Machiavelli’s the Prince and a current day prince would in my opinion carry the same traits. Machiavelli described the steps that a prince or a leader should take to earn their power. He talks about the princes in his story and how they have to make so many different choices, choices that could alter their chances at success in becoming a leader. Well in a current day prince everything Machiavelli suggested is still relevant and applies to becoming a “prince” or what would now be a president or any political role. One example of the common choices between Machiavelli’s prince and American politics would be being willing to change when times change, like if a certain outlook becomes popular with the people, then no matter what your beliefs are you need to be willing to adjust in order to get the people’s vote. A current example of how this applies to our new day prince is whats happened with our new elected African American president of the United States. There are plenty of people who totally disagree with having a non-white president, but at the same time they might agree with his policies vs the policies of his white component so they’re forced to either accept change or be unhappy with a president but satisfied with the color of his skin. As an African American man running for president he would have many forces running against him already just because of race, so in return he might have to change some of his policies to please the people against him, which might be an action that would bring him great recognition, which leads me to my next point; deception. Every great leader is going to deceive the people at some point, it might be about their religion, or where they were born, or even the things they claim to value as a leader. Popular vote will always determine what a leader has to lie about, and that was made clear in the Prince and it’s also a current political fact. Machiavelli’s the Prince, and our current day prince have all of the same qualities, the only thing different are the current day issues they deal with.
The Epic of Son-Jara in my opinion is easier to understand compared to some of the other stories we’ve read this semester which could possibly be the reason why Disney chose to use this story for one of their animated movies. Disney focuses on stories that teach children important morals and how to handle life situations but no matter how dense a moral is they need to be able to break it down well enough for younger ages to digest. The Epic of Son-jara has a deeper story to it but Disney was able to dissect the main points and make it understandable for their audience which is children.
When it comes to literature the epic of Son-Jara might not be as popular because it’s story isn’t as intense as the story of Oedipus the King for example. In Oedipus there are many more factors and details that make the story so entertaining, where as Son-Jara still being an epic and entertaining, there aren’t that many shocking details; for example in Oedipus he finds out that he’s killed his father and slept with his mother after he was warned that this would happen and acted to prevent it, but actually ended up falling right into his bad fortune. In son-jara it has to do with leadership and the right to certain roles in leadership. If you look at most of Disney’s movies it has to do mainly with kings and queens and how someone is always looking to steal that role from the deserving person. Sleeping Beauty there was an antagonist looking to prevent her from becoming queen, in the Lion King his uncle was the antagonist trying to steal Simba’s position as king, and in the Little Mermaid Ursula tries to take The kings power as ruler of the sea. Basically i believe the story may not have been deep enough for the literature world, but when it comes to Disney that’s exactly what they look for.
Geoffrey Chaucer’s “Canterbury Tales” strayed away from the norm. It was an intense story that i didn’t mind reading. In the general prologue the characters introduced basically tell us their life stories and their stories and personal qualities are what interested me the most. The character introduced in the prologue that i feel i most aligned to was the nun.
The nun was brought into the story described as “simple and gracious” which i feel describes me to a certain point because I’m often complimented for being such a “chill person”. I keep to myself and carry myself in a gracious and presentable manner. I prefer for people to know my face but not my name, and by that I mean I stay out of the spotlight while at the same time people know who I am. In the story they say “And truthfully, she was so very pleasant, And amiable, her manners excellent” , this description of the nun relates to me in many ways. People always tell me that I’m just like my mother because she’s so nice and forgiving, she does everything so gracefully and politely, she looks to please everyone else before pleasing her own needs or wants. I take after my mother when it comes to those characteristics and i feel i relate to the nun as well when it comes to being a pleasant person.
Lastly one of her physical descriptions that I feel relates to me is that of her face. I believe our facial features are pretty similar when they described hers; “Her nose well-shaped; her eyes bright as glass; her mouth very small, and soft and read; an indeed she had a fine forehead.” I have a very distinct shaped nose, and through out my whole life I’ve been told that I have a small mouth; in fact my best friend and I have always compared our smiles in the pictures we take together, her smile being big and wide and mine being petite and narrow. My forehead as well as hers would probably be described as “fine”. All in all I believe out of all of the characters detailed in the story, I was most aligned with the nun.