Feminist Perspective in Sociology Essay Example for Free

Feminist Perspective in Sociology Essay â€Å"If we are to achieve a richer culture, rich in contrasting values, we must recognize the whole gamut of human potentialities, and so weave a less arbitrary social fabric, one in which each diverse gift will find a fitting place. † — Margaret Mead I. Prologue At present, it is quite difficult to imagine how there was a time when women were not afforded the same rights and opportunities as men. Some of these rights and opportunities include the right and opportunity to pursue a college diploma and a career, and the right to vote. At present, it is quite revolting to think how women were tagged and branded to remain at home and pursue the best interests of her family members, but not hers. It is quite difficult to imagine, but the truth of the matter is that there was such a time that all these unimaginable things and revolting things were happening, when women were to take the backseat to the men and when they were not regarded as equals. The goal of the first wave feminism was to correct all these notions and to try to achieve a position for the women when they do not take the backseat to the men, but stay beside the men as their equals. Slowly, this was achieved. Hence, women were then are given the right and opportunity to pursue a college diploma and a career, and the right to vote, among all others. All of these things are remarkable achievements and should in and by themselves, be commended. However, it cannot be denied once again, that the struggle of women does not end with the first wave feminism, after all its not apt to call it the first wave if there is no second wave. The second wave devolved around the problems that the achievements of the first wave put to fore. The sum of all these goals is ultimately for society treat woman not just as an object but as a subject — who has her own thoughts and who can speak through her own mind and with her own voice (Delmar, 2005, p. 32). The ultimate goal was to liberate woman from her reification. Thus, MacKinnon remarked: I say, give women equal power in social life. Let what we say matter, then we will discourse on questions of morality. Take your foot off our necks, then we will hear in what tongue women speak. So long as sex equality is limited by â€Å"sex difference† whether you like it or don’t like it, whether you value it or seek to negate it, whether you stake it out as a grounds for feminism or occupy it as the terrain of misogyny, women will be born, degraded and die. We would still settle for that equal protection of the laws under which one would be born, live and die, in a country where protection is not a dirty word and equality is not a special privilege (1987, p. 45). The issues and problems created by the first wave as manifested in the second wave led Bell Hooks to assert that [a]ll women are oppressed, and being oppressed means the absence of choices. The goal of this Paper then is to try to explain in a simplified but not in a simplistic manner what Bell Hooks meant when she cited the above-mentioned assertion through an exposition of some the writings during the second wave feminism. The Paper shall be divided into four parts. The first part is the Prologue, where these paragraphs fall under, which shall discuss in general the background and the goal of the Paper. The second part shall discuss in general what Bell Hooks asserted through the reference materials. The third part shall discuss in specific detail how all women are oppressed, once again through the reading materials. The fourth part is the epilogue, which shall present the conclusion and personal thoughts of the writer of this Paper. II. The New Face of Oppression Oppression presupposes two parties, one is the oppressor and the other is the object of the oppression, or oppressee, so to speak. During the first wave it is quite apparent that the oppressor is the patriarchal and machismo characteristic of society, or men in short, and the object of the oppression are women. In the second wave, one wonders how Hooks made this assertion given the fact that the men and women dichotomy and oppression were no longer as manifest. The answer is simple, while the first wave may have achieved equal rights and opportunities for women and men, there is still oppression. It is only that the faces of the oppressor and the oppressee have changed. With the second wave, other women became the oppressors. According to most critics, this was an inevitable consequence of setting equality with males as the primary goal of feminism (Jhappan, 1996, p. 25). Jhappan expounds: [i]n reality, the positions of power and privileges enjoyed by white men have only been made possible by racism and sexism, they require hierarchy, skewed power relations, inequality and the subjugation of the majority (white women and people of colour). It seems to me that white women’s â€Å"equality† with white men would only be possible of the race hierarchy were kept substantially intact since the privileges that white men enjoy depend upon a racially satisfied social system (p. 25). Simply, this means that with the goal of equality with men, women aimed for an equally oppressing position, where they are now the oppressors. While men were no longer tagged as the oppressors of all women, within the circle of women rose other oppressors in the face of fellow women who are of a different color. This is what Angela P. Harrris discusses in her article, in relation to what Catharine MacKinnon discusses in hers. Generally, the idea of the latter is that there is a universal concept of a woman so to speak. This universal concept of a woman is what was oppressed by society through male domination and supremacy before. For