Conceptions of the Future in Aeschylus' Oresteia
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from Explore Bristol Research, http://research-information.bristol.ac.uk Author: Kouliouri, Vasileia Title: Conceptions of the Future in Aeschylus' Oresteia General rights Access to the thesis is subject to the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International Public License. A copy of this may be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode This license sets out your rights and the restrictions that apply to your access to the thesis so it is important you read this before proceeding. Take down policy Some pages of this thesis may have been removed for copyright restrictions prior to having it been deposited in Explore Bristol Research. However, if you have discovered material within the thesis that you consider to be unlawful e.g. breaches of copyright (either yours or that of a third party) or any other law, including but not limited to those relating to patent, trademark, confidentiality, data protection, obscenity, defamation, libel, then please contact [email protected] and include the following information in your message: •Your contact details •Bibliographic details for the item, including a URL •An outline nature of the complaint Your claim will be investigated and, where appropriate, the item in question will be removed from public view as soon as possible. Conceptions of the Future in Aeschylus’ Oresteia by Vasileia Kouliouri A dissertation submitted to the University of Bristol in accordance with the requirements for award of the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in the Faculty of Arts, School of Humanities March 2021 Word count: 82397 (excl. footnotes and bibliography) Abstract This thesis examines the narrative function and significance of the future through its configurations in Aeschylus’ Oresteia. Drawing on the fields of narratology, literary criticism, and philosophy of history, it argues that the future is employed in the Oresteia as a narrative in a number of different ways. Chapters 2, 3, and 4 probe the teleological implications of the future in the four plays of the tetralogy, exploring the meaning of telos not only as a purposeful fulfilment but also as transition, deferral, and perpetual crisis. Those aspects of the future favour approaches that challenge and undermine the sense of a complete closure. They also draw connections between ancient and modern understandings of the future as something experienced in the present: either as a disruption outside one’s control (future present) or as a new order to be produced in and for the present (present future). Moving beyond the concept of telos, Chapter 5 demonstrates how the narrative of the Oresteia manipulates certain types of future-related knowledge through the literary terms of foreshadowing and sideshadowing. It is argued that, far from neat, the mapping of these terms onto the concepts of the open and closed future is often unpredictable. Finally, two other concepts explored are suspense and surprise (Chapters 6 and 7). They are both examined as intense experiences that are interconnected but distinct. The focus is on their centrality to the narrative mechanisms through which we find ourselves anticipating the future or marvelling at its unexpectedness. Taken together, the concepts explored in the thesis allow us to imagine and experience the future not as something remote and foreseeable, but as something at once tangible, unpredictable, and, thus, always open. Page i of x This page intentionally left blank In memory of my father Page iii of x This page intentionally left blank Acknowledgements The completion of this thesis brings me in the fortunate position of expressing here my gratitude for the help and support I have received along the way. First, I am deeply grateful to my supervisor, Dr Pantelis Michelakis, for his academic acumen, original thinking, and patient guidance from the very first to the very last stage of writing this thesis. I thank Pantelis for the time that he so generously offered me, while our meaningful discussions and his constant feedback helped me develop my own thinking and clarify my arguments. I would like to thank my co-supervisors, Professors Robert Fowler (2014–18) and Patrick Finglass (2018–20) for useful suggestions and their academic guidance and continuous support. I am also thankful to Dr Laura Jansen for her illuminating insights into parts of this thesis, her valuable friendship, warm interest, and genuine advice. I want to express my gratitude to Jonny Scaramanga and Lottie Brown for reading this thesis from the beginning to the end as if it were their own and offering useful comments. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank Professor Genevieve Liveley (University of Bristol) and Dr Nick Lowe (Royal Holloway, University of London), my viva examiners, for their fruitful comments and suggestions that greatly improved the quality of this Thesis. Parallel to my studies, I benefited from the multiple opportunities created by the Department of Classics and Ancient History. My attendance of the core unit ‘Theories and Approaches’ and the numerous departmental seminars with invited speakers from around the globe informed my research and way of thinking in the most creative way, while also offering opportunities for interaction with other postgraduates. I am also grateful for the teaching opportunities that I was involved with, as they helped me expand my knowledge and financially support my studies. I must acknowledge the funding I received from the Department of Classics and Ancient History to participate in conferences and workshops in London, Oxford, and Nottingham. In May 2018, I have been fortunate to be awarded with a scholarship for a three-week stay in the Fondation Hardt in Geneva, where I completed part of my thesis. I am indebted to the foundation’s Board for offering me this amazing opportunity. This PhD was made possible thanks to my family in Greece who did not hesitate to encourage me taking this step amidst great economic uncertainty. I deeply thank them for Page v of x their generosity and unconditional support all these years. Warm thanks also go to my lifetime friends in Greece and the new friends I made at Bristol for filling me with warmth and laughter, in person and over the phone. I am mostly grateful to Dimitris; his temperament, unselfishness, and affection have always been my reason to become better, even in times when this looked far too difficult. I owe him more than I can say. I dedicate this thesis to the memory of my father, who was looking forward to seeing me cross the finish line more than anyone. Vasileia Page vi of x Author’s declaration I declare that the work in this dissertation was carried out in accordance with the requirements of the University's Regulations and Code of Practice for Research Degree Programmes and that it has not been submitted for any other academic award. Except where indicated by specific reference in the text, the work is the candidate's own work. Work done in collaboration with, or with the assistance of, others, is indicated as such. Any views expressed in the dissertation are those of the author. SIGNED: Vasileia Kouliouri DATE: 31 March 2021 Page vii of x Page viii of x Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. The future in narrative .............................................................................................. 2 1.2. Theoretical and methodological framework ........................................................ 12 1.3. The Oresteia as a tetralogy: a case study ............................................................... 25 2. Telos as purpose and fulfilment ............................................................................ 29 2.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 29 2.2. Τέλος in the Oresteia through Seaford’s categories ............................................. 31 2.2.1. Τέλος as ‘completion’ ................................................................................. 31 2.2.2. Τέλος as ‘ritual’ ........................................................................................... 35 2.2.3. Τέλος as ‘payment’ ..................................................................................... 39 2.2.4. Τέλος as ‘authority’ .................................................................................... 40 2.3. Τέλος: from Semantics to Hermeneutics .............................................................. 42 2.4. Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 47 3. Telos as ending .......................................................................................................... 49 3.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 49 3.2. Theoretical prelude: τέλος and narrative closure ............................................... 50 3.3. Closure as necessity in the Agamemnon ................................................................ 58 3.4. Closure as inconclusiveness in the Libation Bearers ............................................. 61 3.5. Closure as possibility in the Eumenides ................................................................. 64 3.6. Closure as desire in Proteus