Aristophanes’ Women at the Thesmophoria and Frogs { Plan of session
Women at the Thesmophoria; ‘Euripidean’ tragedy and Aristophanic comedy: an overview of the play’s para-tragic engagement
Aristophanes’ attitude to Euripidean tragedy and its fluctuations in four comedies
Aristophanic comedy, ‘Euripides’, ‘Aeschylus’ and literary criticism
Frogs: The dramatic action and the main themes: the ‘journey in search of the best poetry’ strand of the play; and the ‘initiation in the mysteries’ strand of the play
Why does ‘Aeschylus’ win in the Frogs?
Overview of Aristophanes’ Thesmophoriazousae and tragedy The Women at the Thesmophoria (411 BC) is a comedy structured and presented like a tragedy, especially a Euripidean tragedy
It draws heavily on Euripides’ Alcestis, Telephos, Helen, Palamedes and Andromeda – as we will see.
And engages with multiple motifs, conventions, techniques etc. recognised as tragic and/or Euripidean. Dramatic action ‘Euripides’ goes with his Kinsman to ask the young tragic poet Agathon for help in a crisis: the matrons of Athens, assembled for the celebration of the Thesmophoria, plan to decree his death because his scandalous heroines have alerted husbands to their hitherto secret misbehaviour. Would Agathon, who claims that his effeminacy enables him to create realistic female characters, be willing to disguise himself as a woman, infiltrate the Thesmophoria, and plead Euripides’ case? When Agathon refuses, the Kinsman volunteers to undertake the mission. Shaven and disguised as a woman, the Kinsman attends the festival and contributes a defence speech that outrages rather than mollifies the matrons: Euripides, he argues, has not revealed even the tiniest fraction of the whole truth. This is only the beginning of the parody of the Euripidean Telephos… The women become suspicious, and with the help of another Athenian effeminate, Cleisthenes, soon expose the Kinsman as a male intruder and sentence him to death. But the Kinsman, continuing the parody of Euripides’ Telephos, seizes a ‘hostage’ (a wine skin disguised as a baby girl) and takes refuge at an altar, where he is guarded first by Critylla, a tough old woman, and then by a barbarian Archer. This is the start of the parody of Euripides’ ‘escape-tragedies’ ‘Euripides’ tries to rescue the Kinsman by re-enacting rescue scenes from his own recent escape-plays (Palamedes, Helen, and Andromeda), but these fail to deceive Critylla and the Archer. Finally, Euripides disguises himself as an old bawd, distracts the Archer with a dancing girl, and frees the Kinsman, having promised the women that he will never again portray them unfavourably.
PARATRAGEDY STARTS BIG (25 ff.)
When does Agathon actually appear on stage? PARATRAGEDY STARTS BIG (25 ff.) The poet as craftsman PARATRAGEDY CONTINUES
PARATRAGEDY CONTINUES
PARATRAGEDY CONTINUES Supplication scene (Th. 179-80)
Agathon’s response (Th. 193-4)
Can you recognise the reference? Does it have any bearing to the rest of the play?
(Th. 211-12)
The costuming scene (and especially the act of transferring the costume from one character to the other): Thesm. 213ff., esp. 249ff.
Cf. the ‘theory’ of mimesis earlier (Thesm. 154-6, p. 477)
Meta-theatricality and (playful) reflection on current literary-critical discourses.
Robson, J. E. (2005), ‘Aristophanes on How to Write Tragedy: What you Wear is What you are’, in McHardy, F., Robson, J. E., and Harvey, D. (eds.) (2005), Lost Dramas of Classical Athens: Greek Tragic Fragments, Exeter: 173–88. END OF PROLOGUE - CONSTRUCTION OF NEW SPACE
- In tragedy, changes of scene are rare. Usually the unity of space (and time) is observed. - In some cases, e.g. in Eumenides, we have change of scene, but it is constructed carefully, especially with appropriate exits and entrances. - Here, how is the change of scene effected? Liberally, in an old-comedy way? Or in a way that resembles tragedy?
