Sancho is drawn into Don Quixote's world as his squire, and exists as an example of the modern next to Quixote's fantasy of knighthood. Timothy Hampton posits that Sancho represents the modern culture of currency, while Don Quixote ignores money on his adventures save to offer Sancho the occasional future reward. What is interesting about this juxtaposition, is that while Sancho himself doesn't buy into Don Quixote's version of their journeys and was moments before warning him not to attack a random friar, he does willingly enter the illusion when it offers him the physical rewards he craves. It is also worth noting that neither character could exist in their current state without their previous relationship with currency. Sancho is a peasant and has a real enough need for fiscal reward that he buys into Don Quixote's promise of some island or governorship despite seeing all of his adventures for the make-believe they are. While the knight-errant would not be able to sneer at the idea of carrying money, nor have even the ramshackle armor he possesses or the knowledge of chivalric tales if he was not well off to begin with.

Hampton, Timothy. “Sancho’s Fortune: Money and Narrative Truth in Don Quixote.” MLN 135.5 (2020): 1214–1226. Web.

Don Quixote's fantastical view of the world often causes him to see villain where there is only random passerby attempting to do their job. In an article on nostalgia Doctor Avishai Margalit describes the affect that nostalgia can have on memory, and how idealizing the past can affect one's morality in a way that excuses their own violence as "protection" of the innocence they crave a return to. While nostalgia is defined as needing first-hand experience memory, Don Quixote's relationship with the idea of the Knight-errant can be seen as an example of "vicarious nostalgia". Having placed this ideal in his mind as the perfect example of past innocence and the correct order of the world, he is able to validate his actions when those around him see him as someone out of their senses attacking a fellow traveler or in this case stable hand attempting to do their job. What is especially interesting is how he is able to acknowledge the reality when it suits his own interests, such as the giants being "turned into windmills", or acknowledging that Dulcinea is a grandiose fabrication but holding that this doesn't make her less real.

Margalit, Avishai. “Nostalgia.” Psychoanalytic dialogues 21.3 (2011): 271–280. Web.

Gawain uses the stereotype of the deceitful woman to dismiss his own failings in the challenge, comparing himself to biblical figures brought low by trusting a woman. In an article on the role of women in medieval literature Justyna Kiełkowicz notes that this tale both utilizes the minimalization of women's agency by having Morgan La Fey's motivations be hidden and petty, while also subverting this trope by having a woman challenge the social standard of what chivalry meant and how it operated in competing fronts.

Kiełkowicz, Justyna. “Beyond the Convention? Representation of Female Characters in Middle English Romances.” New Horizons in English Studies 2.1 (2017): 39–48. Web.

While it has been noted that The Green Knight can fulfill the trickster role and is linked to symbolism of love, the devil, and serpents, he is also posited to exist as an example of the perfect chivalric knight within the tale. Certainly he holds up each of his bargains truly throughout the tale, deals mercifully with Gawain in the end, and here shows how his example measures up to Arthur's best knight.

Beauregard, David N. "Moral theology in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight: the pentangle, the Green Knight, and the perfection of virtue." Renascence: Essays on Values in Literature, vol. 65, no. 3, spring 2013, pp. 146+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A329606342/AONE?u=orla57816&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=3caf9f66. Accessed 17 Mar. 2022.

It is easy and natural to react in revulsion to what Medea has done, even if one pities her for being cast out by Jason. However, within the confines of a Greek tragedy, and her own tale, Medea is not only acting of her own dark passions, but through manipulations of the gods. In his article on how Medea relates to audiences' psychological reaction to dark impulses Corey Hooper has this to say:

"Eros, Aphrodite’s son, pierces Medea with his arrow and she becomes intoxicated by the power of the god and his all-consuming love and passion...What choice does Medea have, as a mortal, when the gods are involved? The archetypal forces of love, passion, loss, betrayal, and death seemed to be lurking behind the screen of her mortal existence, ready to be activated" (215).

It is Hera who originally urges Aphrodite to get involved, due to her championing of Jason. Certainly Medea's actions can be linked the dark side of humanity that she represents as sorceress, but if the goddess of marriage is involved Medea can also be seen as influenced by Eros' arrow and a possible instrument of Hera's judgement. Source: Hooper, Corey. “Medea.” Psychological perspectives 64.2 (2021): 211–221. Web.

While Karma itself has already been discussed, this term "karmabandh" speaks of the tie between one's actions and karma, how one is bound by their Karma and bound to their cycle of rebirths. Krishna is warning him of the way his fretting over consequence will secure him to this karmabandh, while if he lives as Krishna suggests and focuses on the duty or right actions rather than their outcomes, he can sever himself from his karma. While one might assume that the goal would be good Karma, Krishna instead speaks to Arjuna on how to live so that you are not shackled to Karma at all. Source: https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/karmabandhana (slightly different form of the word) https://www.shabdkosh.com/dictionary/english-hindi/bandh/bandh-meaning-in-hindi