On June 20, 2001, Andrea Yates, a Houston woman with a history of mental illness, drowned her three children while her husband was at work. During her trial Ms. Yates successfully pleaded insanity and is currently housed in a treatment facility near Kerrville.
Knowing what we know of Mrs. Yates' psychological history, it is easy for us in contemporary American society to accept that her mental state led to this heinous event. However, looking through the lens of history, we find many examples of murderous mothers.
One of the most famous is of course Agave in The Bacchae. In fact, it is a theme we find popping up in other Greek tragedies of the period. In Medea (also by Euripides) a mother murders her children as revenge against her husband's infidelity.
Legend offers even more examples. "La Llorona" (The Weeping Woman), a Mexican folktale (with many variations according to location) La Llorona is a beautiful woman who kills her children in order to be with the man she loves, who subsequently rejects her. After which she commits suicide and is damned to wander, searching for her lost children and calling their names.
The question of the week is...how can we account for such similar stories emerging from such disparate times and places?
There is undeniably a pattern that emerges when you look at the history of murderous women. Because these similar stories and events seems to be spread out and emerge from such disparate times and places, it is hard to conclude there it is a specific type of culture that sparks such violent cases. But it is also incorrect to say radically different motivations generated such crimes because clearly some type of idea or aspect have had to be shared for the cases of murderous mothers to keep reappearing in history. And we see that a mother murdering her children is not too rare in the society, as shown in the study done by American Anthropological Association. They concluded that every year, 200 women kill their children in the United States alone, and every day, three to five children are killed by their parents. Unfortunately, homicides now rank as one of the leading causes of death for children under the age of 4. These studies have completely ruined our idea of mothers being the devoted figure who cares and loves for their children. But an interesting pattern emerges as we study deeper into these cases. From the three cases we are given above, there is one thing in common. Every case is driven by an external factor, whether it be a mental illness (from the 2001 Andrea Yates Case), the works of a god (Agave’s case in The Bacchae, Dionysus being the god), or a man that provoked such deeds (the Mexican Folktake: La Llorona). Although the three external forces aren’t very much related, the fact that none of the cases were done through “free will” brings up a fascinating point. Does free will vs. determinism intervene in this particular idea? Can we account for such similar stories emerging from such disparate times and places by the idea of determinism? Further research should be made and many more murder cases should be studied before jumping onto this conclusion but from the three cases given, the idea of determinism is supported. But why do these women murder their own children? My theory is that babies are most vulnerable to this threat. It is true that murdering a fully grown adult is much harder than murdering a one to four year old baby. As we can see from our statistics above (every day, three to five children are killed by their parents), the victims here are very young children! Most murder stories, not all, have some type of external force. Men are capable of murdering more than just a child, so many of the murder cases where men are the murderer has older victims. Women are only portrayed to murder children because women are most likely to murder a child then an adult. This is all followed by the idea of determinism. Women determined by fate to murder would most likely murder a child, and a child being their own son or daughter. This theory is what (I think) accounts for such similar stories emerging from such disparate times and places in history.
ReplyDelete-Daniel Kim
Period 1/2
We are coming to find that mothers killing their children are surprisingly uncommon worldwide. When a mother kills her own children; something’s not right. Never would it be a good morality or any adequate reason to do such a thing. One may argue that a mother could be coerced into killing their child or possibly pure mistake, but rarely do you see a mother have to do that. One main example of pure mistake was when Agave killed her own son, Pentheus; which in the real world is a near-impossible task. But in most cases the reason is that of mental insanity. Normal beings wouldn’t do such a thing, which is why they are probably not acting like themselves when they perform the crime. The mothers may kill through neglect, abuse, or purposefully but that all comes from some factor elsewhere. Most factors are unknown such as the Andrea Yates story, where she claims to kill her children with no emotion. She described herself as a bad mother who needed punishment. Mothers killing their children seem to be greater news than men killing people. When men kidnap/kill children we are still shocked but not as much as if we had heard a women kidnap/killed children. This is because we describe women as beings devoted to their children. This is why it receives greater media attention; if we lived in a society where the men were more “motherly” there would be a lot more than just 200 cases of children deaths per year.
