Introduction
Tragedies in a book or movie may portray men as worse than they are in real life, while comedies portray them as better. In a tragedy, the protagonist finds himself in a dire situation; in a comedy, he finds himself in a favorable one. According to Aristotle, tragic hero suffers partly because of their moral integrity. Still, the comic character is made to mock and laugh at their terrible conduct. According to screenwriting and writing, a character may progress or decline on a scale of good or evil. As this shows, the plot’s transformational dynamic is of crucial importance. The purpose of this paper is to discuss ways in which Socrates from The Golden Ass is portrayed as inferior.
How Socrates from The Golden Ass is portrayed as inferior
Aristotle is one of the most remarkable philosophers, and his works have shaped philosophy for many centuries, from the Late Antiquity through the Renaissance. His works continue to be studied today, even with kin and non-antiquarian interests. As he sees it, poetry is an act of imitation. Impersonation has its roots in the poetics of Aristotle, and he considers a poet to be a writer, not just a tool for writing. They create things and inspire us to see things we had not noticed before. Aristotle describes that the most amusing targets for funny imitation are those who are stupid or inferior because these traits lack appeal. Behavior is not a series of discrete events since time imitates nature. An action is anything one deliberately chooses to do and from which they gain pleasure. Human communication, direct and indirect, is the defining characteristic of the human sphere.
1nferiority has been used in this context to describe a person of low moral values. An individual is seen as inferior i they do not conform to patterns of acceptable conduct in line with personal principles and societal ethics. Moral principles are put in place for people to know what is right and what is wrong. An inferior person may make decisions that violate moral agreements. An inferior character may portray characteristics that are unethical, sinful, unfair, improper, dishonorable, wrong and immoral.
According to Aristotle, the objects of poetic imitation are men in action. The poet portrays humankind as a shadow of their true selves. Because he uses historical and conventional facts instead of contemporary people, he can better represent humanity than any contemporary individual. The poet selects and arranges components to create a picture of reality. Comedy is defined in Aristotle’s poetics as the repetitive use of minor characters but not in the ordinary sense of the term as a division of the entire work (Taplin 144). However, this does not necessarily mean that the comic mask is unappealing.
To imitate men in action, we must depict them as either better or worse than they are. When depicted as worse, they portray the inferior character and have low moral standards. Since moral character primarily responds to these divisions with goodness and evil as distinguishing marks of moral differences, we must portray men as better, worse, or as they are. One can see how these differences present themselves in the various methods for emulating different characteristics. Moral character primarily responds to the differences between good and evil, distinguishing aspects of moral divisions. Good Guys and Bad Guys are terms used by screenwriters to describe the characters in their stories, and this has far-reaching consequences, including a struggle between the depictions of human virtue and evil.
In the book Golden Ass, Aristomenes meets with Lucius, who is interested in hearing Socrates’ story, and Aristomenes narrates to him. Socrates is portrayed as inferior in this tale by Aristomenes. At the begging of the story, Aristomenes begins by describing how he saw Socrates when he met him (Apuleius et al. 6). He is shocked by the image of Socrates and how dreadful and worn down his looks are. Socrates’ clothes were tattered and filthy, and it was evident he was living on the streets. Socrates begs Aristomenes to leave, but he decides to take Socrates under care. He takes Socrates to a bathhouse and gives him liquor and food. In this text, Socrates is portrayed as inferior, whereas he is a beggar who is dirty, dreadful, and filthy. Being dirty and filthy is associated with low moral standards. When a person walks around when filthy they are vied as unethical and not conforming to standards of the society.
Socrates explains his story to Aristomenes, the traveler where he says he was robbed when he had gone to watch some gladiatorial game. At this point, Socrates goes to help an innkeeper who is described as lusty and used to take him to her bed. An inferior image of Socrates is portrayed, and it is evident that the traveler is disgusted after hearing Socrates’ story, where he asks him if he had preferred having sexual acts with a lusty woman. He states, “You preferred cavorting with an old leather hide whore to your own home and children!” (Apuleius et al. 7) Socrates is portrayed as promiscuous when he tells Aristomenes that he has been unfaithful to his wife, where he had committed acts of adultery with a woman named Meroe. Adultery is related to immorality, unethical behavior and low moral standards. The act is viewed as breaking a societal ethical code as it is involved in breaking marital promises. When two people are united in matrimony, it is ethical that they need to behave appropriately, conform to marriage protocols and abstain from sexual relations with a third party. Adultery involved acts of unfairness and deception to the other spouse.
