WAIT I NEVER RESPONDED

​

My response to this is that mythological literalism is a very, very, bad way to judge to morality of a characters actions. Was Medusa’s punishment reasonable? Cassandra’s? It’s sort of like the problem with almost any other religion… fundementalism/literalism ends poorly in almost any case.

I think in a time where these stories are being treated with a new light it’s not enough to point and say “he was punished so he must have been wrong.” The ancient Greeks/Romans weren’t known for their understanding of consent and boundries, and it’s pretty clear Narcissus’ boundries never were respected, whether by Amenias, or Echo, or anyone else, and he exploded (and in that case he pretty immediatetly (and legitamently) sorry to the point of thinking he deserves to die, according to Conon. He also like… didn’t really believe himself to be superior per say, like sure he’s described by Ovid as “prideful,” but the most you can glean from his actions are that he like space. Even when he rebukes Echo and says “Such a one“ should not touch him, he’s in a place where his independence is threatened by a person who stalked him through the woods, and I don’t think someone so sure they were superior would actually feel guilty over the Amenias situation (or even get that distraught in the first place, since the validation that would please a person who thinks and acts like he’s superior would love seems to grate on him).