The peloponnesian war was a difficult time for the people of Athens. Along with the general discomforts of war, the Athenians also experienced famine, disease, and political unrest. These factors influenced Aristophanes during his productions of Lysistrata and Acharnians. When performed Aristophanes made sure to include some political agenda lines as well as some comedy so as to keep it light. This form was used to undermine the support of democracy in Athens by showing the audience the folly of the current system and in places propose how it could be different. It was no mystery to the Athenians how war was going to affect their society. As the war dragged on and general support began to wane due to disease and death the people were subjected …show more content…
However in Lysistrata the women needed to get involved to resolve the war between the Spartans and the Athenians. This was a huge red flag for the audience in Athens because of the Athenian attitude towards women. Treated as almost a second class citizen to men, the women in Lysistrata took an active role in persuading the men of Athens to find peace with the Spartans by way of abstinence. Particularly Lysistrata got a group of women together that disliked the current suffering caused by the war and convinced them to not sleep with their husbands until they decided to work towards peace.”...imagine. We’re at home, beautifully made up, and we walk around the house wearing sheer lawn shifts… and we keep our distance … they’ll make peace soon enough”(p.146). Using their sexuality as a weapon towards the men in Lysistrata the women effectively forced the men to change their political attitudes. This further proved to undermine the democracy by showing the audience that even the women noticed that the current system was causing problems and it needed to be changed. So much so that women were willing to make their husbands suffer until an agreeable result was achieved. Once an agreement was achieved between both sides the Spartans and Athenians drank together and celebrated their new found peace. This gave the audience another taste of what it would have been like if the war was over. Using the contrast
nature, and women's legal rights. & nbsp; Albeit in Lysistrata the women were shown as revolutionaries rising up against the men, women in classical Greece were never like that. Aristophanes created the play as a comedy, showing how the world might be in the times of the Peloponnesian war if women tried to do something. It was the women's job to stay home and tend to the house, and never leave, unlike they did in the play. women were shown as revolutionaries rising up against the men, women in classical Greece was never like that. & nbsp; The activities of women in Classical Athens were confined to "bearing children, spinning and weaving, and managing the domestic arrangements. No wandering in the beautiful streets of them. " The suppression of women went so far as to divide the house into separate areas for males and females. While the women stayed home, the men were usually out fighting, and when they weren't. fighting, they were entertaining their friends and having sexual favors.
The major theme that comes out clearly in the text is the theme of warfare and glorious death. Right from the beginning of his book, Thucydides, writes the story of the war between the Athenians and the Spartans. The theme of warfare is therefore evidenced by the Athenians preparation, the author says, ‘…beginning at the moment that it broke out, and believing that it would be a great war and more worthy of relation than any other that had preceded.’ This shows that the war that was to start was a unique one that had never happened before in history, in Thucydides opinion. This to me shows a bit of an exaggeration but more importantly this dramatic portrayal of the Peloponnesian war shows that war was seen as a part of life in Athens. In the text, we don’t find Thucydides describing war as being dark, catastrophic, or destructive which is how we would depict war nowadays. Instead we find him describing the war as this huge event that will go down in history as the greatest war to be fought.
The book written by Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, contains two controversial debates between distinguished speakers of Athens. The two corresponding sides produce convincing arguments which can be taken as if produced as an honest opinion or out of self-interest. The two debates must be analyzed separately in order to conclude which one and which side was speaking out of honest opinion or self-interest, as well as which speakers are similar to each other in their approach to the situation.
The Peloponnesian War could easily be considered one of the most life changing and significant wars that occurred in classical Greece. It was fought between two empires which originally stood together against a common enemy, the Persians. However, once this common enemy was defeated, Sparta and Athens began to become great rivals vying for control of Greece. This resulted in the First and Second Peloponnesian Wars, which saw the rise and fall of the Athenian Empire. Sparta eventually rose to be the victor with the assistance of their former enemy Persia, but the era city-states would not live on for very much longer. The Peloponnesian Wars should be studied, because it details the rise and fall of one of the greatest city-states in Greek history.
The causes of the Peloponnesian War proved to be too great between the tension-filled stubborn Greek city-states of Athens and Sparta. As Thucydides says in Karl Walling’s article, “Never had so many human beings been exiled, or so much human blood been shed” (4). The three phases of the war, which again, are the Archidamian war, the Sicilian Expedition and the Decelean war, show the events that followed the causes of the war, while also showing the forthcoming detrimental effects that eventually consumed both Athens and eventually Sparta effectively reshaping Greece.
Aristophanes’ significant contributions in the development of the theater arts and his standing in the Athenian community are well documented. His hilarious comedy, Lysistrata, reflects the disgust with war prevalent at Athens after the disastrous expedition to Sicily. It is ripe with sexual innuendo and provides much insight into the timeliness of human sexuality, desire, and the war of the sexes, yet it was intended to make a political statement regarding the folly of Athenian military aggression. Aristophanes was not suggesting that a sex strike might be an effective means of ending the Peloponnesian War, more likely that the reasons for the war itself were suspect. Lysistrata’s scheme to force the men of Greece to the peace table could never have been successful. Property concerns, gender roles, and the sexuality of Athenian men prevented Athenian women from exerting the necessary political influence.