ReplyDelete-Ashvin Roharia
-Period 1/2
I think that the reason of mothers killing their children is such a common archetype is because of the perception that one of the strongest bonds that exists is that of a mother for her child (this deals solely with mythical occurrences, not actual occurrences). To break that bond, to break what many would consider one of the strongest things around, would be like turning the world up on its head. Especially in more ancient societies, like, say, Sparta, where the sole role of the woman was to bear children, or in Old China, where family plays a big role in life. Mothers killing children would be an excellent way (in myth and lit, of course) to demonstrate that there is something seriously wrong with the order of the world. It also serves as a very good tragedy.
ReplyDeleteFreud would probably have a lot to say on this subject, but then again what did he NOT have a lot to say?
ReplyDeleteI think that this issue relates to the idea of freedom. For many people, children represent a constraint on their freedom, and in many ways they are right. The killing of one's children represents a tangible as well as a symbolic untethering of bonds. It is a liberating act. Unfortunately this liberation comes at the ultimate cost to others, and is thus an unacceptable solution.
In the case of Andrea Yates we are faced with a different motivation. Through the haze of her mental illness, Ms. Yates firmly believed that, by killing her children, she was saving them from corruption by an evil world, and thus damnation.
So here we have two sides to this issue, the self-oriented flight from responsibility, and the misguided, albeit selfless salvation of others.
My belief is the combination of answers provided by the people above me. Also, a brief warning, I might take this a little too far. I apologize for my confusing thoughts.
ReplyDeleteWhen one thinks of the strongest bond between two people or more. The two that usually pops up are the bond between the mother and child and between lovers. Severing a bond between them indicates that the world has been thrown out of balance. For example, in the play Macbeth, the king Duncan was killed by Macbeth. During Shakespeare's time, a common archetype is that if one takes out the person in power, the entire caste is messed up.
However, what I think the one important reason of why mother killing their children is such a common archetype is because we play the "blame game". Very often, we humans blame on things that causes us to make the mistakes that we do. These things that causes us to do the things that we do often aren't even external forces like a drunken man comes along and maul someone. Examples of things humans can control are deciding not to drink alcohol or even having children.
In the present time, this is especially important. I think the reason why there are cases of women killing their kids is because children do limit that amount of freedom a mother can have. However, one thinks that the mothers could have at least think about it before they decided to start a family. Unless one is raped (abortion is legal, no excuses), one can control whether to follow birth control methods or "keep your pants" on.
In the end, the main idea is that humans do not take responsibility for what went wrong, but choose instead to blame others. Especially for money (in the case of most accidents involving cars).
It depends on how you look at the issue. When you're looking at it from the perspective of the entertainment/news industry, it's easy to understand why you hear of it so often on TV, in books, folklore, and so on. The bond between a mother and her child seems like something that could never be broken or crossed. So when it happens, it's unbelievable and the media is eager to discuss the event, because they know it will get more viewers. There are an innumerable amount of tragic events that occur every day all over the world, but only a fraction of them are shown by the media, because the media wants to appeal to its audience. It only displays what it thinks its viewers/readers will be most interested in. It's similar for books, movies, legends, etc. We've grown up believing that the relationship between mother and child is sacred, and cannot be harmed. So the authors who want to portray a certain message, can use that archetype to get a point across in a very strong way. The thought shocks us, and we become extremely interested in the story and so on and so forth.
ReplyDeleteThen, there is the second perspective, which is more difficult to understand (for me, anyways). Why would a mother in real life actually do this to a child of her own? That's something I have a hard time answering, because I myself could never comprehend the urge or need to kill a child of your own. I would imagine there could be several reasons such as: a) the attention that would follow, b) your child represents something about your past that you wish to forget, c) being just plain insane, d) revenge, e) having an extreme hate for your child for one reason or another, or f) you have a mental disorder that tricks you into thinking that your child is some one that they're not. I'm sure there are PLENTY of other reasons, but those are the only ones I could think of that made sense to me as a person.
