DOCSLIB.ORG

Iphigenia in Tauris.Intro

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Iphigenia in Tauris.Intro IPHIGENIA IN TAURIS In this introduction, I will 1) give an overview of the plot, 2) consider some of the unique features of the play, and 3) discuss the process I went through in adapting the play. Euripides’ Iphigenia offers a different take on the fall of the house of Atreus. Here is the story in its classic form as told in Aeschylus’ Oresteia. 1) The sons of Atreus, Agamemnon and Menelaus, become kings of Mycenae and Sparta and take as wives the sisters Clytemnestra and Helen. 2) Paris’s abducts Helen, igniting the Trojan War; the Greeks navy is led by Agamemnon. 3) Before they can sail for Troy, the fleet is grounded at the Port of Aulis, and Agamemnon is told that the goddess Artemis will not let him sail unless he sacrifices his daughter, Iphigenia. 4) Agamemnon instructs Iphigenia to come to Aulis where she will be married to Achilles, but when she arrives, he sacrifices her. 5) While the Greeks fight at Troy for ten years, Clytemnestra, enraged at Agamemnon’s murder of their daughter, takes a lover. 6) When Agamemnon returns from Troy, his wife kills him. 7) Many years later, Agamemnon’s son, Orestes returns home and, with the help of his sister, Electra (and the guidance of Apollo), kills his mother and her lover. 8) Because he is guilty of matricide, Orestes is chased by the Furies, but Apollo and Athena intercede for him, and he is declared innocent at a trial held in Athens. To this tragic plot, Euripides makes two important changes. As we learn in the opening of the play, Iphigenia was not killed at Aulis. Though all who were there thought Iphigenia was slain, Artemis (the sister of Apollo) spirited away Iphigenia, leaving a deer to die in her place. The goddess carries Iphigenia to barbaric Aulis (located in the Black Sea, at the edge of the Greek world, near where Jason found the Golden Fleece); there she is made priestess at the altar of Artemis, and serves King Thoas. Part of her duties as priestess is to sacrifice to the goddess all strangers who land on the shores of Aulis. When the play opens, Iphigenia has just had a dream that makes her believe that her brother, Orestes, is dead. But he is not. According to Euripides, even after being declared innocent as his trial, Orestes is pursued by several Furies who rejected the verdict. In desperation, Orestes seeks help from Apollo, who tells him that the only way he can be freed from the Furies is to seek out the Temple of Artemis in Aulis. There he must steal a small wooden idol of Artemis believed by the Taurians to have fallen from the sky. Only by carrying the idol back to Greece can he be freed. Immediately after Iphigenia shares with her chorus of captive Greek women her belief that Orestes is dead, Orestes appears on stage, accompanied by his friend, Pylades, who is married to his sister, Electra. The two decide to hide in a cave by the sea and then return at night to steal the idol from the temple. But they are spotted on the beach when Orestes, driven mad by the Furies, attacks and kills a herd of cattle. After a struggle, the two men are captured and dragged before Iphigenia. She is told that one of the men is named Pylades, but she does not know the name of the second. She questions Orestes vigorously, but the truth remains hidden to both of them. When she learns that they are Greeks from Mycenae and that Orestes still lives, she asks them to carry a letter from her to Orestes. In the process the siblings discover who they are, and Orestes is saved from being sacrificed by his own sister. In the second half of the play, Orestes, Pylades, and Iphigenia plot together to steal the idol of Artemis and escape back to Greece. Iphigenia fools Thoas into allowing her to take Orestes, Pylades, and the idol down to the beach to purify them in the sea. The three manage to get aboard Orestes’ ship, but Thoas is warned and is about to send troops to stop them. At that moment, Athena appears and commands Thoas to allow them to return to Greece and, in time, to send ransom back to Tauris to buy back the freedom of the chorus of captive women. 