MacKinnon, there is just one experience, culture, heritage, needs for all women, thus, their needs are all alike. As most feminists then were white women, most of what was pushed for were for the needs of the white women. This is also known as the notion of a monolithic women experience (Harris, 2002, p. 384). Through this gender essentialism and worse, racial essentialism was likewise furthered (Harris, 2002, p. 384). Thus according to Harris, they reduce the lives of people who experience multiple forms of oppression to additional problems: â€Å"racism + sexism = straight black woman’s experience† or â€Å"racism + sexism + homophobia = black lesbian experience. † Thus, in an essentialist world, black women’s experience is always forcibly fragmented before being subjected to analysis, as those who are â€Å"only interested in race† and those who are â€Å"only interested in gender† take their separate slices of our lives (p. 384). An example for Harris is what MacKinnon does when she reduces Black women to just worse forms of white women, and not as a separate and diverse woman apart from the white woman, but not an aggravation. MacKinnon imparts: [b]lack is not merely a color of skin pigmentation, but a heritage, an experience, a cultural and personal identity, the meaning of which becomes specifically†¦ and glorious and/or ordinary under specific social conditions. It is as much socially created as, and at least in the American context no less specifically meaningful or defective than any linguistic, tribal, or religious ethnicity, all of whom are conventionally recognized by capitalization. While women on paper, were liberated from their reification, what happened really was that white women were liberated from reification. White women were no longer considered as objects —they became subjects. Black women, though they were women but because they were black, were not similarly liberated. This is because [w]hite feminists have exposed male essentialism only to replace it with another essentialism based on the notion of an essential woman. However, as it turns out, this generic â€Å"woman† is not only white, but middle class, and also able-bodied†¦Over the last couple of decades people of color have highlighted the silences of racists Eurocentric history and discourses which render all â€Å"others† invisible (Jhappan, 1996, p. 22). By virtue of the monolithic experience of women, women who did not fit the mold of the monolithic experience were oppressed in the sense that they were left with no choice. The choice was already made for them by the systems that were built in place respecting such monolithic experience. They were left with no choices as their needs were not addressed. The needs that were addressed were the needs of those who fit the monolithic experience of women. III. The Specific Instances of Oppression The specific instances of oppression that are discussed in the reference materials are enumerated below. a. Oppression in Relation to the Family Through the idea of the family wage, women were oppressed with the fact that they were made dependent on the wage of their husbands. They were made dependent with the notion that â€Å"a working man should earn enough to support his family† (Gavigan, 1996, p. 237), and consequently, the place of the woman or the wife is at home (Gavigan, 1996, p. 237). As the husband already earns enough to support the family, there is no more need for the woman to earn and augment the budget for the family. Thus, she is tasked by society to stay at home and address the needs of her family members. Such admittedly, does not require professional and personal growth. Thus, while the members of the family pursue different goals in their lives, the woman is stuck at home looking after the family members, sending them off to reach their dreams, while she stays in her place. In addition, if and when a woman earns, she is given minimum wage. The notion of minimum wage was put in place to accommodate individuals who were single and who did not have dependents to support (Gavigan, 1996, p. 238). In this wise, women were oppressed with the fact that when they earn, what they earn is not even enough to provide for their dependents, if any. b. Oppression under the Law Under the law, heterosexual relationships are afforded more advantages and privileges, in terms of â€Å"tax benefits, standing to recover damages for certain torts committed against spouses, and rights to succession and insurance benefits† (Gavigan, 1996, p. 263). The same are not afforded to homosexual relationships; thus women are oppressed. Oppression of women under the law is manifested explicitly in Welfare Law. When women seek assistance under the welfare law, especially the solo parents, they have a hard time obtaining the assistance that the law provides because of the very stiff and stringent definition of â€Å"spouse† under the laws such as the Family Law Act, RSO 1990 and Canada Pension Plan Act : â€Å"spouse† means either of a man and a woman who (a) are married to each other or (b) have together entered into, a marriage that is voidable or void, in good faith on the part of the person asserting a right under the Act x x x â€Å"spouses† means a spouse as defined in subsection 1 (1), and in addition includes either of a man and woman who are not married to each other and have cohabited (a) continuously or (b) in relationship of some permanence, if they are natural or adoptive parents if a child x x x â€Å"spouses: in relation to a contributor means’ (i) if there is no person described in subparagraph (ii), a person who is married to the contributor at the relevant time or (ii) a person of the opposite sex who is cohabiting with the contributor in a conjugal relationship at the relevant time, having