See pp. 497-499 and consider especially exits and entrances
AGON between Kinsman and Women (Thesm. 383-530)
Defence speech: Here starts the lengthy parody of the most sensational scene of Euripides’ Telephos, and lasts for 300 lines! (Thesm. 467-764)
Let us look at the famous Euripidean play, which Aristophanes parodied extensively at least twice in his career (in Acharnians in 425, and here in 411) Aristophanes RE-WORKS not only Euripides, but also Aristophanes!
The Telephos by Euripides First time produced in 438, as part of the same tetralogy as Alcestis. It survives only in fragments. In myth, Telephos was the king of Mysia (to the south of Troy). Before the Trojan war, the Greeks had tried to conquer his city; he defeated them but was wounded by Achilles. His wound could not be cured and when he asked the oracle, he was told that he was going to be curd by whoever wounded him. Telephos set off for Greece to find Achilles. In the play by Euripides, Telephos went to Argos, to the palace of Agamemnon, disguised as a beggar. He intended to persuade Agamemnon to mediate so that he sees Achilles. In a scene of the play, as Agamemnon and Menelaus were discussing the impending invasion to Troy, they started discussing paying the Mysians for having defeated them. Telephos, pretending that he is a Greek soldier who had been wounded in the battle against Mysia, intervened to speak in support of the Mysians. In that famous speech, he said that the Mysians had done nothing wrong. They had been attacked and they they defended themselves. The Greeks would have done the same, he said He also accused Agamemnon for making profit from the war, and Menelaus for dragging the whole of Greece to a war for the sake of a woman. The Greeks who were present were outraged as the ‘beggar’s insolence. At that moment, they received news that a spy had infiltrated the army camp. After investigation, they found him out. With his life in danger, Telephos seized the baby Orestes, found refuge on the altar as a suppliant, and threatened that he would kill the child if they did not let him go. By taking Orestes as hostage, he achieved a compromise, revealed his identity and received his cure. The Aristophanic Telephos-scene Thesm. 467-764 Kinsman-’Telephos’ defense speech: (Th. 467ff.) It is not surprising, ladies, that you are very keenly enraged at Euripides when he slanders you this way, indeed that your bile is aboil. Why, let me have no profit in my children if I myself don’t hate the man; I’d have to be crazy not to! Still, we should permit open discussion among ourselves: we’re on our own and there will be no leaking of what we say. Why are we bringing that man up on these charges, and getting so angry with him just for mentioning two or three of our misdeeds, out of the thousands of others he knows we’ve committed? I myself to begin with, not to mention anyone else, have a lot of awful things on my conscience. I’ll tell you maybe the worst. I’d been married only three days, and my husband was sleeping beside me.
The reaction of the women (Th. 520-30) The Kinsman carries on revealing the women’s offenses, and when attacked, he becomes aggressive…. 574-654 The news about the spy from the honorary ‘woman’, Cleisthenes The investigation , the questioning and the discovery of the Kinsman The removal of the disguise and the revelation of the phallus The Kinsman on the altar being guarded
655-85 Chorus searches for spies – song including material from equivalent scene in Telephos The ‘child’-hostage scene (689-764) The seizing of Mica’s baby and the infanticide
Extended paratragic character: language, metre, themes, ethical and religious reflections, climax in singing Euripides’ ‘escape’- tragedies (cf. Frogs 81) The threat to violate the ‘suppliant’ and the infanticide The women’s bibulousness….. Kinsman Light me up and burn me down! Mica (unwrapping the baby) As for you, off with How dare you? You’ve undressed my child— this Cretan swaddling, quickly. And for disgusting!—a tiny baby! Kinsman your death, my child, blame but a single Tiny? It is pretty small at that. How many years woman, your mother! What is this? The old? Three Wine-Jug Festivals or four? baby girl’s become a skin full of wine, and Mica wearing Persian booties to boot! Women, That’s about right, plus a Dionysia. But give it back! Kinsman you overheated dipsomaniacs, never No, by Apollo there! passing up a chance to wangle a drink, a Mica great boon to bartenders but a bane to us— Then we’ll incinerate you. not to mention our crockery and our Kinsman woolens! By all means, incinerate away. (producing a knife) But Mica and Mania re-enter with firewood. this little girl will get sacrificed on the spot. Mica Mica Pile them on nice and thick, Mania. Don’t do it, I beseech you! Do what you want with Kinsman me, for this one’s sake. Go ahead, pile them on. But tell me one Kinsman thing: do you claim to have given birth to You’ve a good mother’s instincts. But nonetheless this? this girl’s going to get her throat cut. Mica Mica Carried it all ten months myself. 49 Ah my baby! Give me the slaughter bowl, Mania, so I can at least catch my own child’s blood. Kinsman Kinsman You carried it? Hold it under there; I’ll do you this one favor. Mica (Kinsman slashes the wineskin) By Artemis, I did. Kinsman What’s the proof—seventy-five, was it?
