Gillhouse, Elizabeth. ““Eve was Framed”: Ideostory and (Mis)Representation in Judeo-Christian Creation Stories.” Children’s Literature Association Quarterly, vol. 36 no. 3, 2011, p. 259-275. Project MUSE, doi:10.1353/chq.2011.0037.

Gillhouse analyzes the effect of modern feminist ideologies on the retelling of Biblical stories in children’s Bibles, specifically Eve’s story. She notes that, contrary to the common idea that Christian stories would be devoid of modern influence, authorial influence is inevitable, especially in the Creation and Fall stories, which for so long have been used to degrade women and force their adherence to the patriarchy. Eve’s “ideostory,” a term coined by Mieke Bal and used often by Gillhouse in this article, limits her story to how it fits into the patriarchal understanding of Genesis. Despite and in response to her misogynistic ideostory, modern feminists have rewritten or omitted parts of Eve’s story in their own retellings to better conform to modern ideologies. Thus, despite long-term patriarchal views of women as being inferior to men, the root of evil, and designed to bear children in pain, changing ideologies have had their effect on Eve’s story, slowly transforming her story into one of intelligence, courage, and a pursuit of free will.

Glenn, Justin. “Pandora and Eve: Sex as the Root of All Evil.” The Classical World, vol. 71, no. 3, 1977, pp. 179–85. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4348824.

In this article, Glenn explores signs that the stories of Pandora and Eve are related to “society’s suspicion of sex,” as a way of answering the question of why both stories are so similar in their degradation of women, despite their different cultural origins. He mostly focuses on Eve, discussing the earliest theories of the sexual innuendos in the story and the more recent, more extreme theories. He eventually concludes that, despite the controversial ideas that have arisen within this academic community, there is plausibility in the idea that the Genesis story is rooted in the societal taboo of sex. He then claims that the euphemisms present in Eve’s story are undeniably present in Pandora’s, from the similarities between the fruit and the box to the role that both women play in ruining humanity in their innate deviousness, which in this case is related to their debauchery.

Hesiod. “Theogony.” Hesiod, The Homeric Hymns, and Homerica, translated by Evelyn-White, H.G., 1914, lines 560-617.

[LENS TEXT #1] The first of ancient Greek writer Hesiod’s most prominent texts, “Theogony” follows the lives and struggles of the Greek gods. In lines 560-617, Hesiod recounts Zeus’ anger at Prometheus for stealing fire for the humans and his subsequent creation of the first woman, meant as a punishment for mankind. Hesiod’s internal misogyny is apparent in his writing as he refers to the woman as the first of the deadly, troublesome, cunning line of womankind who brings evil upon her male counterpart. He writes of women’s curse on men: with a woman, he is subject to evil, yet without her, he is condemned to a life alone with no kin. His misogyny is further seen by his lack of giving her a name. Hesiod’s account of the first woman in this work ends with these descriptions and a statement on the inevitable will of the king of the gods.

Hesiod. “Works and Days.” Hesiod, The Homeric Hymns, and Homerica, translated by Evelyn-White, H.G., 1914, lines 42-105.

[LENS TEXT #2] Hesiod’s later work focuses more on the origins of the gods, explores the roles of humans in the gods’ stories, and imparts divine wisdom onto its readers. In lines 42-105, Hesiod once again writes about the creation of the first woman at Zeus’ behest following Prometheus’ theft of fire. His story is still embedded with traces of his misogyny; he blatantly blamed Pandora for bringing evil to the world of man, not only when she opens the jar, but just by existing with the traits that the gods gave her. Unlike in “Theogony,” Hesiod gives the first woman a name, and he writes of the infamous jar of Pandora. He provides so more details on the anguish that Pandora brings into the world, then once again, ends with the inevitable will of Zeus.

Lev Kenaan, Vered. Pandora’s Senses: The Feminine Character of the Ancient Text. University of Wisconsin Press, 2008. Project MUSE muse.jhu.edu/book/8412.

Lev Kenaan identified the misogyny in Hesiod’s stories of Pandora, then delved deeper to understand the story and its significance beyond the constraints of sexism. Rather than limiting her historical importance, Hesiod’s blatant misogyny further complexes Pandora’s story, inviting analysis and scrutiny from academics. She both frees and condemns men, much like Eve. This dichotomy is caused by Hesiod and the patriarchy’s perceptions of female sexuality and beauty; they fear what they do not understand nor control, and they label it as “evil.” Lev Kenaan claims that Pandora acts as a mirror, or a double, for men, showing them their own treacherous souls. She also discusses how Hesiod’s Pandora is a combination of the divine, mortal, and beast, and her creation brings an end to the once-insignificant human existence. Hesiod’s description of her creation also places the woman’s blame on her physical appearance.

Lovatt, Helen. “Hesiod and the Divine Gaze.” Helios, vol. 40, 2013, p. 143-166. Project MUSE, doi:10.1353/hel.2013.0016.