so cohabited with the contributor for a continuous period of at least one year (Gavigan, 1996, p. 266) When solo parents seek social welfare assistance, there were always resort to the courts in order to determine whether or not a particular relationship was sufficiently conjugal to warrant the characteristic as spousal and consequently to warrant the benefits provided by the social services (Gavigan, 1996, p. 266). Also, the definition of the term â€Å"spouse† was too technical such that even in heterosexual relationships, there were always doubt as to whether a relationship is sufficiently conjugal to warrant the benefits granted by social services (Gavigan, 1996, p. 267). An example of the ill-effect of this law is the requirement that the spouse who should support the spouse (wife) and the children, must not live in a certain proximity; otherwise the latter cannot receive the benefits under the Welfare Law (Gavigan, 1996, p. 269). c. Oppression by Virtue of Race or Color This form was already discussed in part two. However, in addition Jhappan tells us that for colored women, race rather gender has been the primary source of oppression. †¦while white feminists have theorized the male breadwinner dependent-female, post-Industrial Revolution family form of the West as a source of women’s oppression, different family forms persist in other culture even among those living in the diasporas, For many women of colour, in fact, state actions such as iimmigration and labour policies that have separated and distorted families have oppressed them more than gender relations (p. 23). d. Oppression of Oneself by Oneself Women also admit that in and by themselves, they are oppressed. As there are women who are of different cultures, there are certain aspects of their identity that is rejected by another aspect, but which they ultimately have to deal with. For instance a woman who has both black and Caucasian heritage, the black heritage forsakes slavery while the Caucasian heritage promoted the same. There may be instances in the life of such person when decisions have to be made favoring one aspect over the other, and in such instance, the woman is the oppressor of her own self as she is left with no choice but to decide in such manner, although contrary to an aspect of her identity. IV. Epilogue Delmar has pointed out that the problem of oppression within the circle of feminism is rooted on the fact that the very definition of feminism is monolithic and abstracted. The very definition of feminism forgets or averts from the reality that there exists a multiple consciousness of women. With the realization that a multiple consciousness of women exists, then there may be the realization that there are various facets of oppression. Consequently, solutions may be afforded to these various facets in order to abolish, if not minimize the same. This is why at the beginning of this Paper a quote from Margaret Mead was stated. â€Å"If we are to achieve a richer culture, rich in contrasting values, we must recognize the whole gamut of human potentialities, and so weave a less arbitrary social fabric, one in which each diverse gift will find a fitting place. † With the realization that women are rich in culture, in contrasting values, then we can realize that there is a whole gamut of potentialities. With such variety, a less arbitrary social fabric may be established, and through such less arbitrary social fabric, each and every individual may find his or her own place without necessarily fitting into a monolithic mold. References Delmar, Rosalind. (2005). What is Feminism? Feminist Theory: A reader, 27-36. New York: McGraw-Hill. Gavigan, Shelley. (1996). Familial Ideology the Limits of Difference. Women and Canadian Public Policy, 225-78. Toronto: Harcourt Brace. Harris, Angela. (2002). Race and Essentialism in Legal Theory. Women, Law and Social Change, 4th ed. , 383-92. Concord, ON: Captus Press. Jhappan, Raddha. (1996). Post-Modern Race and Gender Essentialism or a Post-Mortem of Scholarship. Studies in Political Economy 51:15-58. MacKinnon, Catharine. (1987). Difference and Dominance: On Sex Discrimination. Feminism Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law, 32-45, 240-45. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Privatizing the Public Sphere Essay -- Industrialization Fragmentation

Privatizing the Public Sphere The privatization and fragmentation of space in post-industrial urban America is a widespread social problem. As society becomes even more globalized as a result of technological advances, the rampant spread of a privatized public realm is ever-increasing. Public space is needed as a center in which to bring people together to share a common place. It is within public spaces that public life unfolds and without public spaces such as parks, streets, and buildings, the mixing of classes will become increasingly uncommon. Society is made up of two sectors: the private and public, and it is essential that both remain separate entities. However, through the use of fear tactics especially the threat of violent crimes, privatized settings are spreading throughout the public sphere. In this analysis, it is my intent to explore the various tactics being used to impede upon the public sphere. In doing so, I will explore the causal factors that contribute to the increased privatization of urban public life. Historically, the city was an all-encompassing entity. At the dawn of industrialization, large masses of people flocked to the city in hopes of a better economic life for themselves and their families. It was within the city limits, particularly closest to the areas of commerce and exchange that people took up residence, worked, and pursued various social activities. The city