1 To the shock and surprise of modern audiences, Iphigenia at Tauris turns out to be a tragedy with a happy ending. And yet, Iphigenia is but one of a number of ancient Greek tragedies that end happily. According to Aristotle’s Poetics, what makes a tragedy a tragedy is that its plot is built around a reversal during which the action shifts suddenly from good fortune to bad fortune (or vice versa) and the characters move from a state of knowledge to ignorance (or vice versa). Aristotle makes it clear that the best tragedies end unhappily; such was the influence of the great philosopher that Aristotle’s aesthetic taste became synonymous with that of Europe. Aristotle also demanded that the best plots should resolve themselves, rather than rely on a climactic appearance of a god to sort out the plot (a method known as a deus ex machina, since the divine figure would be lowered on to the stage by a crane). In direct contrast to Aristotle’s taste, Euripides’ play not only reverses toward good fortune, but ends with a deus ex machina. Alfred Hitchcock was a director who preferred suspense to shock In Vertigo, a villain hires the hero (Scotty) to keep an eye on his suicidal wife (Judy). Scotty falls in love with Judy, but when she runs up a bell tower and leaps to her death, his vertigo prevents him from saving her. Several months later, Scotty sees a woman who looks like Judy and slowly, obsessively tries to remake her into Judy. In the novel on which Hitchcock based his film, the reader does not realize until the end that the woman is Judy: that it was not her, but the real wife who was thrown out of the tower to her death by the villain. Hitchcock sacrifices this shocking revelation by letting the viewer know right away that the woman is Judy. In return, he gains almost an hour of nail-biting suspense as we wonder how and when Scotty will realize who this woman is—and what he will do when he finds out! Euripides manufactures the same form of suspense by letting the audience know immediately who Orestes and Iphigenia are. As a result, we sit on the edge of our seats waiting for the tiniest clue that will reveal their identities—before it is too late! # Although my adaptation retains all the characters and scenes, the play itself has been cut in half. I did so by trimming back the long speeches, condensing the choral songs, and whittling away at long sequences of dialogue. Still, I have carefully maintained Euripides’ balance between meditative soliloquies, lyrical poems of longing and regret, and rapid-fire exchanges. As is common in English, I have translated the play (but not the choral songs) into blank verse, a form that consists of an unrhymed series of iambic pentameter lines: 10-syllable, 5-stress lines, with the stresses falling on the even syllables (But THAT the DREAD of SOME-thing A- fter DEATH). Shakespeare used this form for his soliloquies as did Milton for Paradise Lost. Blank verse moves forward in a stately, grandiose fashion that is both meditative and sweeping; as such, it is perfectly suited for translating Greek epic and tragedy. Though Shakespeare has been my model, I have also followed Wordsworth, whose blank verse tends to read like good prose. Wordsworth accomplishes this by using normal syntax whenever possible: “and I have felt a presence in the woods” rather than “a presence I have felt within the woods.” In attempting to make this adaptation as accessible as possible I have learned a lesson from Shakespeare and the King James Bible—don’t be afraid to use monosyllables. Consider the first and last lines Psalm 23 (“The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want / And I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever”), or the last two lines of Shakespeare’s sonnet 29 (“For thy sweet love remembered such wealth brings / That then I scorn to change my state with kings”). Louis Markos (www.Loumarkos.com), Professor in English & Scholar in Residence at Houston Baptist Univ,, holds the Robert H Ray Chair in Humanities; his books include From Achilles to Christ, The Eye of the Beholder, and Pressing Forward: Tennyson and the Victorian Age. 2 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Role-Playing and Self-Actualization in Iphigenia at Aulis the Climactic Change of Mind in Euripides' Iphigenia at Aulis