-Zoe Obkirchner
1st/2nd period
The tale of mother killing her children that i am most familiar with is of Ishtar and Tammuz, which is a babylonian myth. In this tale Ishtar kills her son Tammuz because he is a more popular god than she is. So she kills him because he is to loved and he goes down to her sister in the underworld he spends six months down there and finally his mother, Ishtar misses him and wants to get him back. She then travels to her sisters place underground and goes though the subsequent 7 gates, relinquishing a piece of her power at each, meaning she has to face her sister defenseless. She gets her son back but his absent is were winter comes from. Obviously, people who kill their kids regret it, and most if not all would bring them back if they could. Killing ones child is comes from a lack of reason, but i think part of the motive behind it is, like with Ishtar and Tammuz, is jealousy. We see this today, when a women's pregnant, all any one else every talking about something in your belly or the crying thing your pushing around. Of course this isn't rational or reasonable but we're social creatures and when for some reason or another you stop thinking rationally your likely to take out the thing thats obscuring you in the eyes of others. Often a child. But having regained rationality most if not all would bring them back. Going back to Ishtar and Tammuz, i think its interesting that she's striped of her powers when she goes to get her son. A primary reason being because of the guilt, but also i think because you've admitted to your self and the world that jealousy or that insecurity about your self. Now this may be extremely convoluted but its sort of a way of saying that "I'm feeling over looked", its sort of a cry for attention and a cry to yourself, not just the world. This sort of story sticks with us because its so human. Its so desperate and a warning, like all fairy tales, about life and how to look at your life and probably come to the conclusion "wow, I'm lucky." Its like killing any one else, people do it because they have a grudge against the person a lot of the time and its just the same, having a grudge against someone whose taking that spotlight away from you. And as much as we try to disagree with it, we live for that spotlight, its an essential nutrient for us because we need others to pay attention to us, to care and some people have more extreme responses to being deprived as opposed to others.
ReplyDelete-Blair Creedle Reynolds
1st and 2nd periods
The story of a mother killing her child brings to mind perversity and grotesqueness (at least for me). Mothers and children share a uniquely strong bond that transcends individual cultures. Therefore, it is reasonable to say that to represent something in literature or drama that is tragic, you need not but have a mother kill her child. Breaking such a strong, pure, bond inevitably draws the mind to terrible sadness. This is true of all cultures, whether you are reading the Bacchae or the Weeping Woman.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, it is this strong connection to their children that drives mothers to kill them in cases of suicide. The rationale of the situation being that if I am going to die, this thing that is a part of me, that I brought into this world, must be taken out of it with me. The mother feels an overwhelming obligation to protect her child because the child is a direct extension of her. Mothers will always know their children as direct extensions of themselves and will act accordingly.
Mothers killing their children can be seen as a natural response to the Oedipus complex. For example, in Oedipus Rex, Jocasta (along with Laius) send her son to be killed. As we now know from countless psychological studies, Oedipus kills his father and marries his mother now regarded as the crux of the Oedipus Complex. However, the prophecy at the beginning of the play may symbolize a reverse of the Oedipus complex. Jocasta tries to kill her son with the innate knowledge that he will try to rise and kill her later. The mother killing her child might be the twisted opposite of the Oedipus Complex. The mother kills her child to prevent there from being competition. This would also explain why mothers are more likely to kill young children. They essentially rid themselves of the children early to prevent the worst effects of the Oedipus Complex from occurring.
For the most part we see this common theme transcend cultures to present itself as a common staple in tragedy. This is one of the few plot devices that can universally convey tragedy.
Momentous events in history frequently make indelible mark in the record of the past. These prominent incidents all have some facet that make the remarkable and worthy of the effort of keeping them part of the collective human consciousness, through oral or written history. The present is no different. Mundane events do not make the news, but the woman who drowns her children does. Taking the life of one’s children is an act so monstrous and vile, that it is certain to be incorporated into these records of history.
ReplyDeleteIt is an irrelevant observation that the stories are similar, because all recorded events incorporate aspects of each other. Last week’s blog post delineated 36 dramatic situations, and I couldn’t think of any work of literature or film that didn’t incorporate any of these situations. The mere fact that someone can divide drama into 36 different situations means over thousands of years of literary and dramatic history, there is going to be some overlapping of themes.