Comedy and Iconography: the Telephos Krater
T Comedy and Iconography: the Telephos Krater
What do you observe as regards the relation between vase-painting and text?;
How do you interpret the fact that this Apulian Bell-krater is dated around 40 years after the production of Thesmophoriazousae?
Oliver Taplin, 1993, Comic Angels, Oxford In conclusion:
The engagement of the Thesmophoriazousae with Euripides’ Telephos is extremely extensive and works on multiple levels
QUESTION: Do you think that the radical alteration of the ending has a significance in the way comedy presents tragedy?
Parody of Euripides’ Palamedes (765-84)
Palamedes was produced in 415 (alongside Alexandros, Trojan Women and Sisyphus) In Troy, the hero Palamedes (to whom the invention of the alphabet is attributed) was unjustly accused by Odysseus that he betrayed the Greeks. He was executed. His brother Oeax inscribed his story on oars and threw them in the sea. One of them reached his father Nauplius, who planned revenge against the Greeks. After parabasis (785-845):
The characters of Euripides’ Palamedes and the identity of the Kinsman
Parody of Euripides’ Helen (846- Helen and Andromeda were produced by Euripides only one year before Thesmo, in 412.
Plot elements: - Helen in Egypt; fearful of Theoclymenus becomes suppliant on Proteus’ tomb; - Recognition with shipwrecked Menelaus - Theonoe, Theoclymenus’ sister , helps the pair escape by tricking him
The Euripidean Helen is an impressively strong character, with initiative and intelligence (like Theonoe, and in contrast to the weak Menelaus and the brutish Theoclymenus). Main theme: the contrast between appearance and reality.
Drastically shortened version of the play (opening scene –Menelaus’ encounter with doorkeeper – recognition ) The Aristophanic ‘Helen’ is far more passive.
Metatheatrical play: ‘Helen’ and ‘Menelaus’ are trying to maintain the dramatic illusion, but Critylla keeps breaking it
One more ‘tragedy’ fails to provide salvation (with comedy’s sabotage)
Perhaps: appearance as the tragic illusion; reality as the comic reality.
Parody of Euripides’ Andromeda(928-1135)
After the Kinsman’s binding on the plank (by the Scythian policeman) and the choral interlude In the Euripidean version, Cassiepeia, Cepheus’ wife and queen of the Ethipians, had offended Poseidon and the god had sent a sea monster to ravage the land. Cepheus chained his daughter Andromeda on a rock as an offering to the monsetr. The play started with Andromeda’s monody, to whom Echo responded from the depths of the cave; a dialogue with the young maidens, companions of Andromeda, ensued. Perseus arrived, returning from his Medusa feat, and saved her.
