I thought that #5 on the list seemed like an interesting topic. I've been feeling a connection with the story of Antigone and thought it would be interesting to compare and evaluate the rule of these two kings as well as what their ultimate flaws were. Both Kings had power although they used it in different ways. The people under the rules of Creon and the King had two different rules of their King whether that be hatred, frustration, confusion, or satisfaction. Gilgamesh and Creon certainly both had their flaws but there were also good things the two kings had going for them as well as accomplished. How would these two evils measure up and which one would be the greater evils of the two? Each king suffered from excessive Hubris. I would like to further examine the reasons that each King did what they did and why they were like they were. Was there some sort of message that needed to be derived from the two stories or were they mainly for entertainment purposes.
I like the idea of examining these two character, especially given the questions you raised in your post.
ReplyDeleteTo chime in one the last question, I think both stories served in some ways as instructions to their different cultures and leaders. So that might be one way to look at these two characters: what are we supposed to learn about being a good leader? What do they say about the dangers of leadership, the dangers of power?
Power is an interesting concept when it comes to these two stories. Both characters have absolute power. But it is precisely that power that gets them in so much trouble. You might even look at what the stories seem to be saying about power, how to use it, and what its dangers are.
These two stories came out of cultures that gave absolute power to their leaders. But the stories themselves seem to be ambivalent at best about whether absolute power is a good thing.
Please post some sources once you have them so I can see where you're going with the outside research. What you have here looks strong.