When Aristomenes doubts Meroe, Socrates tells him not to criticize her, claiming that Meroe is a powerful witch. Socrates says that the witch was capable of doing things such as transforming people into animals, teleporting people, and even making people lust after her (Apuleius et al.7). The fact that Socrates lusts for this woman show that he is inferior. Unfaithfulness in marriage has always been seen as an unnatural vice in the community. People who have committed adulterous acts and made them known in society are seen as a disgrace to society. In today’s societies, adultery is perceived as an inherently controversial act and, other time is a ground for divorce in a family. Infidelity acts undermine family foundations in many ways. It can be a source of devastation, heartbreak, loneliness, betrayal, hopelessness, and confusion from one or both spouses involved.
Another scene is shown when the traveler and Socrates are asleep in the house. Two women suddenly appear, smashing the door open and hurling Aristomenes to the floor. The two women appear very agitated and are talking about how they would wish to punish Socrates. Shockingly, one of the women who are the innkeeper whom Socrates had committed adultery with slices Socrates’ throat. She proceeds to put her hand in and pulls out Socrates’ heart. The woman proceeds to put a sponge on Socrates’ wound and even urinate on him before leaving. This scene shows how the women undermine and discriminate against Socrates. Social ethics shows that a man is supposed to be dominant and gather respect from women. The act of omen urinating on Socrates is disgraceful and shameful. This image continues to portray how Socrates has been shown as inferior in the book.
The traveler is scared that people might blame him for killing Socrates. In fear, he tries killing himself using his coat threads, but he is unsuccessful as the rope breaks although suddenly Socrates wakes up (Apuleius et al. 12). They leave the room and discuss events of the previous night where they speculate that they had too much to drink. The traveler, however, learns that the night’s events had actually happened and that it was not a dream. The image of Socrates at this point is described as a drunkard by not remembering the previous night’s events. This image continues to describe Socrates low moral standard in the text. After they proceed and they both take breakfast, Socrates tries to drink from a brook. At this point, his wound on the neck gaps opens suddenly, and he drops down dead.
Unlike in the book Golden Ass, Socrates’ character differs in real life. His followers loved him for his honesty, self-discipline, and deep awareness of the world around him. He was a legend in his day and delved deeply into ethical questions. To help the people of Athens, Socrates was a selfless and unselfish individual. To his credit, he was friendly and gracious when forgiving his tormentors. His assurances to them were that he was unfazed by the prospect of death. For centuries, Socrates has been credited for inspiring people to rethink their beliefs. He usually exposes the flaws in his interlocutors’ logic by offering a series of blunt questions and allowing them to contradict themselves.
Socrates was an outspoken proponent of speaking one’s mind. The words he chooses to speak express a lot of attributes about who he is. He was one-of-a-kind and a morally acceptable man devoted to spreading knowledge worldwide. Socrates was self-aware and humble, realizing that he was no wiser than the rest of us. He gave lectures for free and taught people from all walks of life. He was adamant about eliciting a response from his audience. He described himself as a biting insect in his own words. By asking follow-up questions in response to questions, he urged people to come up with their solutions.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Socrates was a kindhearted individual who just cared about the Athenians well-being. To his credit, he was friendly and gracious when forgiving his tormentors. He has generosity, wit, and passion for life. He bravely defended himself by speaking through a third party and utilizing simple language rather than sophisticated ones. However, in the “Golden Ass,” he is presented with weak traits compared to real life. In light of these characteristics, it is clear that Socrates’ character in the text is inferior compared to his real life.
Works Cited
Apuleius, et al. The Golden Ass: Being the Metamorphoses of Lucius Apuleius. Harvard University Press, 1977.
Taplin, Oliver. “Aristotle’s Poetics and skênikoi agônes.” Eris vs. Aemulatio. Brill, 2018. 141-151. Web.