Parody of Euripides’ Andromeda(928-1135)
In her panic, Kinsman-’Andromeda’ barely manages to maintain the dramatic illusion: her character fluctuates rapidly between ‘Andromeda’ and Kinsman The Scythian archer is identified sometimes with the monster and sometimes with Cepheus. Last year’s sensational Euripidean presentation of the Numph Echo becomes the Aristophanic Echo that annoys both the heroine and the monster (and contributes to the failure of the rescue) Euripides-Perseus appears on the crane at 1098 He tries to maintain illusion, but he fails due to the interruptions of the Scythian, who understands nothing of tragedy, and panic- stricken Kinsman Plan fails again…
Exodos (1160-end) After all failures, ‘Euripides’ abandons the tragic means and turns comic means: Like a comic ‘deus ex machina’ he appears disguised as a old bawd, with a prostitute and a boy piper
He negotiates reconciliation with women and arranges for the Scythian policeman to be seduced and taken inside The Kinsman is freed, the Scythian is in trouble, and the chorus celebrates Some bibliography Sommerstein, A.H. (1994), Aristophanes Thesmophoriazusae, Warminster. Arrowsmith, S.P. (1975), ‘Aristophanes’ Thesmophoriazousae: The formal debate’, Arion 2, 5-12. Bobrick, E (1997), ‘The tyranny of roles: playacting and privilege in Aristophanes' « Thesmophoriazusae »’ in Dobrov, G.W. (ed.), The city as comedy, 177-197. Carter, E.B. (1991), ‘Iphigeneia revisited : Thesmophoriazusae 1160-1225’, Arethusa 24, 67-76. Cowan, R. (2008), Nothing to do with Phaedra? Aristophanes, Thesmophoriazusae 497- Classical Quarterly (CQ) 58, 315-320. Nieddu, G.F. (2007), ‘A poet at work: the parody of « Helen » in the « Thesmophoriazusae »’, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies (GRBS) 44, 331-60. Stehle, E.M. (2007), ‘Thesmophoria and Eleusinian mysteries: the fascination of women's secret ritual’ in Women's rituals in the ancient Mediterranean, 165-185. Stehle, E.M. (2007), ‘The body and its representations in Aristophanes' « Thesmophoriazousai »: where does the costume end?’, American Journal of Philology (AJP) 123, 369-406. Taaffe, L. K. (1993), Aristophanes and women, London. Tzanetou, A. (2002), Something to do with Demeter: ritual and performance in Aristophanes' « Women at the Thesmophoria », American Journal of Philology (AJP) 123, 329-367. Zeitlin, F.I. (1982), ‘Travesties of gender and genre in Aristophanes' Thesmophoriazusae', in H.P. Foley (ed.), Reflections of Women in Antiquity, New York, 169-21.
Aristophanes’ attitude to Euripidean tragedy, and its fluctuations in four comedies
Acharnians (425BC) => Dicaeopolis/’Aristophanes’/Telephos use tragedy to claim the value of comedy : ‘trygedy knows what is right, too’
Clouds (the revision: 419 BC)=> rather somber mood for new intellectual developments (that are firmly associated with Euripides); enigmatic? the parabasis of Clouds and the Aristophanic self-presentation
Thesmophoriazousae (411 BC) =>an Aristophanic comedy built like a Euripidean tragedy – but showing Euripidean tragedy as ‘failing’
Frogs (405BC) => passion for ‘Euripides’ and journey in search of good poetry; but in the end, through Dionysus -‘Aristophanes’ chooses Aeschylus
{ Aristophanic comedy ‘Euripides’, ‘Aeschylus’ and literary criticism Old comedy, para-tragedy, parody and literary criticism
Parody is one of the most perceptive and penetrating forms of literary criticism It tells us precious things about Athenian cultural activity and its reception by the audiences. It is a goldmine (and a largely unexplored one!) as source for audience responses. Comedy is great at picking up (new) cultural trends which generate interest, excitement, suspicion or anxiety to audiences (think, perhaps, of a mixture of Have I got news for you, The Daily Mash, The Private Eye, The Review Show etc.) It also reflects (and transfers) beliefs and arguments about the audiences’ own cultural heritage. It gives us a great glimpse of how Homer, Hesiod, iambos, lyric, and of course tragedy (old and new), were understood and thought of. (Other factors at play here, e.g. education) But also: Comedy takes part into every kind of literary talk is happening in the polis (we can imagine that that talk would happen at symposia, artistic competitions, public festivals; from the mid-5th cent, literary criticism was taught by the sophists; consider also publications)
Old comedy as critic
One of the main themes that preoccupy ancient criticism and comedy in particular? The nature and provenance of poetic inspiration Where does poetic ability come from? Is it ‘divinely inspired’? Or does it come with technique, knowledge and craft? And which variety should be considered ‘the best’?