    Role-Playing and Self-Actualization in Iphigenia at Aulis The climactic change of mind in Euripides’ Iphigenia at Aulis (extensively discussed by Gibert 1995: 222-54) is notorious both for representing such an absolute reversal of Iphigenia’s views and for being considerably delayed: her final speech “contains a series of points, virtually all of which could equally well have been made by Iphigeneia fifty lines earlier” (Sansone 1991: 164). This paper addresses both issues by analyzing her reversal as an example of role-playing that is meant to impose one’s own vision on reality; Zeitlin’s important article on Orestes’ role- playing as an attempt to escape from his own myth provides a starting point (cf. Siegel 1980, Luschnig 1988, who speaks of roles in IA, though without much definition). This brand of role- playing appears first in IA in the figures of Clytemnestra and Achilles, who continue to play the roles of mother of the bride and prospective husband even after Iphigenia’s engagement to Achilles has been revealed as a fabrication. When Iphigenia agrees to the sacrifice, she assumes a new role as active heroine of her own story and, like Clytemnestra and Achilles, forces that fiction to become a reality. Her reversal is delayed because her monody and the stichomythic exchange between Clytemnestra and Achilles are needed to illustrate why other possible roles are unsatisfying or untenable. Throughout the play, Iphigenia’s dilemma is framed as a question of whom she should marry: Hades or Achilles. Helene Foley (1985: 68-78) has argued that on the level of ritual marriage is at least as important as sacrifice for negotiating the social tensions explored in the play.
    [Show full text]
  • An Examination of the Correlation Between the Justification and Glorification of War in Charles Mee's Iphigenia
    An Examination of the Correlation Between the Justification and Glorification of War in Charles Mee’s Iphigenia 2.0: A Director’s Approach Caroline Donica Table of Contents Chapter One: Charles Mee and the History Behind Iphigenia 2.0 4 Introduction 4 The Life and Works of Charles Mee 4 Just War 8 Production History and Reception 11 Survey of Literature 13 Conclusion 15 Chapter Two: Play Analysis 16 Introduction 16 Synopsis 16 Given Circumstances 24 Previous Action 26 Dialogue and Imagery 27 Character Analysis 29 Idea and Theme 34 Conclusion 36 Chapter Three: The Design Process 37 Introduction 37 Production Style 37 Director’s Approach 38 Choice of Stage 38 Collaboration with Designers 40 Set Design 44 Costumes 46 Makeup and Hair 50 Properties 52 Lighting 53 Sound 55 Conclusion 56 Chapter Four: The Rehearsal Process 57 Introduction 57 Auditions and Casting 57 Rehearsals and Acting Strategies 60 Technical and Dress Rehearsals 64 Performances 65 Conclusion 67 Chapter Five: Reflection 68 Introduction 68 Design 68 Staging and Timing 72 Acting 73 Self-Analysis 77 Conclusion 80 Appendices 82 A – Photos Featuring the Set Design 83 B – Photos Featuring the Costume Design 86 C – Photos Featuring the Lighting Design 92 D – Photos Featuring the Concept Images 98 Works Consulted 102 Donica 4 Chapter One Charles Mee and the History Behind Iphigenia 2.0 Introduction Charles Mee’s Iphigenia 2.0 is a significant work in recent theatre history. The play was widely recognized and repeatedly produced for its unique take on contemporary issues, popular culture, and current events set within a framework of ancient myths and historical literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Trojan Women: Introduction
    Trojan Women: Introduction 1. Gods in the Trojan Women Two gods take the stage in the prologue to Trojan Women. Are these gods real or abstract? In the prologue, with its monologue by Poseidon followed by a dialogue between the master of the sea and Athena, we see them as real, as actors (perhaps statelier than us, and accoutered with their traditional props, a trident for the sea god, a helmet for Zeus’ daughter). They are otherwise quite ordinary people with their loves and hates and with their infernal flexibility whether moral or emotional. They keep their emotional side removed from humans, distance which will soon become physical. Poseidon cannot stay in Troy, because the citizens don’t worship