served the needs of all its citizens. However, as industrialization moved further along, there was a major shift in urban economics. While many businesses flourished, so did wealth and as this increased, society faced an evolving class system. Three notable classes emerged: the lower/working class, the middle class, and the upper/elite class. While these class divisions grew, a large amount of money was being invested in the creation of public venues. Public institutions were designed to bring education, culture, and in many ways, a sense of community to modern city life. A public park or library was a plac e that people of various classes could come together and share space. However, by the end of the Twentieth century and into the Twenty-First, true public space is becoming almost extinct, as is the middle class. Privatized public space has become the new trend across many American cities. There are many interrelated factors that contribut... ...for the poor into the public realm. The decline of a middle class is affecting the structure of society because cities and public venues were once designed to serve the middle class. However, without such a class, cities are now being designed to service an elite class and it is this class that has the power and control over public life. With the widening division between classes, services to the non-elite members of society will continue to diminish. The importance of public space and life is an important aspect of any given society. Without such spaces, society will continue to be dived among class lines. When a certain group of people hold power and it’s all about power and control, there will always be those that are excluded and denied access to the public sphere. As long as imaginary and irrational fears are instilled into the private lives of the public, society will continue to build fortress around its buildings and to use surveillance cameras outside the doors. Public space is a right to all citizens and due to fear of the unknown; it is diminishing right before our eyes. In this day and age, to be an American means to always be under the watchful eye of another. Privatizing the Public Sphere Essay -- Industrialization Fragmentation Privatizing the Public Sphere The privatization and fragmentation of space in post-industrial urban America is a widespread social problem. As society becomes even more globalized as a result of technological advances, the rampant spread of a privatized public realm is ever-increasing. Public space is needed as a center in which to bring people together to share a common place. It is within public spaces that public life unfolds and without public spaces such as parks, streets, and buildings, the mixing of classes will become increasingly uncommon. Society is made up of two sectors: the private and public, and it is essential that both remain separate entities. However, through the use of fear tactics especially the threat of violent crimes, privatized settings are spreading throughout the public sphere. In this analysis, it is my intent to explore the various tactics being used to impede upon the public sphere. In doing so, I will explore the causal factors that contribute to the increased privatization of urban public life. Historically, the city was an all-encompassing entity. At the dawn of industrialization, large masses of people flocked to the city in hopes of a better economic life for themselves and their families. It was within the city limits, particularly closest to the areas of commerce and exchange that people took up residence, worked, and pursued various social activities. The city served the needs of all its citizens. However, as industrialization moved further along, there was a major shift in urban economics. While many businesses flourished, so did wealth and as this increased, society faced an evolving class system. Three notable classes emerged: the lower/working class, the middle class, and the upper/elite class. While these class divisions grew, a large amount of money was being invested in the creation of public venues. Public institutions were designed to bring education, culture, and in many ways, a sense of community to modern city life. A public park or library was a plac e that people of various classes could come together and share space. However, by the end of the Twentieth century and into the Twenty-First, true public space is becoming almost extinct, as is the middle class. Privatized public space has become the new trend across many American cities. There are many interrelated factors that contribut... ...for the poor into the public realm. The decline of a middle class is affecting the structure of society because cities and public venues were once designed to serve the middle class. However, without such a class, cities are now being designed to service an elite class and it is this class that has the power and control over public life. With the widening division between classes, services to the non-elite members of society will continue to diminish. The importance of public space and life is an important aspect of any given society. Without such spaces, society will continue to be dived among class lines. When a certain group of people hold power and it’s all about power and control, there will always be those that are excluded and denied access to the public sphere. As long as imaginary and irrational fears are instilled into the private lives of the public, society will continue to build fortress around its buildings and to use surveillance cameras outside the doors. Public space is a right to all citizens and due to fear of the unknown; it is diminishing right before our eyes. In this day and age, to be an American means to always be under the watchful eye of another.

