Gender Inversion and the Politics of Subversion in Aristophanes’ Ecclesiazvsae
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Tsoumpra, N. (2019) Sex can kill: gender inversion and the politics of subversion in Aristophanes’ Ecclesiazvsae. Classical Quarterly, 69(2), pp. 528-544. (doi: 10.1017/S0009838820000105). This is the author’s final accepted version. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/194984/ Deposited on: 05 September 2019 Enlighten – Research publications by members of the University of Glasgow http://eprints.gla.ac.uk SEX CAN KILL: GENDER INVERSION AND THE POLITICS OF SUBVERSION IN ARISTOPHANES’ ECCLESIAZUSAE Scholarship on Ecclesiazusae (as on Wealth) has beEn largely divided betwEEn thosE who are in a favour of a fantastical/positive reading of the play and viEw it as a cElEbration of comic Energy void of sErious social critique,1 and thosE who argue for an ironic/satirical intErpretation and deEm Praxagora’s plan as a spectacular failure.2 The unsuccEssful * Many thanks to Angus BowiE, FElix Budelmann, Ian Ruffell, Matthew Wright, and the anonymous reviEwEr of the journal, who read and commEntEd on EarliEr drafts of this piEcE. 1 D. Konstan and M. Dillon, ‘The ideology of Aristophanes’ Wealth’, AJPh 102 (1981), 371–94, A.H. SommErstEin, ‘Aristophanes and the demon poverty’, CQ 34 (1984), 314– 33, N.W. SlatEr, Spectator Politics: Metatheatre and Performance in Aristophanes (Philadelphia, 2002), 207–34. 2 D. Auger, ‘LE theatre d’Aristophane: lE mythe, l’utopiE Et lEs femmEs’ in D. Auger, M. RosEllini and S. Saïd (edd.), Aristophane, les Femmes et la Citè (FontEnay-aux-RosEs, 1979), 71–101, S. Saïd, ‘L’assEmbléE des femmEs: lEs femmEs, l’ économiE Et la politique’ in id., 33–69, H.P. FolEy, ‘The “femalE intruder” reconsidered: womEn in Aristophanes’ Lysistrata and Ecclesiazusae’, CP 77 (1982), 1–21, T.K. Hubbard, The Mask of Comedy: Aristophanes and the Intertextual Parabasis (Ithaca and London, 1991), 246–51, F.I. ZEitlin, ‘Aristophanes: the performancE of utopia in Ecclesiazusae’ in S. Goldhill and R. Osborne (edd.), Performance, Culture and Athenian Democracy (Cambridge, 1999), 167– 200, K.M. DE Luca, Aristophanes’ Male and Female Revolutions: A Reading of 1 realization of the new political program is oftEn regarded as a commEntary on the statE of democracy at the timE. Other viEws are more affirmative of the democratic values of the play: Scholtz claims that the womEn in Ecclesiazusae succEEd into putting into action Lysistrata’s dream of a cohesive civic order, although, according to him, the play does not presEnt ‘an unambiguously pro or contra viEwpoint vis-à-vis gynaEcocratic communalism’.3 RothwEll beliEves that the satire is directEd against the greEdy demos rather than Praxagora’s plan. HE sEEs the persuasion ExercisEd by womEn as ‘a benevolEnt and indispensablE forcE in democracy’, and argues that the womEn of Ecclesiazusae, like the ones in Lysistrata, strive to assure the continuity of the community; in his viEw, the play is about ‘the potEntial advantages of lEadership in building a community’.4 MoodiE Aristophanes’ Knights and Assemblywomen (Lanham, MD, 2005). I.A. Ruffell, ‘A littlE ironic (don't you think?): utopian criticism and the problEm of Aristophanes’ latE plays’, in L. Kozak and J. Rich (edd.), Playing Around Aristophanes (Oxford, 2006), 65–104 cautions that this sharp division limits the possibilitiEs of the play which should not be read as simply ‘ironic’ or ‘sErious’ but as ‘progressive thought ExperimEnts’. J. HEnderson, Aristophanes IV: Frogs, Assemblywomen, Wealth (Cambridge, MA, 2002), 241 beliEves that the play ‘satirizEs contEmporary Athenian fondness for political ExperimEntation and theorizing’. 3 A. Scholtz, Concordia Discors: Eros and Dialogue in Classical Athenian Literature (HEllEnic StudiEs SEriEs 24; Washington, DC, 2007). 4 K.S. RothwEll, Politics and Persuasion in Aristophanes’ Ecclesiazusae (LEiden, 1990), 103. 2 also outright rejEcts a threatEning or pessimistic reading and makes the casE that the audiEncE is Encouraged to take the womEn sEriously as political actors due to their unusual intEraction with the audiEncE and the rupture of dramatic illusion, which creatEs a rapport betwEEn the womEn and the audiEncE. If the play is subvErsive it is so only in its ‘non- satirical presEntation of femalE lEadership’.5 WhilE it would be Exciting to discover proto-feminist traits in the portrayal of Aristophanes’ womEn in the Ecclesiazusae, I do not beliEve that there are any. Contrary to what has beEn argued, the comparison betwEEn the permanent gynaEcocracy in Ecclesiazusae and the tEmporary one in Lysistrata does not paint the world of Ecclesiazusae in a positive light. Whereas both femalE lEaders are preoccupiEd with issues concErning the oikos, the new world of Ecclesiazusae, as formEd by Praxagora’s laws, is the oppositE of Lysistrata’s lEadership and the world brought about at the End of Lysistrata. The womEn in Lysistrata, by taking mattErs into their hands, uphold the institution of marriage and restore the procEss of reproduction6 in a world controllEd oncE more by mEn. The play is almost a lEsson on how a well-governed and restrained sExuality may prove beneficial for the city. As I will argue, Ecclesiazusae is a far cry from this. The womEn in 5 E.K. MoodiE, ‘Aristophanes, the Assemblywomen and the audiEncE: the politics of rapport’, CJ 107 (2012), 257–81, at 278. 