From reading various articles regarding retellings of the Ramayana, a classic, old narrative, I’m more aware of how traditional interpretations are not necessarily the appropriate and only interpretation. Even though such interpretation has withstood many centuries doesn’t mean that it’s guaranteed correct. In the traditional context, Rāma is the ultimate dharmic character. Some perspectives disagree, such as “Yes to Sita, No to Ram.” In fact, this reading views Sita as more of a dharmic character than Ram. Traditional texts, such as the Good Samaritan parable, my research paper topic, deserves to be challenged. It allows doors to open.
Secondly, these readings have taught the importance of understanding that every person will have a different interpretation than the person next to them. For example, “A Rāmāyana of Their Own: Women’s Oral Tradition in Telugu,” discusses women of different castes and their perspectives of the popular story. This knowledge is applied in my paper when discussing Christians and their different interpretations of the famous parable. Not all followers will have the same experiences, mind, and set of eyes. Thus, popular stories are bound to be analyzed differently by people, even if they’re of the same faith.