In this article, Lovatt compares the divine male gaze and divine audiences present in Homeric epics to Hesiodic poems, claiming that the poet in each case is a double of the deity; Homer is doubled by many deities and received by many divine audiences, while Hesiod is more self-reflective as he focuses almost entirely on Zeus’ gaze. In the case of Pandora’s story, Zeus is Hesiod’s double as the “ultimate master narrator” (152) who determines mortal futures according to what he sees. Pandora, however, despite the change in poet, is similar to other women in ancient Greek poems: a combination of “victim [and] monster” (157), objectified by the men, both divine and mortal, for her femininity and otherness.

O’Brien, Joan. “Nammu, Mami, Eve and Pandora: ‘What’s in a Name?’” The Classical Journal, vol. 79, no. 1, 1983, pp. 35–45. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3297042.

Beginning with the images that appear on an ancient Greek vase of Pandora’s creation and of the emergence of a goddess from the earth, O’Brien connects the epithets of women from the Sumerian, Akkadian, Greek, and Yahwist religions to make the claim that Eve of the Yahwist belief and Pandora from ancient Greek are both remnants of prehistoric mother goddesses. Both women were demoted from a goddess who created all creatures or all humans, to an inferior being who brought hardship to her race. O’Brien attributes the demotions to cultural factors in both cases. Mesopotamian polytheism featured the fading of many goddesses, while the only male god remained in his role for the entirety of the belief, and later Israelite beliefs reflected their patriarchal societies where men were seen as protectors. In ancient Greece, goddesses like Hera were often written into more unfavorable roles as time passed, while nature goddesses were disadvantaged by Greece’s natural climate. Behind all of these changes was the theme of misogyny and female inferiority.

Phipps, William E. “Eve and Pandora Contrasted.” Theology Today, vol. 45, no. 1, Apr. 1988, pp. 34–48. EBSCOhost, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0000800830&site=ehost-live.

Contrary to some academic discourse on Pandora and Eve, Phipps claims that the similarities between the stories of Pandora and Eve are much less prevalent when looking at the original stories. He analyzes the original story of Eve as told in original translations, including the agender human who was simultaneously split into Adam and Eve, according to specific understandings of word usage and grammar, as well as Adam’s silence and passiveness as they took the forbidden fruit together before the serpent. Phipps also discounts the commonly proposed relationship between Eve’s fault and her sexuality. Instead, he claims that the similarities between Pandora’s and Eve’s stories arose following the Hellenization of Western Asia and the consequent spread of the Greek idea of women being the root of evil, an idea he claims originally spread in Greece by Hesiod himself and his poet contemporaries. Phipps then follows the spread of misogyny in Christianity, specifically within Adam and Eve’s story, from the early Church fathers to bishops in the Middle Ages, and onward.

Vernant, Jean-Pierre. “Semblances of Pandora: Imitation and Identity.” Translated by Froma Zeitline. Critical Inquiry, vol. 37, no. 3, 2011, pp. 404-418. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.1086/660795.

Historian and anthropologist Jean-Pierre Vernant begins this article by stating that parents love their children because they are doubles of themselves, and that brothers love each other because they are each other’s doubles; he accounts this kind of familial love to the doubling involved. He reconciles that, as other academics argued, Hesiod’s Pandora was created as a double for men and goddesses alike, as if she were “a statue or a mannequin” (Vernant 404). However, he claims that her very existence makes her unlike any other creature, as she is the unique and new combination of mortal man, divine goddess, and unnatural and evil beast. This lack of doubling, as caused by her individuality, is then the cause of her, and of all subsequent women’s, “otherness” and separation from man. Her irresistibility by men and previously unknown combination of qualities separate her from her counterpart. Of course, women went on to have the ability to reproduce, creating their doubles, although this double’s identity is attributed to its father’s. Vernant goes on to compare Pandora to Aphrodite, Athena, and Penelope, and he uses her diadem and other Greek stories to analyze specific Greek phrases used throughout those stories.

Walcot, Peter. “Greek Attitudes towards Women: The Mythological Evidence.” Greece & Rome, vol. 31, no. 1, 1984, pp. 37–47. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/642368.

The late classics professor and author Peter Walcot claims that the ancient Greek attitude towards women, as seen in the examples he provides of deities like Hera, Athena, Hestia, and the Amazons, was based on their fear of female sexuality. He connects this to the story of Pandora as well, in which Pandora is blamed for all evil, though she was simply acting according to the unfavorable traits given to her by male gods, and she was only accepted by Epimetheus due to his blind acceptance of her beauty. He also connects this to Eve, a Yahwist counterpart of Pandora, and in turn Mary, the New Testament counterpart of Eve who undoes Eve’s mistakes in the Christian tradition. It is no coincidence that Mary is the Virgin Mother of God; just as celibate Athena, Artemis, and Hestia are able to avoid the goddess of love Aphrodite’s tricks, the Virgin Mary helps reverse Eve’s transgression as she is incapable of enticing or ensnaring men in her devoutness.