6 The preoccupation with stErility and cEssation of reproduction is Evident throughout Lysistrata and becomEs the main motivation of the womEn to sEizE powEr (cf. 588–97, 648–52). On this topic sEE N. Tsoumpra, ‘Comic lEadership and powEr dynamics in Aristophanes’ (Diss., University of Oxford, 2014). 3 Ecclesiazusae abolish the institution of marriage, and creatE a chaos and a wild sExual disorder, which smacks of prostitution and an inability to reproducE. The years that intErvened betwEEn the production of Lysistrata and that of Ecclesiazusae make all the differencE for the fantastical portrayal of a world dominatEd by womEn, a world which now Enacts the nightmarish scEnario of an ungoverned and unrestrained femalE sExuality. It must be clEar by now that my reading falls into the dystopian camp. It focuses on the competition scEne betwEEn the threE old womEn and the young girl over Epigenes, which follows the application of Praxagora’s plan, in order to show that there are dark aspects to the way powEr relationships are transactEd betwEEn mEn and womEn in the new world. The analysis is divided into two parts. The first part argues that the old womEn are assimilatEd to agents of death and mythical femalE monstErs that prey on the young man, who is gradually EmasculatEd and finally reducEd to a statE of impotEncy and symbolic death. In the sEcond part I proposE that the old womEn and the young girl perform magical practicEs, such as the pronouncEmEnt of sEparation cursEs and ἀγωγή spells on stage, in order to satisfy their sExual cravings. Both the treatmEnt of the young man at the hands of the womEn and the control of magic practicEs by the womEn over the young man reveal somE alarming aspects of the new world, namEly stErility, impotEncy, and (figurative) death of the young and vital forcEs of the city. Such a dystopian reading propounds an Escapist fantasy politics of a darkly misogynistic sort. At the samE timE, howEver, Praxagora’s brave new world has somEthing to say about Aristophanes’ own world and that of his audiEncE. I will comE back to this point at the end of my analysis. 4 1. FEMALE MONSTERS AND THEIR MALE VICTIM Men are thoroughly humiliatEd in Ecclesiazusae, as is oftEn the casE in the ‘femalE’ plays of Aristophanes. Even before a man shows up on stage, all womEn’s referencEs to mEn sEEm to question their masculinity: Agyrrhius usEd to be a woman (102–3) and Epigonus looks like a woman (167–8); the most succEssful malE speakers are beliEved to have a woman’s rolE, sincE they assumE a passive sExual rolE (112–14). The EntrancE of the first malE charactEr, BlEpyrus, sEts the tone for how the young man will be latEr portrayed in the play.7 BlEpyrus shows up on stage as an involuntary transvestitE,8 who puts himsElf in the position of a pregnant woman and prays to the goddess of childbirth for assistancE, whilE he is squatting for reasons other than delivery: he wants to bring forth not an infant, but a pear (354–5, 361–2). The attEmpts at this rather unorthodox delivery remain unsuccEssful. BlEpyrus compares himsElf to a σκωραμὶς κωμῳδική (371), a comic chamberpot, which recEives ExcremEnt but cannot discharge it: he is stErilE.9 His impotEncy 7 D.D. LEitao, The Pregnant Male As Myth and Metaphor in Classical Greek literature (Cambridge, 2012), 147. 8 G. Compton-EnglE, Costume in the Comedies of Aristophanes (NEw York, 2015), 77–9. 9 A.H. SommErstEin, Ecclesiazusae (WarminstEr, 1998), 173 notEs that ‘it is likely, though not cErtain, that BlEpyrus’ prayer proves Effective […] whilE BlEpyrus aftEr much labour has given birth to a quantity of ExcremEnt, the AssEmbly under his wife’s guidancE has beEn giving birth to a new Athens’. HowEver, BlEpyrus does not find reliEf: ChremEs’ question and BlEpyrus’ answEr (372–3 οὗτος, τί ποιεῖς; οὔτι που χέζεις; ἐγώ; / οὐ δῆτ’ ἔτι γε μὰ τὸν Δί’, ἀλλ’ ἀνίσταμαι) refer to his unsuccEssful attEmpts, as previously the word 5 and stErility are stressEd sEveral timEs in the play.10 In the comic world, where sExuality is oftEn the driving forcE and sExual prowEss the most powErful malE wEapon, sExual death and impotEncy Equals (symbolic) death.11 IndeEd, the overtones of death are manifest when χέζοντα (322 οὐ γάρ με νῦν χέζοντά γ’ οὐδεὶς ὄψεται). Even if BlEpyrus was reliEved, the product of his labour would be most suggestive.