Cody Pfund Pulliam
Period 1/2
The recurrent theme of murderous mothers throughout the world can be accounted for by the ideas of determinism and freedom.
ReplyDeleteIn each of the examples presented, the mother was under the influence of something. Whether that something was possession by a god, insanity of the mind, or simply the intense desire for a man it can be said that none of these women had free will. Assuming determinism is true, then it would be present throughout the world and throughout time. According to determinism, none of these mothers, no matter where nor when they lived, had input in the decision to murder their children.
Another similarity between the three mothers is their desire for freedom. They all felt tied down by their children and believed that by murdering them they would be set free. Ms. Yates believed she would be released from the horror of going to hell for being a bad mother, Agave was released from the possession of Dionysus, and La Llorona believed she would be free to be with the man she loved. All of these women had freedom to gain from their heinous crimes, and freedom is something that mankind has pursued throughout time.
-Emily Tubbs
1st/2nd
The whole idea of a mother killing her own young for various reasons can be found all through out history. As time progresses onward, the stories about mothers killing their children pass down through time and across the world. If a mother is going through a time where their child is becoming a burden and they have heard stories about mothers killing their babies then they can have the idea in their head about murder.
ReplyDeleteEven animals kill their young because of competition for food or because they take to long to grow up. This is known as filial cannibalism and is present in a few species of animals. If a mother who was mentally disturbed and read about animals that kill their young and eat them, heard the sotries about other mothers killing their children, then the mother might believe that killing her children is acceptable in society. She wouldn’t understand that murder is a bad thing and the child would be dead because of the process of logic in her mind.
When you look at the issue of mothers killing children it’s just so unreal, and unbelievable, that you could understand why the entertainment industry would put it into books, movies and focus on it in the news. This would be because when you think of a mother and a child, that bond seems unbreakable. Mothers tend to be a protector, or a protecting figure in a Childs life. But if you’re going to look into the real life meaning of why a mom would kill her children might be because when you have a child, it limits you so much. So much of your life is lost once you are responsible for a child, and some moms probably don’t want that responsibility and kill there children. Some parents have kids that are supposed to be “trophy children” and do everything right. Once you have a kid you’re going to realize that no one is perfect and the mom doesn’t want something that isn’t perfect so she gets rid of them, literally. But the main reason I think that the mother killing her children is so prominent is because it’s so shocking. A mother and child bond seems like something that should be unbreakable, as I said before, so when a mother terminates this bond it makes everything more dramatic and surreal and unbelievable.
ReplyDeleteAriel Timkovich
1/2
The story of the mother killing her child has clearly withstood the test of time, but as with Mrs. Yates, we still see its presence.
ReplyDeleteThis specific tragedy persists throughout time because it is, in many ways, one of the pinnacles of sorrow. The mother and the child have what is often perceived as an unbreakable bond, often more so that that of the father and the child. And when the mother herself rips that bond apart, something has gone terribly wrong.
If the murder is purposeful, as in Yates' case, the event is truly tragic. However, I feel that if the death is accidental, as with Agave, the tragedy is augmented substantially. Purposeful murder is one thing, but accidentally ending the life of an offspring is something no mother could ever recover from.
This staple of tragedy has persisted because it is one of the standards in horror when a mother breaks the "unbreakable" bond.
Thomas Massad
Odum 1/2
Mothers killing their own children is just one of many archetypes that is repeated over literature from all time periods and locations. One could make an argument, as many have, that these archetypes, including the one of discussion, continue to pop up throughout different societies simply because these thoughts are all part of the "human collective unconscious" that everyone has in common despite their ignorance to it.