Research Papers

E. W. Clay’s Life in Philadelphia Series During the 1830’s, among the antislavery protest, freeborn blacks of Philadelphia represented the wealthiest and most educated group of African Americans in the country. They established their own schools, churches, and even a social order. Associated to the cultural and social economic status, African American clubwomen of Philadelphia were greatly ridiculed in racially prejudiced cartoons such as E. W. Clay’s popular â€Å"Life in Philadelphia† series. E. W.Clay was inspired to make these series by George and Robert Cruikshank who had published a â€Å"Life in London† series. His late 1820s feature series â€Å"Life in Philadelphia† fight with who African Americans could be in the social world; a world that relied on race and slavery as powerful signs of inequity. His response was brutally racist: in Philadelphia, those African Americans who took on the frills of urban life were strained and out of p lace. Clay’s analysis came in the form of fourteen engraved plates, a series that was one part observation, one part artistry, and one part imagination.Clay’s series presented American spectators a cruel portrayal of black figures that offered an exaggeration in overdressed clothing and proportions, awkward poses, and thus failed to measure up to the demands of freedom and citizenship. In Clay’s cartoons, not only was their style being ridicule but their language as well. In his 1828 â€Å"Is Miss Dina at home? † cartoon he mocks the person by declaring that an African American with a business card is simply a laughable concept. Blackness, as illustrated by Clay, provided his free black subjects mistaken aspirants, were always controlled by incomparable distinction.Clay’s varieties of drawings were inspired by the way some of the African American women had started to carry themselves out. They added a touch of certain things, that perhaps were not permissible by their society, and it made them give the impression trying to be different. They might have imitated their middle-class etiquette and their ways of life, but they always overreached, or as one of Clay’s characters put it, â€Å"aspire too much†. This series of cartoons were an observation that everything they did was taken as a joke.Clay was not the only American caricaturist active during the Jacksonian era, but he was the first American artist to specialize in political caricature. His work was pointed towards African Americans; therefore in the south it was pointless for southern whites to purchase these images. The south already had slavery and was establishing social perimeters. Nevertheless, many people still bought his cartoons. The early success of Clay’s images is example to his ability to tap into the nations fears and appeal with the dilemma on slavery and in abolition.His â€Å"Life in Philadelphia† etchings mocked the fancy dre sses, their manners, and dialects of Philadelphians, white and black. Today these images are often used as basic examples of discrimination against blacks. However, an inspection shows humorous, theatrical pictorial satire, grounded in Philadelphia culture just before the rise of the Abolition Movement. Clay’s work shows that he reserved that right to comment on events and personalities regardless of political affiliation as well as the right to change his mind on issues. Although Clay’s point of view varies from topic to topic, he did not always follow a party line in his caricatures.

Aeschylus Agamemnon Plot Summary

Aeschylus Agamemnon was originally performed at the City Dionysia of 458 B.C.  as the first tragedy in the only surviving trilogy of ancient Greek plays. Aeschylus won 1st prize for his tetralogy (the trilogy and a satyr play). Overview Agamemnon, leader of the Greek forces in the Trojan War, has returned after 10 years. He arrives with Cassandra in tow. There is controversy about  the performance dates for the Greek tragedies  and the  components of Greek tragedy. Structure The divisions of ancient plays were marked by interludes of choral odes. For this reason, the first song of the chorus is called the parodos (or eisodos because the chorus enters at this time), although the subsequent ones are called stasima, standing songs. The episodes, like acts, follow the parados and stasima. The exodus is the final, leaving-the-stage choral ode. Prologue 1-39Parados 40-2631st Episode 264-3541st Stasimon 355-4882nd Episode 489-6802nd Stasimon 681-8093rd Episode 810-9753rd Stasimon 976-10344th Episode 1035-1071Kommos 1072-13304th Stasimon 1331-13425th Episode 1343-1447Exodus 1448-1673(Line numbers from Robin Mitchell-Boyak with consultation from  The Structure of Aeschylus Agamemnon  by Dr Janice Siegel) Setting In front of the royal palace of Agamemnon at Argos. Characters of  Agamemnon AgamemnonAegisthusClytemnestraCassandraHeraldWatchmanChorus of Argive Elders Prologue (Watchman) enters. Sees  the Greeks have taken Troy. exit. Parodos (The chorus of Argive elders) Summarizes the war to get back