him any longer. He may feel sadness or regret, but not mourning for the people who once worshiped but now are dead or soon to be dispersed. He is not present for the destruction of the towers that signal his final absence and the diaspora of his Phrygians. He takes pride in the building of the walls, perfected by the use of mason’s rules. After the divine departures, the play proceeds to the inanition of his and Apollo’s labor, with one more use for the towers before they are wiped from the face of the earth. Nothing will be left. It is true, as Hecuba claims, her last vestige of pride, the name of Troy remains, but the place wandered about throughout antiquity and into the modern age. At the end of his monologue Poseidon can still say farewell to the towers.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 IPHIGENIA in TAURIS by Euripides Adapted, Edited, and Rendered Into
    IPHIGENIA IN TAURIS by Euripides Adapted, edited, and rendered into modern English for the express purpose of dramatic performance by Louis Markos, Professor in English and Honors Scholar-in-Residence/Robert H. Ray Chair in Humanities Houston Baptist University (Houston, TX) Dramatis Personae IPHIGENIA, daughter of Agamemnon ORESTES, brother of Iphigenia PYLADES, friend of Orestes THOAS, King of the Taurians HERDSMAN MESSENGER ATHENA CHORUS of captive Greek women who serve Iphigenia SCENE Before the temple of Artemis in Tauris. (Iphigenia, dressed as a priestess, enters and stands before the altar.) IPHIGENIA From Asia Pelops came to the shores of Greece; His son was Atreus and from him came Two greater sons, skilled in the arts of war. The eldest, Agamemnon, rules Mycenae While Menelaus holds the throne of Sparta. For Helen’s sake they raised a mighty fleet And set their sails for Troy. But Artemis, Beloved sister of the god Apollo, Sent vexing winds to wrestle with their sails And strand them on the rocky shore of Aulis. Eager to conquer Troy and so avenge His brother’s bed, my father, Agamemnon, Ordered Calchas, prophet of the host, To seek the will of Zeus and to proclaim The cause of their misfortune–and the cure. “O King,” he spoke, “You must fulfill the vow You made to Artemis: to offer up The dearest treasure that the year would bring. 1 The daughter born to you and Clytemnestra— She is the treasure you must sacrifice.” I was and am that daughter—oh the pain, That I should give my life to still the winds! The treacherous Odysseus devised The plot that brought me, innocent, to Aulis.
    [Show full text]
  • Iphigenia in Aulis by Euripides Translated by Nicholas Rudall Directed by Charles Newell
    STUDY GUIDE Photo of Mark L. Montgomery, Stephanie Andrea Barron, and Sandra Marquez by joe mazza/brave lux, inc Sponsored by Iphigenia in Aulis by Euripides Translated by Nicholas Rudall Directed by Charles Newell SETTING The action takes place in east-central Greece at the port of Aulis, on the Euripus Strait. The time is approximately 1200 BCE. CHARACTERS Agamemnon father of Iphigenia, husband of Clytemnestra and King of Mycenae Menelaus brother of Agamemnon Clytemnestra mother of Iphigenia, wife of Agamemnon Iphigenia daughter of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra Achilles son of Peleus Chorus women of Chalcis who came to Aulis to see the Greek army Old Man servant of Agamemnon, was given as part of Clytemnestra’s dowry Messenger ABOUT THE PLAY Iphigenia in Aulis is the last existing work of the playwright Euripides. Written between 408 and 406 BCE, the year of Euripides’ death, the play was first produced the following year in a trilogy with The Bacchaeand Alcmaeon in Corinth by his son, Euripides the Younger, and won the first place at the Athenian City Dionysia festival. Agamemnon Costume rendering by Jacqueline Firkins. 2 SYNOPSIS At the start of the play, Agamemnon reveals to the Old Man that his army and warships are stranded in Aulis due to a lack of sailing winds. The winds have died because Agamemnon is being punished by the goddess Artemis, whom he offended. The only way to remedy this situation is for Agamemnon to sacrifice his daughter, Iphigenia, to the goddess Artemis. Agamemnon then admits that he has sent for Iphigenia to be brought to Aulis but he has changed his mind.