ReplyDeleteHowever, as for mothers killing children, I'm not buying this as part of some collective unconscious, but rather I think it resurfaces in literature and media because it appears as an interesting story line. I don't mean to sound cold-blooded by saying this, but just the idea of murderous mothers is so ridiculous that when this event happens everyone turns their heads to it in utter surprise. Something that can grip many people in real life can also provide a great storyline for fiction, and mainly I think this archetype is used because authors want to use this as an out of the ordinary event to make their story more interesting. Honestly though, this could be said for any archetype, not just children slain by their mother, because an archetype is generally reused because it adds a lot of interest to a story, or else there would be no point to one. In other words, these common themes continue to reappear, because they provide for great stories, and they can be told in much different ways so that they don't become similar enough to become cliche and therefore pointless. As long as people don't become bored of this storyline, it will continue to appear over and over in many various forms.
John Gormley
1st /2nd
I believe that we can account for the stories of a mother killing her children because the stories are something we perceive to be grossly wrong. It's like the train wreck we cant take our eyes off of. I view it as more of a lesson; this is the damage when a train crashes, this is what happens when a mother kills her children. This lesson is there because a mother killing her children is conceivable, however culturally unacceptable. There's more than a shred of truth in each story and people seem to be drawn to the stranger than fiction side of the truth. I also think the stories portray a more animalistic, for lack of a better word, side to the mothers. As humans we usually do not kill our young, but there are plenty of other species of animals in the world that do, mice, some insects, baboons and lions just to name a few. Seeing how most of my species views themselves to be above animals this might serve as a warning such that if we were to sink to that level we would be no better than animals.
ReplyDeleteRebecca Gilson
Period 1/2
I think that mothers killing their childeren in sroties are so "popular" because it is such a heinous act and creates drama and plot to any story when a mother murders her children. The bond between a mother and her children is supposed to be an unbreakable one and when a mother goes so far as to kill her kids she is obviously representing the most extreme case of breaking that sacred bond. As for Mrs. Yates I truly believe that she is insane and thought she was liberating her kids from this evil world. In real life it is so much more horrifying when a mother kills her children and I don't think that many would make the connection between Greek drama and the real life situation with death is involved. AS for the stories emerging together I think that it is an interesting plot that will continue to puzzle people with the motives of the mothers and the horrifying act of murder upon ones' child.
ReplyDeleteAnnalee Alston
Great Ideas 1/2
I think that we can account for these similar stories because of fear that adults are trying to instill in small children. For instance, If you have a lot of kids it is probably a lot easier to put them to sleep and get them quiet at night if you have crazy uncle joe come in and tell them the story of the weeping mother. This would explain the tales, like that of La Llorona and perhaps even of Agave, but i believe that the acts of Andrea Yates have nothing to do with stories of murderous mothers. You see, Andrea was a very christian women so when she first got married, she was excited to have a large family. So she started with the baby-making and further down the road, she realized she wasn't fully prepared to grapple with the task of caring for 5 infants. Maybe Andrea saw secretly drowning her children as the only way out. She later justified this to say she was saving them saying they were "They were doomed to perish in the fires of hell." This religious fear was probably a driving factor.
ReplyDeleteIn short, although one could draw similarities between the stories of the weeping women and Andrea Yates, I do not believe that they were related in any archetypal sort of way.
Paul Holmes 12
I would say that mothers murdering their children are, unfortunately, becoming more and more common as time progresses. I think that there are many factors that contribute to that. First could be the media, considering all people want to see on television nowadays is violence. Second factor might just be plain insanity in different women. It is just a coincidence that everyone is starting to get crazier and crazier. But a third factor could be anger. A child could just be so angering that the mother might feel she might murder the child. Or in regards to Medea, the mother might be trying to get revenge on someone else who loves the children. I would also say that a murderous mother sounds out of the ordinary, in the murderous sense. Usually, men are the murderers of children for whatever reason. So when a mother murders her child, it comes off as out of the ordinary probably because, well, she's a mother. Mothers are usually close to their children, so if she suddenly has the urge to kill them, obviously something is not right and that mother is no ordinary mother. She might be crazy, she might have been drugged, she might have even been in a frenzy like the women in the Bacchae. But for whatever reason, murderous mothers seem to be a story we find uncommon, even though they are becoming more and more common at the same time.
ReplyDeleteAlec Brown, 1-2 Period
It is somewhat rare for a mother to kill her child. The mother gave birth to her child and cared for them and nursed them until the child grew up. The mom is always considered the loving, kind parent, while the father is considered to be more tough and strict. The mother's love is unconditional while a father's love can waiver at times due to disappointment in the child. Because of this, the mother probably has a very compelling reason to murder her children, disregarding whether it is a good reason or bad.