Helen, Agamemnons sister-in-law. They are suspicious of what Agamemnons wife, Clytemnestra, is up to. They describe the injustice done to Clytemnestra by her husband. Clytemnestra enters. First Episode (Chorus Leader and Clytemnestra ) The chorus learns from the queen that the Greeks are back from Troy, but they dont believe her until she explains the beacon relay that provided her with the news, then the chorus gets set to offer prayers and thanksgiving. Clytemnestra exits. First Stasimon (The chorus) Says that Zeus is the god of guests and hosts and disapproves of breaking the bonds, as Paris did. The families suffer and begrudge their losses when their men follow Agamemnon to war to avenge Paris theft. Too much glory brings an inevitable fall. Second Episode (Chorus and the Herald) The Herald asks the gods to welcome back those who have survived the 10-year war, and especially Agamemnon who destroyed their land and the altars to their gods. The chorus says it has been anxious for the return. Clytemnestra enters. She says she already knew it was time to rejoice and asks that the message is brought to her husband that she has remained faithful and loyal. Clytemnestra exits. The herald doesnt know any better than to believe Clytemnestra. The chorus wants to know whether Menelaus suffered any mishaps, which he and other Achaeans have, but the herald says its a day for rejoicing. The Herald exits. Second Stasimon (The chorus) The chorus takes Helen to task. It also blames an evil/proud family for producing future generations of ill-doers. Agamemnon and Cassandra enter. The chorus greets their king. Third Episode (Chorus and Agamemnon, with Cassandra) The king greets the city and says he will now go to his wife. Clytemnestra enters. Clytemnestra explains how awful it is to be the wife of a man away at war. She addresses her attendants to fete her husband and strew his path with a royal cloth. Agamemnon doesnt want to make a feminine entrance or one more suited to the gods. Clytemnestra persuades him to step on the royal cloth, anyway. He asks her to receive the war prize that is Cassandra with kindness. Clytemnestra then asks Zeus to work his will. Clytemnestra and Agamemnon exit. Third Stasimon (The chorus, with Cassandra) The chorus senses doom. Fate doesnt forget blood guilt. Fourth Episode (The Chorus, with Cassandra) Clytemnestra enters. Clytemnestra tells (silent) Cassandra to go inside. The Chorus tells her to do so, too. Kommos (Cassandra and Chorus) Cassandra is distraught and invokes the god Apollo. The chorus doesnt understand, so Cassandra tells the future or the present that Clytemnestra is slaying her husband, and tells the past that the house has a lot of blood guilt. She tells of how Apollo gave her the gift of prophecy but then cursed her. She knows she will be killed, but still enters the house. Cassandra exits. Fourth Stasimon (The Chorus) The chorus describes the multi-generational blood-guilt of the House of Atreus and hears shrieking from within the palace. Fifth Episode (The Chorus) Agamemnon is heard to cry out that he has been struck a mortal blow, and cries out again about a second. The Chorus discusses what to do. They look around. Clytemnestra enters. She says she lied for good reason before. She is proud that she killed Agamemnon. The Chorus wonders if she has become maddened by some type of potion and says shell be exiled. She says they should have exiled him when he sacrificed his own child. She says Aegisthus is beside her and that they slew Cassandra, Agamemnons concubine. Exodos (The Chorus and Clytemnestra) They take to task the two women who have caused such turmoil, Clytemnestra, for killing their guardian, the king, and her sister Helen. Clytemnestra reminds them it wasnt Helen who killed the warriors. The Chorus warns that there will be further evil. Aegisthus enters. Aegisthus explains his part of the vengeance cycle, that Agamemnons father had served Aegisthus father his sons as a feast. These were Aegisthus brothers. Aegisthus says he can die now that he has obtained revenge. The Chorus says they will stone him, ignoring the presence of his retainers. Aegisthus says he will use the late kings gold to control the people of Argos. Clytemnestra tells them to cool down. The Chorus and Aegisthus do so but continue to taunt each other, the Chorus saying that Fates willing, Orestes will return home soon. The End Sections of the Tragedy in Popular Translations Lattimores Chicago Translation Robert Fagles translation Prologue: 1-39Parodos: 40-257Episode I: 258-354Stasimon I: 355-474Episode II: 475-680Stasimon II: 681-781Episode III: 767-974Stasimon III: 975-1034Episode IV: 1035-1068Epirrhematic: 1069-1177Episode V: 1178-1447Epirrhematic: 1448-1576Episode VI: 1577-1673 Prologue 1-43.Parodos: 44-258.Episode I: 258-356.Stasimon I: 356-492.Episode II: 493-682.Stasimon II: 683-794.Episode III: 795-976.Stasimon III: 977-1031.Episode IV: 1032-1068.Kommos: 1069-1354.Stasimon IV: 1355-1368.Episode V: 1369-1475.Exodos: 1476-1708.