Multiple responses to this perennial question from the poets themselves who present their own poetry often in opposition to that of their rivals ►
Li Bai, Chinese poet of the 8th cent. AD Old comedy as critic The nature and provenance of poetic inspiration The Dionysiac, wine-inspired poet: Archilochus 120W: “I know how to initiate a fine song for Lord Dionysus, a dithyramb, after my mind is struck with wine (οἴνῳ συγκεραυνωθεὶς φρένας).” Poets of natural genius vs. poets of craft and learning Pindar O. 2. 86–8. “The man (i.e. poet) who knows a great deal by nature (πολλὰ εἰδὼς φυᾷ) is truly sophos, while those who have only learned chatter with raucous and indiscriminate tongues (ἄκραντα γαρυέτων) in vain like crows against the divine bird of Zeus.”
OLD poets (e.g. Pindar) are naturally INSPIRED
NEW poets (e.g. Bacchylides, Simonides) are merely TECHNICAL
See what comedy does with this idea when it describes the new poets of tragedy (Agathon, Euripides) ► Li Bai, Chinese poet of the 8th cent. AD Old Comedy as critic From opening scene of Thesmophoriazousae (53-7), at the house of Agathon. His slave is talking about his master at work:
AGATHON’S SLAVE: He’s warping fresh stakes (κάμπτει δὲ νέας ἁψῖδας) of verses; some he planes down (τορνεύει), others he couples, minting aphorisms (γνωμοτυπεῖ), swapping meanings (κἀντονομάζει), channeling wax (κηροχυτεῖ) and rounding the mold and funneling metal (χοανεύει)
EURIPIDES’ KINSMAN: … and sucking cocks.
Notice the importance of making NEW stuff (kainotes) and the image of ‘twisting’. Comedy as critic
Some polarities of comedy’s crazy literary-critical imagination:
Old vs. New
Naturally inspired vs. Technically constructed
Masculine (and heroic, noble) vs. Effeminate and degenerate
AND MANY MANY MORE (constantly adapted and renegotiated) How do we place Aristophanes’ Frogs within this picture of comic criticism?
Aristophanes’ Frogs
Two main strands in Aristophanes’ Frogs should be kept in mind:
1. Frogs dramatises a journey in search of the best kind of poetry (the ‘journey’ strand)
2. This journey involves a katabasis to the Underworld (a symbolic ‘death’) and a resurrection, a regeneration (the ‘initiation in the mysteries’ strand)
1. The ‘journey in search of the best kind of poetry’ strand
From its very beginning, Frogs is obsessed with the question ‘what is good poetry’. See Frogs 1-105. What are the conversations about, whether the characters talk about comedy or about tragedy?
Although not a parabasis, the opening scene of Frogs is VERY PARABATIC in character. (I would argue that the whole play is very ‘parabatic’ in character)
From vv. 35 onwards, when Dionysus arrives at Heracles’ house, and the conversation turns to his passion for tragedy, we are presented again with the associations above: old and new, masculine and feminine, heroic/noble and degenerate. Which ones of them are connected with ‘Euripides’ and new tragedy?
The journey ends with a formal judgement – the act of literary criticism presented physically on stage! (Comedy can’t stand abstraction!) 2. The ‘initiation in the mysteries’ strand As many scholars have shown, Dionysus goes through a process of initiation into the Eleusinian/Dionysiac mysteries. See A. Bowie Aristophanes, myth, ritual and comedy; and especially I. Lada-Richards Initiating Dionysus (more on this at the seminar of the 9th of March)
In any rite of passage, as initiation rituals are, the initiand he goes through a symbolic death from his previous status, and is ‘reborn’ a new person. (For the motif of death - and near-death experiences - see Frogs 117 ff)
Dionysus SEES the initiates at 313ff.; the motif of seeing (and knowing) is extremely important in initiation rituals.
At the end, Dionysus returns to the living after having witnessed a poetic agon and made up his mind – which happens to be different from his mind in the beginning of the play…
Frogs 312ff.
Choral introduction to the main agon: Frogs 814-29
IDENTIFY THE POETS THROUGH THEIR IMAGERY !