ReplyDeleteThere are mothers in every single place on earth, no matter how disparate they are. Being a mother is VERY common throughout the world, so most of these women understand what it is to be a mother and care for her children. That is why it is possible for a mother to murder her children anywhere, not that that happens a lot, and not that I want it to happen.
As to what could be the driving force for these mothers to actually kill her child. I'm not saying that any of these reasons justify the murder of a child, but these are possible reasons. If a single mother has several children and is struggling financially because the legal father isn't helping out, then she may be very stressed and tired of being both a mom and a dad and therefore tries to get rid of the stress by getting rid of her children. If a mother didn't want a child, she may kill the offspring as a newborn. She may even kill the baby through neglect, being so preoccupied by something that she somehow kills her child. She may try to punish the child and through an extreme punishment, may end up killing the child.
There can be many reasons for this, but because mothers are everywhere on this planet, it isn't a shock that stories like these pop up frequently.
A mother killing her child is one of the most grotesque acts there are. I think one of the reasons that these stories are so prevelent is that you never hear about mothers acting normally because that's just normal, but if one lady decides to chop up her baby and eat him, then the people who know about it are going to talk about it to all of their friends. Just because the story is so horrible, it will spear more quickly.
ReplyDeleteAnd even more so than even in the father, a mother killing her offspring goes against nature. You see even in bears in Alaska, that your not supposed to go near them, but especially not a mother with cubs. Mothers naturally have that instinct to protect their children, no matter the cost. I'm pretty sure I heard a story of a mother who's children were pinned under her car, and she actually pushed the car off of them long enough to get them out.
So a mother actually killing her children would go against nature, and it's so unnatural the story spreads.
Clare Lewis, 1st period
Injn
It could be said that the primary role of the mother is to nurture and protect her child from the world, and a reversal of that role is terrifying to us. Children represent ultimate helplessness and trust, for they have no other choice than to put their trust in their mother. As such, the breaking of such a bond, and the killing of such helplessness seems to go against all we know about people. Mothers are suppose to be kind, caring individuals, and are mostly portrayed as being good. The idea of the mother being an evil being, who would slay her own child seems to be an upheaval of all we know. Plus, many people have positive memories from their own childhood of their mothers helping and protecting them. If we think back on that time and think of what might have happened if we were born to a murderous mother, it is a bit scary.
ReplyDeleteSam Shook, 1/2 period
Well it seems like since the beginning of man, human beings have never truly changed on the inside, just changed what they think they know, how they see the world, and how much they use the world to work for themselves as the centuries pass. Naturally, they ask the questions such as where do we come from, and what is our purpose, what should we do with this life, always trying to explain things. This natural curiosity that the human mind generates extends to questions about personalities, and how the large majority of people are accepted as normal and there are the ones who are "different" to the point of possibly being psychotic, and clearly, proof of this is shown not only in the works of Euripides, but all over history.
ReplyDeletePhillip Hawkins
Period 5/6
I think that stories like these are so popular because people think of this action as inexcusable. To a mother, the thought of killing her child is so grotesque and inhumane, that it wouldn't even cross her mind. As human being, we are naturally curious about social taboos and actions we consider perverse, so stories like the above mentioned are of high demand. The reason these storie have been passed down and retold is because the theme is a universal idea that all generations, past and present, can relate too.
ReplyDeleteIn all the cultures in the world, the mother's role in the family is to nurture, care and protect their children. People have this idea of a universal motherhood and it being natural to all mothers. The idea is mostly influenced by the media and cultures that think this is the proper way mothers should treat their children. I'm sure every one agrees with this idea.
ReplyDeleteWhen people hear about mothers killing their children, the news appeals to them as being taboo, horrific and wicked. Because of how people view all mothers, they feel that this is a very rare phenomena, and so, the news gets passed on and gets popularized. I believe this is what accounts for many stories of women killing their children. However, i think that we should not continue to persist this unrealistic view that this is a rare behavior. Researchers have found that this behavior is actually very common throughout history. In the U.S. alone, there are three to five children that are killed by their parents per day. This is also the reason why there are many stories of murderous mothers. It is because they are not as unlikely as we had thought.
