Upon completion of some of the readings, my understanding of myth is beginning to change slightly. After completing The Epic of Gilgamesh, I started to re-think the events in the book and apply different theories of myth to them. I applied the theory of binaries developed by Lévi-Strauss to analyze both Gilgamesh and Enkidu. Gilgamesh stands for almost everything human made, culture, and the opposite of purity and untouched my nature. Enkidu on the other hand was created out of nature; he stands for everything earthy, nature, pure, and untouched. As the theory states, they are two opposites who do not appear to go together. I also applied Girard’s way of thinking about myth to the story as well. The violence that occurred was always justified in almost a sacrificial way (one thing must happen in order for another to follow). There was also rivalry between Gilgamesh and other characters, such as Humbaba. Both Gilgamesh and Humbaba are …show more content…
The two main theories that I applied to the reading were that of Girard and Eliade. I saw connections to Eliade’s way of thinking about myth as the characters all seem to be very concerned with different Gods and of other character’s morals, differentiating right from wrong in actions. I also saw more prominently, Girard’s way of thinking through the constant justification of violence. Agamemnon sacrificed their daughter for a cause. In turn, Clytaemnestra killed Agamemnon because he killed their daughter and she also killed Cassandra because she corrupted her husband and was a mistress to him. Whenever the killings were questioned, they were always justified by actions done to avenge someone or to “make things right again”. So far, I believe that my way of thinking about myth has definitely changed in the way that Girard’s theory of myth has greatly impacted my understanding and interpretation of the