    [Show full text]
  • Sons and Fathers in the Catalogue of Argonauts in Apollonius Argonautica 1.23-233
    Sons and fathers in the catalogue of Argonauts in Apollonius Argonautica 1.23-233 ANNETTE HARDER University of Groningen [email protected] 1. Generations of heroes The Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius brings emphatically to the attention of its readers the distinction between the generation of the Argonauts and the heroes of the Trojan War in the next genera- tion. Apollonius initially highlights this emphasis in the episode of the Argonauts’ departure, when the baby Achilles is watching them, at AR 1.557-5581 σὺν καί οἱ (sc. Chiron) παράκοιτις ἐπωλένιον φορέουσα | Πηλείδην Ἀχιλῆα, φίλωι δειδίσκετο πατρί (“and with him his wife, hold- ing Peleus’ son Achilles in her arms, showed him to his dear father”)2; he does so again in 4.866-879, which describes Thetis and Achilles as a baby. Accordingly, several scholars have focused on the ways in which 1 — On this marker of the generations see also Klooster 2014, 527. 2 — All translations of Apollonius are by Race 2008. EuGeStA - n°9 - 2019 2 ANNETTE HARDER Apollonius has avoided anachronisms by carefully distinguishing between the Argonauts and the heroes of the Trojan War3. More specifically Jacqueline Klooster (2014, 521-530), in discussing the treatment of time in the Argonautica, distinguishes four periods of time to which Apollonius refers: first, the time before the Argo sailed, from the beginning of the cosmos (featured in the song of Orpheus in AR 1.496-511); second, the time of its sailing (i.e. the time of the epic’s setting); third, the past after the Argo sailed and fourth the present inhab- ited by the narrator (both hinted at by numerous allusions and aitia).
    [Show full text]
  • THE ARGONAUTIKA He'd Gone on His Vain Quest with Peirithoos: That Couple Would Have Made Their Task's Fulfillment Far Easier for Them All
    Book I Starting from you, Phoibos, the deeds ofthose old-time mortals I shall relute, who by way ofthe Black Sea's mouth and through the cobalt-dark rocks, at King Pelias 's commandment, in search of the Golden Fleece drove tight-thwarted Argo. For Pelias heard it voiced that in time thereafter a grim fate would await him, death at the prompting of the man he saw come, one-sandaled, from folk in the country: and not much later-in accordance with your word-Jason, fording on foot the Anauros's wintry waters, saved from the mud one sandal, but left the other stuck fast in the flooded estuary, pressed straight on to have his share in the sacred feast that Pelias was preparing for Poseidon his father, and the rest of the gods, though paying no heed to Pelasgian Hera. The moment Pelias saw him, he knew, and devised him a trial of most perilous seamanship, that in deep waters or away among foreign folk he might lose his homecoming. ,\row singers before 7ny time have recounted how the vessel was fashioned 4 Argos with the guidance of Athena. IW~cctIplan to do now is tell the name and farnib of each hero, describe their long voyage, all they accomplished in their wanderings: may the Muses inspire mnj sinpng! First in our record be Orpheus, whom famous Kalliope, after bedding Thracian Oikgros, bore, they tell us, 44 THE XRGONAUTIKA hard by Pimpleia's high rocky lookout: Orpheus, who's said to have charmed unshiftable upland boulders and the flow of rivers with the sound of his music.