Glenn Sampayan
1/2
There are a number of psychological reasons why the murderous mother archetype remains popular, but I think the biggest contributor to this is the pure shock factor. Almost all of us hold a special place in our hearts and minds for our mothers. Each time we hear of bad mothers, this place is stabbed.
ReplyDeleteWhat also must be taken into account is the point of view of the mother. Not being a mother myself, it is obviously rather difficult to put myself in that position, but there are a couple of broad spectrum ideas that influence a mothers feelings. The first of which is that children are born from their mothers. Obvious though this may be, from a mothers perspective, this is almost as if the child is a part of herself. There are conditions like postpartum depression, where a mother either feels like she has lost a connection with her child now that they are separate, or the mother does not want the child at all. This can lead to the murdering of the said child. Mothers can also feel that you owe them you life. Many have heard their mothers say, "I brought you into this world and I can take you out!" Whether they mean it or not is up to how bad of a child you are to her, but this gives another motive to the murders. Mothers also feel responsible for how their children behave or even what type of person the child is. For some women, it apparently does not go beyond the bounds of parenthood to beat or kill their children.
In the end, whether a sane mother would murder her children boils down to the individual parent child relation, which is complicated at best. Agave did not wish to kill Pentheus, but she was mad with Bacchic ecstasy. Even La Llorona regretted what she had done. In fact, I would wager to say that most mothers who kill their children do not have a true desire to. Most, like Mrs. Yates, are simply psychotic, and the majority of the remainder likely regret it in the end. The fact remains that this does happen and embeds itself in mythology to discourage this from happening again. After all, if there is one thing almost every culture could agree upon, it is that killing your kids is not part of the road success.
Zach Nirenberg
5/6
I've heard multiple cases of murderous mothers. It seriously is hard to believe, but when you look at other crimes, it's the same as any other crime committed out there. Being a mother usually tends to bring about tendencies to protect a child. But it's not like as soon as you get pregnant, you become the model mother and are perfect in everyway. There are seriously people not stable enough to be parents, but it's not like you notice that right away.
ReplyDeleteWomen who are predisposed to acts of madness will not stop for anyone, even their children. Natural mother instincts do not override personality. Even in nature, if a mother snake (I think it was a snake?) is hungry, she'll eat the babies.
I'm not saying it's natural for mothers to kill their children, and I think it's completely heartless to do so...but what I'm saying is "Don't be shocked. It's going to happen"
Michi DeSantiago
5/6
I believe they arise in different cultures so many time periods because the connection between a mother and her children is sacred and the thought of a mother killing her children creates such a "shock factor" for readers. Now, we can take in account for insanity and mothers with scattered brains, but I would guess that it is almost even crazier in Greek times because most people didn't think of maternal insanity. Although this is apparent in many stories, they a few and far between. We might see this archetype a lot in tragic stories, but I know these are a rare few.
ReplyDeleteZach Johnson
5/6
Insanity is something i think we as humans need to take in consideration as a natural thing. Im sure history has had its share of mental people but could not aprehend why they did what they did. If you were insane or put under stress at a point say drowning your kids might seem like a good idea. I think insanity is just another part of human culture that we learn to live with whether its on a small scale such as frustration or a larger scale that deals with the perception of thought.
ReplyDeleteDaniel Maldonado
5/6
Murders and homicides occur every day in all parts of the globe, and are generally ignored by the majority of people because they are so commonplace. Most of these murders involve people we do not know and have no emotional connection to. However, whenever a mother kills her children, there is an extreme reaction of horror and revulsion from the general public, people who normally don't react to stories of murder. A mother killing her own children, the people she brought into the world and loved and cared for, is a twisted and revolting act. While the reasons behind murdering their children may differ, each mother seems to have a method of justification for their actions other than pure insanity, whether it be to protect them from the world (the Yates Case) or to be loved by a man (La Llorona). I believe that the archetype of the murderous mother continues to appear because of its shock value. There is nothing more awful than a mother killing her own children, whatever the reason, and so the trend lives on as the epitome of tragedy.
