Graduation Year

2022

Date of Submission

4-2022

Document Type

Open Access Senior Thesis

Degree Name

Bachelor of Arts

Department

Classical Studies

Reader 1

Benjamin Keim

Reader 2

Shane Bjornlie

Terms of Use & License Information

Terms of Use for work posted in Scholarship@Claremont.

Rights Information

© 2022 Grant A Braught

Abstract

Hope’s interpretation within Works and Days is a nuanced and particular issue on whether Hesiod portrays Hope as good or evil. This paper examines the arguments from the ongoing scholarly debate on whether Hope should be interpreted as good or bad and introduces why Hesiod’s portrayal of Hope is a lesson on its use for his audience. The previous scholarship argues for both interpretations of Hope but does not dive further into why Hesiod discusses it nor how he wanted humankind to interact with it. In short, the importance of Hope to a reader of Works and Days. While Hesiod does not explicitly state an example of good Hope in his letter to Perses, only of evil Hope, he implies good Hope is attached to work. Thus, the portrayal of Hope in Works and Days is nuanced between good and evil since Hesiod explicitly warns against the despair and delusion that evil Hope can bring but portrays good Hope as work that humans can use to make the future better. This paper concludes that Hesiod displays Hope as very precarious and thus should interpret Hope as nuanced between good and evil. The use of Hesiodic Hope is an incentive to work for a better future but to be very vigilant against false Hope that can lead to despair and delude expectations about the future.

Download

Share

COinS