    [Show full text]
  • MONEY and the EARLY GREEK MIND: Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy
    This page intentionally left blank MONEY AND THE EARLY GREEK MIND How were the Greeks of the sixth century bc able to invent philosophy and tragedy? In this book Richard Seaford argues that a large part of the answer can be found in another momentous development, the invention and rapid spread of coinage, which produced the first ever thoroughly monetised society. By transforming social relations, monetisation contributed to the ideas of the universe as an impersonal system (presocratic philosophy) and of the individual alienated from his own kin and from the gods (in tragedy). Seaford argues that an important precondition for this monetisation was the Greek practice of animal sacrifice, as represented in Homeric epic, which describes a premonetary world on the point of producing money. This book combines social history, economic anthropology, numismatics and the close reading of literary, inscriptional, and philosophical texts. Questioning the origins and shaping force of Greek philosophy, this is a major book with wide appeal. richard seaford is Professor of Greek Literature at the University of Exeter. He is the author of commentaries on Euripides’ Cyclops (1984) and Bacchae (1996) and of Reciprocity and Ritual: Homer and Tragedy in the Developing City-State (1994). MONEY AND THE EARLY GREEK MIND Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy RICHARD SEAFORD cambridge university press Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521832281 © Richard Seaford 2004 This publication is in copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • Female Familial Relationships in Valerius' Argonautica and Statius
    W&M ScholarWorks Undergraduate Honors Theses Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 5-2021 Female Familial Relationships in Valerius’ Argonautica and Statius’ Thebaid Sophia Warnement Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/honorstheses Part of the Classical Literature and Philology Commons Recommended Citation Warnement, Sophia, "Female Familial Relationships in Valerius’ Argonautica and Statius’ Thebaid" (2021). Undergraduate Honors Theses. Paper 1619. https://scholarworks.wm.edu/honorstheses/1619 This Honors Thesis -- Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Undergraduate Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Female Familial Relationships in Valerius’ Argonautica and Statius’ Thebaid A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in Department of Classical Studies from The College of William and Mary by Sophia Irene Warnement Accepted for ______Honors___________________________ (Honors, Highest Honors) __Vassiliki Panoussi___________________ Vassiliki Panoussi, Director __Molly Swetnam-Burland____________ Molly Swetnam-Burland __Jennifer Gülly___ ____________________ Jennifer Gülly Williamsburg, VA May 07, 2021 Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Motif of Love in Euripides' Works Helen and Medea
    THE MOTIF OF LOVE IN THE HELEN AND THE ALCESTIS OF EURIPIDES by Eleftheria N. Athanasopoulou DOCTORAL DISSERTATION submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree DOCTOR LITTERARUM ET PHILOSOPHIAE in GREEK in the FACULTY OF HUMANITIES at the UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG SUPERVISOR: PROFESSOR J. L. P. WOLMARANS JANUARY 2008 For my family, and especially for my children… «Αν κάποιος προηγείται απλώς του καιρού του, κάποια μέρα ο καιρός θα τον προλάβει». (Wittgenstein, L. 1986). «Η θάλασσα που μας πίκρανε είναι βαθιά κι ανεξερεύνητη και ξεδιπλώνει μιαν απέραντη γαλήνη». (Seferis, G. 1967). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Grateful acknowledgment is hereby made to Prof. J. L. P. Wolmarans for his advice, patience and assistance. This work would not have been completed without his encouragement. Indeed, his criticism was beneficial to the development of my ideas. It is of special significance to acknowledge the support given to me by some friends. I am particularly indebted to them for various favours. I also thank my husband for his advice, so that I could look afresh at a large number of questions. I wish to thank the anonymous reader for the improvements (s)he suggested. Johannesburg 2008 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ABSTRACT xiii ΠΕΡΙΛΗΨΗ xi I. INTRODUCTION The Helen and the Alcestis 1 Rationale 3 Problem Statement 5 Methodology 6 Layout and Structure 8 Overview of Literature 12 Note to the Reader 14 II. THE PHILOSOPHY OF EURIPIDES AND WITTGENSTEIN Euripides’ Profile: Life and Works 15 Wittgenstein’s Profile: Life and Works 23 Euripides and Wittgenstein: Parallel Patterns of Thought 33 The Motif of Love, Language and Gloss analysis 37 III.