...tics. Her function in society as a heroine is portrayed throughout the play. However, the reader must consider that the play is representative of a fictitious comedy and offered no relief from war "the war continued for seven more exhausting years, until Athens's last fleet was defeated" (Page 467, Paragraph 2). Furthermore, Lysistrata is the "mastermind" of the "sex strike;" however, she does not take part in it other than directing orders. Also, due to her apparent lack of sexual desire, Lysistrata is given more respect by the men of Athens. The play's actions, characters and Lysistrata's actions all indicate her demonstration of a bold leader, unrepresentative of a traditional Athenian woman.
Aristophane’s Lysistrata is a flawed classic filled with the power struggle between man vs. woman. It is entirely focused and written from the male perspective, in which male-privilege dominated and disregarded the women’s outlook entirely. This “classic” is full of misogynistic perspectives, and should be disregarded as a great piece in Athenian literature.
...edicted it would, and without a leader like him willing to direct them away from this mindset rather than pander to it to get votes, the political constitution of the city was doomed to dissolve. Speaking of the revolution in Corcyra, which occurred after the Athenian decision to spare Mytilene but before its destruction of Melos, Thucydides wrote, “In peace and prosperity states and individuals have better sentiments, because they do not find themselves suddenly confronted with imperious necessities; but war takes away the easy supply of daily wants and so proves a rough master that brings most men’s characters to a level with their fortunes” (III.82.2). This was precisely the change Athens underwent, and the cause of its eventual demise.
“Lysistrata” is a tale which is centered around an Athenian woman named Lysistrata and her comrades who have taken control of the Acropolis in Athens. Lysistrata explains to the old men how the women have seized the Acropolis to keep men from using the money to make war and to keep dishonest officials from stealing the money. The opening scene of “Lysistrata” enacts the stereotypical and traditional characterization of women in Greece and also distances Lysistrata from this overused expression, housewife character. The audience is met with a woman, Lysistrata, who is furious with the other women from her country because they have not come to discuss war with her. The basic premise of the play is, Lysistrata coming up with a plan to put an end to the Peloponnesian War which is currently being fought by the men. After rounding up the women, she encourages them to withhold sex until the men agree to stop fighting. The women are difficult to convince, although eventually they agree to the plan. Lysistrata also tells the women if they are beaten, they may give in, since sex which results from violence will not please the men. Finally, all the women join Lysistrata in taking an oath to withhold sex from their mates. As a result of the women refraining from pleasing their husbands until they stop fighting the war, the play revolves around a battle of the sexes. The battle between the women and men is the literal conflict of the play. The war being fought between the men is a figurative used to lure the reader to the actual conflict of the play which is the battle between men and women.
Aristophanes’ Greek comedy, Lysistrata has been translated many times. The key to a good translation is finding one that models what the current time frame is looking for. What would a student attending college in the year 1912, think of the translation used in our 2011 literature class? What about the choices of a literature professor, in the year 1925, when teaching this play? The tone and speech of these translations can be very different, yet mean the same thing. Lysistrata has been altered throughout time to fit the meaning and the language of the translator; however, the theme remains to be a comedy based around the main idea of antiwar. The meaning can be different for everyone. Lysistrata can support the antiwar methods of a present-day protestor or it can just be a means to entertain a person looking for a laugh. The key to making this work readable to the modern world is to pick a translation that is best suited for the present time.
In the plays Medea and Hippolytus, both by Euripides, the female psyche is a point of focus that is not explored in many other Greek tragedies. Through these plays, we can discover the way women were viewed in Ancient Greek society, as well as their concerns. We can also pay attention to how women are portrayed differently between the two plays. In Medea and Hippolytus, the women we spend the most time with are Medea and Phaedra. These women have vastly different values, but the cunning and determination they use to get their way are not as different as one may believe.
Lysistrata is portrayed as a typical commander of war that gives orders and does not take part in the war. While being the mastermind behind the sex strike, she is able to separate her self from the other women in her ability to resist her attraction for men. The women are used as pawns by this cunning and powerful, Lysistrata, who is victorious in establishing peace in Greece.
As can be expected from pioneer governmental institutions, Athenian democracy was not perfect. In fact it was far from it. It resulted in the establishment of poor policies by aggressive populists who sought "...private ambition and private profit...which were bad both for the Athenians themselves and their allies." (Thucydides). These self interested populist leaders with personal gain in mind established extensive internal political instability "...by quarrelling among themselves [and] began to bring confusion into the policy of the state." (Thucydides). Repeated opportunities to accept terms of peace after the battles of Pylos (425), Arginusae (406) and Aegospotami (405) were ignored by the inefficient Athenian demos eventually resulting in the devastation of the once dominant city-state. Internal political strife can also be attribu...
... convey deeper themes of life and death, the struggles between power and class structure and also the societal differences between men and women. Aristophanes uses humor to hook his audience into his play, and then undermines the surface humor with much bigger thematic issues. If this play had simply been about women withholding sex for other reasons such as wanting more money for shopping or other frivolous ideas it would not then be considered a satiric comedy. Satire requires more than physical humor. An issue must be raised such as the life and death theme that is seen in the war in Lysistrata, and a solution must then be made. Aristophanes created the women in the beginning to be bickering, unintelligent, and self-centered people. But in the end it was their idea and compromise that ended the war.