(p. 137-9)
(earthborn/coming from the earth) ‘Aeschylus’ as raw natural force / monster in comedy’s imagination
PASSAGE ON AESCHYLUS Passage on euripides As opposed to Euripidean technical ability and dexiotes (=cleverness, sophistication): How does ‘Aeschylus’ fit into this scheme?
‘NATURE’ VS. ‘CULTURE’ - A poetry that is ‘natural’ gushes - Poetry comes from learning and forth, flows freely, has a raw power. thorough study of sources. Most Inspiration resembles a mystic, important virtues are technical ability, religious process. The poet finds innovation, experimentation, and himself intoxicated / in trance. display of artistic virtuosity. - This is the ‘real’ Dionysiac poetry. - It deals with issues closer to It follows in the footsteps of the everyday life. noble tradition of epic and teaches - It is exciting for the audiences, but the citizens heroic virtues. morally reprehensible and irreverent. - Naturally, it appeals to the elite!! It is degenerate and effeminate. (Aeschylus’ ‘aristocratic’ - Naturally, it appeals to the demos allegiances!!!!) (and the masses, including criminals!) - It is found in the poets ‘of old’. - It is found in the variety of ‘new’ (please note, this is not the whole story!) poets. (again this is not the whole story) How does Aeschylus fit into this scheme? More images in the nexus of imagery that constructs ‘Aeschylus’ ‘Aeschylus’ as gushing stream of water (Fr. 1005)
‘Aeschylus’ as Bacchic lord and follower of the mysteries (Fr. 885-7, 1259)
Aeschylean poetry and Iliadic imagery (Fr. 928-30)
‘Aeschylus’ as the Achilles of the (very Homeric) Myrmidons (Fr. 832ff.)
(Which epic figure does ‘Euripides’ evoke, then?)
For the passages, see next page
Why does Aeschylus win the Frogs agon? No answer will satisfy everyone. BUT: It probably has to do with Aristophanes’ own self-definition as a poet. Let us not forget, ‘Aristophanes’ embarks on his own ‘metapoetic journey’ in the Frogs. Earlier Aristophanic comedy is obsessed with Euripidean tragedy. In earlier Aristophanes, Euripides is adored, imitated and parodied (warmly!) (though there is a certain degree of anxiety here, since his association with controversial Euripides comes with a risk).
‘And who are you?’ some clever-dick spectator might ask; a micro-intellectualist, a hunter of subtle ideas, a euripidaristophanist. Cratinus fr. 342 Why does Aeschylus win the Frogs agon?
In Frogs ‘Aristophanes’ seems to say ‘I have turned Aeschylean!’ (i.e. I, too, now belong to the ‘old’ and ‘inspired’ generation of classics!!)
He appropriates the persona not only of Aeschylus, but also of Cratinus ‘the bull-eater, i.e. Dionysus’ (Fr. 357)
Other clues: Poetic inspiration as initiation (throughout Frogs, see Lada-Richards). The initiation motif is very strong. ‘Aristophanes’, one could say, makes himself go through this journey to ‘get initiated’ into the Bacchic mysteries of ‘genuinely inspired’ poetry!!!
Aeschylus, Cratinus, and Dionysiac/intoxicated inspiration
And remember Cratinus from the seminar material. Some bibliography
Hunter, R. (2009) ‘Aristophanes’ Frogs and the Classical Tradition’ in Hunter, R. Critical Moments in Classical Literature, Cambridge, 10-52 and ‘Introduction’, 1-9 Ford, A. (2002) The origins of criticism, Princeton, 199-200 Bakola, E. (2008) ‘The drunk, the reformer and the teacher: agonistic poetics and the construction of persona in the comic poets of the fifth century’ CCJ 54 (2008): 1–29 E. Bakola, L. Prauscello and M. Telò (eds.) (2013) Greek Comedy and the Discourse of Genres, Cambridge University Press. Halliwell, S. (2012) Between Ecstasy and Truth. Interpretations of Greek Poetics from Homer to Longinus, Oxford Griffith, M. (2013) Aristophanes’ Frogs, Oxford Wright, M. (2011) The Comedian as Critic: Greek Old Comedy and poetics, London