    [Show full text]
  • Late Sophocles: the Hero's Evolution in Electra, Philoctetes, and Oedipus
    0/-*/&4637&: *ODPMMBCPSBUJPOXJUI6OHMVFJU XFIBWFTFUVQBTVSWFZ POMZUFORVFTUJPOT UP MFBSONPSFBCPVUIPXPQFOBDDFTTFCPPLTBSFEJTDPWFSFEBOEVTFE 8FSFBMMZWBMVFZPVSQBSUJDJQBUJPOQMFBTFUBLFQBSU $-*$,)&3& "OFMFDUSPOJDWFSTJPOPGUIJTCPPLJTGSFFMZBWBJMBCMF UIBOLTUP UIFTVQQPSUPGMJCSBSJFTXPSLJOHXJUI,OPXMFEHF6OMBUDIFE ,6JTBDPMMBCPSBUJWFJOJUJBUJWFEFTJHOFEUPNBLFIJHIRVBMJUZ CPPLT0QFO"DDFTTGPSUIFQVCMJDHPPE Late Sophocles Late Sophocles The Hero’s Evolution in Electra, Philoctetes, and Oedipus at Colonus Thomas Van Nortwick University of Michigan Press Ann Arbor Copyright © Thomas Van Nortwick 2015 All rights reserved This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, including illustrations, in any form (beyond that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law and ex- cept by reviewers for the public press), without written permission from the publisher. Published in the United States of America by the University of Michigan Press Manufactured in the United States of America c Printed on acid- free paper 2018 2017 2016 2015 4 3 2 1 A CIP catalog record for this book is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging- in- Publication Data Van Nortwick, Thomas, 1946– . Late Sophocles : the hero’s evolution in Electra, Philoctetes, and Oedipus at Colonus / Thomas Van Nortwick. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978- 0- 472- 11956- 1 (hardcover : alk. paper) — ISBN 978- 0- 472- 12108- 3 (ebook) 1. Sophocles— Criticism and interpretation. 2. Sophocles. Electra. 3. Sophocles. Oedipus at Colonus. 4. Sophocles. Philoctetes. I. Title. PA4417.V36 2015 882'.01— dc23 2014049364 For Nathan Greenberg colleague, mentor, and friend Preface Oh children, follow me. I am your new leader, as once you were for me. (Sophocles, Oedipus at Colonus 1542– 431) Sophocles’s Oedipus at Colonus ends with his most famous character walking serenely through the central doors of the stage building (skēnē) in the Theater of Dionysus and into the grove of the Eumenides.
    [Show full text]
  • Classical Athens and the Delphic Oracle: Divination and Democracy Hugh Bowden Frontmatter More Information
    Cambridge University Press 0521823730 - Classical Athens and the Delphic Oracle: Divination and Democracy Hugh Bowden Frontmatter More information CLASSICAL ATHENS AND THE DELPHIC ORACLE The Delphic oracle was where, according to Greek tradition, Apollo would speak through his priestesses. This work explores the import- ance placed on consultations at Delphi by Athenians in the city’s age of democracy. It demonstrates the extent to which concern to do the will of the gods affected Athenian politics, challenging the notion that Athenian democracy may be seen as a model for modern secular democratic constitutions. All the known consultations of the oracle by Athens in the period before 300 BC are examined, and descriptions of consultations found in Attic tragedy and comedy are discussed. This work provides a new account of how the Delphic oracle func- tioned and presents a thorough analysis of the relationship between the Athenians and the oracle, making it essential reading both for students of the oracle itself and of Athenian democracy. HUGH BOWDEN is Lecturer in Ancient History at King’s College London. He is the author of numerous articles on Greek religion and history and is editor of the The Times Ancient Civilizations (2002). © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 0521823730 - Classical Athens and the Delphic Oracle: Divination and Democracy Hugh Bowden Frontmatter More information CLASSICAL ATHENS AND THE DELPHIC ORACLE Divination and Democracy HUGH BOWDEN © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org
    [Show full text]