ReplyDeleteRoger Cain
Period 1/2
A mother killing her own children is an extreme that does occasionally occur. The fact that it does not happen all the time makes it more likely that it would pop up in many different areas. Things that happen on a regular basis are the things that are prone to change over time and distance. For example, language is used all the time, and it changes drastically in a rather short amount of time, and when separated, two isolated cases will take different directions. A mother killing her own children is not something that adapts to the needs of the individual, because people are driven to murder and it changes them, but languages drives people and is changed by them. Over time and over different areas of people, children are regarded generally similarly. Evolutionarily, the humans who protected their spawn until they could protect themselves were the humans whose genes persisted because the children survived to reproduce. Therefore, humans are made to value their children because of ages of genetic conditioning, as well as often growing up in that sort of cultural environment. Killing one's own children is against the main tenets of a great number of societies: prolific reproduction and the future of your genetic line, so it provides a subject that will resonate with a large audience.
ReplyDeleteRebekah Pruett, 1-2
Because all of the stories invlving a mother killing her child(ren) is such a shocking story, they are ones that are going to be told and the ones that are easily clled to mind. All of the stories that were menchioned before could be attributed to a mental illness, or lack of judgement from some other outside factor, in some way. In all cultures and time periods there are crazy people, who's lack of judgemnet and inability to make the sensible choices cause them to do the unthinkable. As an example, in the Bakkhai Agave kills her son because of the interference of the god. Her being fully concious of what she is doing leeds her do comminting the murder she commits. In general, when someone who already may not have the best judgement is put in a stressful situation there is a greater possiblilty of them doing something they may not want, or even realize they are doing.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteA mother killing her child is an especially heinous act in the realm of murder. In many cultures, the child is seen as the continuation of life from the parents, and the bond between them is irreplaceable. Such love that is shattered by murder really embodies the spirit of a non-function society; corruption and imbalance. Because of this, many cultures found this type of murder to be almost equally disturbing, and thus, many of these stories were created.
ReplyDeleteThese stories could be a message to the public, to give people a reason or an almost 3rd person experience to resist corruption.
-Zach Krebs Periods 1/2
I think that the idea of a mother killing her own child stems from the belief that many people have, that nothing can stop a mother from loving her child. Creators of legends and stories that involve murderous mothers probably all considered what their audiences would find most horrific, unnatural, or hard to accept. Since, to use Coach McNiel's words, "your mom is always your biggest fan," it's an obvious choice to have a mother kill her child to show the audience how messed up the characters and the world in which the story takes place are. In many of these stories, other forces are at work than the simple will of the mother in question. In the Bacchai, Agave doesn't realize what she's done for quite a long time, and she only did it because she was under Dionysos's influence. This reinforces the idea that the bond between mother and child is one of the strongest bonds people have.
ReplyDeleteIn a story or play, amother killing her child acts as an easily recognizable tragedy. however, in day to day life when we encounter these things, it seems grotesque and unnatural. this is so; from animals to humans, a mother naturally shares an immensely strong bond with her children. this is natural, but in certain cases, mother feel stressed or overburdened which can contradict her natural emotions for her child. this may cause extreme acts of violence as in these plays, which will exhibit the bitter corruption that speaks so clearly to the audience.
ReplyDeleteI think that when you hear about a mother killing their children, the first thing you think about is "why would she do such a wrong and messed up thing" and that is the question... why? as we talked about in class about if we think a person is either forced into doing something or if it is fate, plays a large role in this topic because what gives a mother the will and influence to do such a horrible thing. I belive that everyone has a choice, and everyone makes one, be it the correct or incorrect thing. i do not know why the yates did this horid thing but she did do it and she is mentally ill.
ReplyDeleteIn the Bacchae, what is depicted in the play is that Dionysos has influenced Agave into killing pentheus, and she did not do it by her own will, and she does not realize that until she gets back to Cadmus and the spell/influence is lifted.
Tyler Scholz
period 5/6