I found the discussion of how Penelope is doubled to be fascinating. In one reference she is “the icon of the perfectly devoted wife” and then she is seen as wondering if her husband has been faithful. Finally, she is “used to accuse men who have “strayed” into femininity.” I found this to be interesting for multiple reasons. I know that often multiple interpretations of a text exist, but this difference in Penelope’s persona is more than a difference in translation or meaning. This difference creates an alteration in Penelope’s purpose as a character and a women. This removes her identity, creating a blank canvas. “Penelope” easily glides from a faithful women, to an uncertain one, to an object of temptation, and finally to one that is held over the heads of feminine men. What is left is this “flattened image” that can be used to relocate into other frames of reference. As the text progresses Penelope shifts into quotations as this unrealized idea that “turns out to be a complex of overlapping, competing and even contradictory constructions of texts and landscapes. These cultural texts representing the feminized weaver were and are more complicated than its flattened use into a feminist image of the female would allow.” The Romans continually re-birthed Penelope, erasing her previous identity. This act highlights the shifting and unrealized female identities that exist in texts and in religious texts because they seem often to be repurposed to fit the male narrative. Why is it that females are always so easy to reimagine? Who really is Penelope?