truthful the Oedipus Complex is, has actually been denounced. According to my research, the Oedipus Complex, the idea that children want to replace their gender-same parent by killing them and marrying their other parent has very little empirical evidence to support the theory. The theory is so unsupported that it is not even listed in the Manual of Mental Disorders.
Even though my AP Lit. class might have had baseless references to the Oedipus and Electra Complex, it has been very interesting to learn of the theory’s origins in Greek mythology. I wonder what other psychological theories and phenomena can be explained through a more in depth research of western mythology!
Medusa and Athena
Trigger Warning: Mentions of Sexual Assault/Rape
Everyone knows about Medusa’s story: she is the green mythological monster with snakes for hair who can turn any creature to stone. But Medusa’s story goes much deeper than this simple description.
Medusa is one of the three Gorgons since she and her two sisters, Stheno and Euryale, were all cursed with the same physical form. Medusa was the ultimate catalyst for her sisters becoming monsters, and the story actually starts with the sea god Poseidon.
Medusa was a beautiful woman and a priestess in Athena’s temple. One day while she was tending to the temple, Poseidon came to Medusa and raped her. Athena, in response to her perception that Medusa desecrated her temple, punished Medusa by turning her into the gorgon. Medusa was condemned to her fate, and Poseidon, as one of the most powerful Greek gods, never had to face the consequences of his actions.
As the myth goes, later in Medusa’s mortal life, the Greek hero Perseus was tasked by Polydectes, the king of Seriphos, with slaying Medusa and bringing her head back to the king. Athena, the patron of heroes, wanted to help Perseus complete his task and return home without humiliation. Therefore, Athena gave Perseus guidance along his travels in ultimately cutting off the head of Medusa.
At this point in the myth, it appears that Athena had deep animosity towards Medusa: Athena was ruthless with how she treated Medusa after the mortal’s rape, and Athena even assisted in the slaying of the gorgon. This is where interpretation of Athena’s intention runs two separate paths.
The first interpretation is that Athena was a promoter of the patriarchal powers of the gods. She not only allowed for Medusa to be raped, but she punished Medusa as well. This is similar to the ‘blaming the woman’ narratives that are often used to defend the actions of rapists and redirect blame onto victims. Why else would Athena turn the woman into an ugly monster and eventually help to slay her? Additionally, Athena’s shield, Aegis, has the head of Medusa brandished onto it, signifying her destruction over her enemies, including Medusa.
But could it be interpreted as Athena was protecting Medusa and saving her from men? Many people come to Athena’s defense, claiming that transforming Medusa into the gorgon and giving her the power to turn men to stone would help her escape other assaults. Athena, therefore, was protecting Medusa from mortal men when she could not get involved in stopping the actions of a more powerful god like Poseidon.
In my opinion, the second interpretation does not make as much sense. Athena could have protected Medusa in so many other, less isolating ways. Additionally, Athena still helped in the beheading of Medusa, which doesn’t add up with the story of a savior. Finally, the culture of Greek mythology does not typically question the raping by gods, it usually displays it as normal. Therefore, during the society in which these myths were written, it is difficult to imagine that the storywriters would believe protecting Medusa would be Athena’s first intention, as she is just as self-centered and conceited as the other gods.
In the modern meaning, the image of Medusa’s head is used to represent survivors of sexual assault. Her face has become synonymous with a sign of strength, and many relate to Medusa’s pain yet power. It is inspiring that even in such a tragic story, people have been able to find community in other survivors like Medusa.
Pandora’s Jar
Pandora’s Box is one of the most referenced pieces of mythology seen in western culture today. The box metaphor is used in a variety of ways, including to indicate something precious or problems-ridden. Personally, I see references to this myth in society through the Pandora jewelry company as well as a chocolate brand also named after Pandora. But where is this myth from and what is the real story behind it?
Pandora was the first woman ever created, according to Greek mythology. But her creation was meant to ultimately punish humans for the titan Prometheus gifting people fire, much to Zeus’s anger. So Zeus made Pandora, which literally means “all-gifted,” and the gods adorned her with gifts in order to form her humanity. These included wisdom, loyalty, and curiosity.
And curiosity would be the ultimate flaw within humans, as displayed by Pandora’s story. The woman was gifted as a wife to the titan Epimetheus, yet he was warned by his brother Prometheus to not accept any gifts from Zeus. Prometheus believed that Zeus’ gifts were most likely secreted punishments to get back at Prometheus for stealing fire for the unworthy humans. Yet Epimetheus was enamored by Pandora, and the two married. As a wedding gift, Zeus gave the new couple a jar (it was not actually a box), yet remembering his brother’s warning, Epimetheus decided to never open the jar, for fear of what it might contain.
Although Pandora also agreed to never open the jar, the curiosity and temptation she was given by Hermes made her desire to know what it contained greater every day. Years went by, and she could no longer contain her temptation, so Pandora opened her jar.
Upon opening, from the jar flew out the evils of the world. Death, War, Starvation, and many others swirled around Pandora and were released onto all humans of the ancient universe. The world became dark, yet when Pandora looked into the seemingly empty jar, she discovered one small source of light inside: Hope.
The myth of Pandora’s Jar is used to show why there are evils in the world and that, even in the times of deepest trouble, hope still exists. Although this story can be quite inspiring for people, I had a different initial reaction to my reading of Pandora’s story, one of feminism.
