Oedipus Rex and Aristotle

Greeks The narrator is coy about whether or not he views Alexander as Great. He makes a lot of jokes about people want to be great and starts off the lecture with a bit about Kim Kardashian -- but it's not really a fair comparison in my estimation. Fame does not equate to greatness and one can be famous for being rich, pretty and making a sex tape (and having a PR team at one's fingertips). But that is not greatness.

Greatness should be defined more appropriately: it has to do with values, ability, achievement, impact. Alexander's brilliance and power were shown at an early age when he tamed the wild horse Bucephalus. His teacher was Aristotle. His father was a king. He had an army at his command. He had character. He loved learning. These are all indicators of greatness. Comparing him to KK and asking what is greatness should receive the response: Alexander was great, KK made a sex tape.

The narrator does give a lot of good reasons why Alexander should be considered great: his military achievements (good at conquering, bad at empire building); his legacy (military giants have all studied him); his introduction of the Persian idea of absolute monarchy to the Greco-Roman world; his founding of Alexandria in Egypt (which became home to a great library and was the center of learning for a while); his spread of the Greek language throughout the realm.

So while his empire did not last in one piece following his death, he still more closely united the region he conquered -- which is more than anyone else had ever done in the same territories. Thus, Alexander had a major impact on the direction of history and the course of events following his death. Hopefully, this is more than can be said of KK. Part II I would invite the playwright Euripides to dinner because I enjoy his tragedies the most.

Aristotle stated that Sophocles wrote the perfect tragedy with Oedipus Rex because it features the four points that are needed for a perfect tragedy -- a hero who is good, larger than life, true to life, and consistent. Aristotle also says that tragedies are supposed to be said -- and in this respect Euripides excels beyond any other because his characters suffer a tremendous amount; yet, Euripides does not adhere to the formula that Aristotle recommends as being properly tragic.

That aside, I am mostly intrigued by Euripides because he is doing something unique in theater and drama and really focusing on the element of suffering. I find this to be fascinating. For instance, in his drama Medea, the title character is jilted by her husband Jason who has decided to run after another woman. Medea is a foreigner, now left in a strange land -- her husband having abandoned her -- and the Greeks do not want her there because they fear she might do something sinister to them.

She is pushed to the limit and reacts with great pride and scorn: if they are going to abuse her like this then she will take the ultimate.