What I have observed in many mythologies, including the Torah/Old Testament, is ingrained anti-feminist sentiments. For example, in the Book of Genesis, Eve, the equivalent of Pandora for the Jewish and Christian texts, was punished for eating forbidden fruit, which she consumed in pursuit of the knowledge held within the magical food. In Christianity, this story is known as the fall of man and the “original sin.” Essentially, Eve’s desire and curiosity condemned all humans to punishment as a result of Eve’s disobedience of God’s wishes.
To me, Pandora’s story is very similar. And I am beginning to observe a common, anti-feminist theme in these ancient texts where women assume the blame for all the human evils of life. Additionally, as described above, Pandora and women alike, were created as a pawn by the gods for bringing evil into the world. Pandora and Eve were both punished when their curiosity led them to no longer be passive. Drawing conclusions such as these make me wonder: do mythological narratives contribute towards the unequal treatment of women in past and current societies?
The Infamous Achilles’ Heel
Is the story of the Achilles heel even real? Let’s back up, and I’ll explain. Achilles was the son of the goddess Thetis and King Peleus of Phthia. Achilles is most known for his role in the Trojan war, fighting for the side of the Greeks. This war led to his demise and, whether or not you realize, you probably already know the story. The story of Achilles’ death begins from his childhood. When Achilles was a young boy, his mother Thetis was told by the oracle a prophecy about her son.
The prophecy told how Achilles would die young. In a trivial attempt to preserve her son, Thetis took infant Achilles to the River Styx to make him immortal. The story goes that a dip in the river, which flows into the underworld, would make the mortal body immortal. Thetis held him by the heel above the Styx and dipped him in, missing the tip of his heel where she held him. This would serve as Achilles’ weak point and eventually his death.
At the age of around twenty (it is disputed), despite his prophecy of youthful demise, Achilles joined the war effort against Troy, knowing that he would die. Yet Achilles, being the hero he is, refused to stay home, for his honor and glory would be lost. To the Greeks, dying in battle was the most honorable act, and Achilles was most honorable of the Greek warriors.
As it was, near the end of the ten year Trojan War, Achilles met his demise by the arrow of Paris. It is understood that the god of Archery, Apollo, assisted Paris’ aim in order to punish Achilles for murdering the god’s son. And divine intervention in the Trojan War was very common. Regardless, Paris struck Achilles in the heel, the one body part attaching Achilles to the confines of the mortal world.
But the story of how Achilles gained his immortality is disputed. Although the River Styx version is most known, more classical myths tell of how Achilles came to his state through a treatment of the godly food, Ambrosia, and his mother’s use of fire to burn away his mortality, except for at the heel where she held him.
In fact, the myth of Achilles’ ‘immortal’ body might not be truthful anyways. The story of his death that we all know, more or less, might be misleading. Achilles’ invulnerability was not discussed in the Iliad, the story of much of the Trojan War. In fact, some works of ancient art portray Achilles with an arrow striking and killing him by the torso. From this, we can gather that the story of Thetis and the River Styx might not be the original version of Achilles’ story.
To further this point, the expression “Achilles heel” only dates to relatively very modern times, the 1840s. So the story of Achilles’ dip, whether it be in the river or the fire, might be recent fabrications altogether. Either way, Achilles will never be forgotten in contemporary art and rhetoric, as his heel represents the fatal flaws within us all.
The Myth of Arachne
Why is absolute conformity so important in ancient Greece… and in our world?
The story of spiders and absolute allegiance to the divine. In ancient Greece, the myth of Arachne came about with a woman who was famous for her skillful embroidery. Her pieces were so incredible that people came to watch her work from all over Greece. She lived for the fame and was offended when compared to the great goddess Athena. Arachne asserted: “If Athena herself were to come down and compete with me, she could do no better than I.”
Athena heard Arachne’s claim and decided to check the mortal’s offensive remarks. She appeared before Arachne, and the two began to compete. Athena wove images of mortals who contested the gods and were fated horrible ends as a warning to all humans. Meanwhile, Arachne wove scenes of the cruelness and trickery of the gods. The pieces were equal in quality, yet when Athena saw what Arachne was weaving, she struck Arachne. Believing she was undeserving of such a beating, Arachne attempted to kill herself, yet Athena quickly transformed the woman and the rope into the first spider and its thread. Arachne’s spider web spinning still stands as a reminder to all people to not contest the gods.
The story of Arachne, boiled down, is about checking pride but mostly about obedience to the gods. Of course this story tells of the origin of the spider, but its main purpose is to show the ancient Greeks the importance of complete, unquestioned respect and compliance to their “superiors.” As a versed Greek mythology reader, I take issue with this notion. First of all, the Greek gods, although powerful creatures, are shown through their myths to be selfish and violent beings. They endlessly kill and abuse mortals at their will when their egos are touched.
But if they are gods, why do they share so many human emotions that drive them to be so greed filled and hateful? Why can’t the Greek people decide to change the source of their devotion without being turned to spiders?
Questioning the ideas we are taught to devote ourselves to is what led me along my religious journey. I began to question my Judaism– why I was practicing and if I truly believed in my own religious teachings. Over several years of existential confusion, I arrived at my belief in no higher being. Still, I am a practicing Jew. Religion, I learned, does not need to be so cut and dry as it was in the time of Arachne.
What Arachne’s story tells us is that we have limited free thought in this world. We are conditioned to a common belief, and if we try to transform it we will be outcasted. I might not be condemned to the same fateful ending for my atheism as Arachne was for her questioned devotion, yet her story shows that even if we meet adversity and consequences along the way, we should embrace breaking free from the shackles of societal norms to discover who we really are.