Introduction:-
Since Sophocles and Euripides’s tragedies Electra and Orestes got so much success, name and received great critical acclaim they have been extensively approached and discussed in terms of characterization, themes, symbols, plot, incestuous love, demolition, betrayal and especially lamentation. For instance, Vengeance is the soul of the both plays and it is largely discussed as major themes of the play. But its connection with the tragedy of characters is far away better to be discussed. It arises towards dramatic conflict and it brings out the real sight of the characters and becomes the reason behind of tragedy in these two masterpieces of Ancient Greek drama. So vengeance is the core of these plays because of its major role in the action of the plays. Sophocles has narrated in one of the lines of his play “Electra” and they clearly show relationship between vengeance and dramatic conflict and also they give the clue that vengeance will take the play towards tragedy.
“In darkness, and his foes shall not again/render him for blood for blood in amplest penalty” (277-248).
Euripides and Sophocles both wrote on the story of Electra but Sophocles mainly focused on Orestes while Euripides’s focal point was to depict the miseries of Electra. The plot was same but they fabricated in a very different way that is why we can draw a comparison of both plays and this research is based on a comparative study of both texts Electra and Orestes. Basically the vengeance is the purpose of Electra and Orestes life; in Electra it becomes the source of dramatic conflict and further in Orestes this conflict leads towards tragedy. Because of dramatic conflict vengeance becomes one of the important thematic implications of the plays...
... middle of paper ...
...th dramatic conflict through a comparative study for the first time.
.
References:-
• Belsey, Catherine. A Guide to Critical Practice .Lahore: New kitab Mehal, 2004. Print
• Carson, Anne, Electra. New York: oxford university press, 2oo1. Press
• Camus. Albert, The Outsider. Great Britain: Hamaish Hamilton, 1982. Press
• C.Storey, Ian and Allen, Arlene, A guide to Ancient Greek Drama. USA: Blackwell publishing, 2005. Print
• Electra/symbolism.Gradesavor.15 July 2013
.
• Electra/historical.background.enotes.18 July 2013
< http://www.enotes.com.html>
• Peck,John and Nisetich, Frank. Euripides Orestes. New York: Oxford university press, 1995.
• Shakespeare. William. Hamlet. London: penguin popular classics, 1994. Print
• Shakespeare. William. Romeo and Juliet. London: penguin classics, 1994. Print
“This, by his voice, should be a Montague. Fetch me my rapier, boy. What dares the slave come hither, cover’d with an antic face, To fleer and scorn at our solemnity? Now, by the stock and honour of my kin, To strike him dead I hold it not a sin.” (Shakespeare, page 54).
Sophocles' Oedipus Tyrannus can be argued that it is related loosely to Rita Dove's The Darker Face of the Earth. This comparative and contrasting characteristics that can be seen within both plays make the reader/audience more aware of imagery, the major characters, plot, attitudes towards women, and themes that are presented from two very different standpoints. The authors Sophocles and Dove both have a specific goal in mind when writing the two plays. In this paper I will take a closer look of the two, comparing and contrasting the plays with the various elements mentioned previously.
At first glance, the picture of justice found in the Oresteia appears very different from that found in Heraclitus. And indeed, at the surface level there are a number of things which are distinctly un-Heraclitean. However, I believe that a close reading reveals more similarities than differences; and that there is a deep undercurrent of the Heraclitean world view running throughout the trilogy. In order to demonstrate this, I will first describe those ways in which the views of justice in Aeschylus' Oresteia and in Heraclitus appear dissimilar. Then I will examine how these dissimilarities are problematized by other information in the Oresteia; information which expresses views of justice very akin to Heraclitus. Of course, how similar or dissimilar they are will depend not only on one's reading of the Oresteia, but also on how one interprets Heraclitus. Therefore, when I identify a way in which justice in the Oresteia seems different from that in Heraclitus, I will also identify the interpretation of Heraclitus with which I am contrasting it. Defending my interpretation of Heraclitean justice as such is beyond the scope of this essay. However I will always refer to the particular fragments on which I am basing my interpretation, and I think that the views I will attribute to him are fairly non-controversial. It will be my contention that, after a thorough examination of both the apparent discrepancies and the similarities, the nature of justice portrayed in the Oresteia will appear more deeply Heraclitean than otherwise. I will not argue, however, that there are therefore no differences at all between Aeschylus and Heraclitus on the issue of justice. Clearly there are some real ones and I will point out any differences which I feel remain despite the many deep similarities.
In Aeschylus' trilogy, the Greeks' justice system went through a transformation from old to new ways. In the beginning of the trilogy, the characters settle their matters, both personal and professional, with vengeance. Vengeance is when someone is harmed or killed, and either the victim, or someone close to them takes revenge on the criminal. This matter is proven in the trilogy numerous times. For example, Clytemnestra murders Agamemnon as revenge for his sacrifice of their daughter Iphigeneia. Along those same lines, in the second part of the trilogy, Choephoroe, Orestes, who is Agamemnon son, murders Clytemnestra and Aegisthus. He does this in order to gain revenge on them for killing his father. It was by this way that people would deal with conflict, and it was thought to be not only a justice system, but also a honorable and fair. In fact, one of the principal purposes of the first play of the trilogy is to force us to recognize that justice based on revenge creates special difficulties, which in turn cannot be solved. It does not solve the problems that it is meant to, but only causes more problems that are even larger. As the third and last part of the trilogy begins, the system begins to evolve and change from vengeance to genuine justice. Instead of getting revenge on Orestes and killing him, they decide to put him on trial and have a jury decide whether or not he sho...
In the ancient myths from the Aegean seas, much political theory is derived. Lessons on the dangers associated with monarchical political forms are brought to light. The connection between gender and power along with violence, war and necessity raise questions to enact a democracy and depersonalize the government.
Ingri and Edgar Parin D’alaure’s. Book of Greek Myths. New York: Bantam Dowbleday Dell Publishing Group, 1962.
...us the King. In Robert W. Corrigan (Ed.), Classical Tragedy Greek and Roman (pp. 245-251). New York, NY: Applause Theatre Book Publishers.
In Sophocles' most famous Theban play consisting of two parts, "Oedipus the King" and "Antigone", both parts are necessary in understanding some of the things that happened around them, and what type of man had raised Antigone. She is the main character in the play of “Antigone”.
Aeschylus, was a master dramatist - he liked to portray conflict between persons, human or divine, or between principles.1 His trilogy of plays, the Oresteia, develops many conflicts that must be resolved during the action of the Eumenides, the concluding play of the trilogy. The central theme of the Oresteia is justice (dike) and in dealing with questions of justice, Aeschylus at every stage involves the gods.2 The Oresteia's climactic conflict in the Eumenides revolves around justice and the gods - opposing conceptions of justice and conflicting classes of gods. This essay will describe and discuss these conflicts and, more importantly, the manner in which they are resolved so that the play, and indeed the entire trilogy, might reach a satisfactory conclusion.
Worthen, W. B. (2000). Oedipus the King. The Harcourt Brace anthology of drama (3rd ed., pp.
Myers, H. A. (1949). Aristotle's study of tragedy. Educational Theatre Journal, 1(2), 115. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1290192594?accountid=12085
The cyclic thread of vengeance runs like wild fire through the three plays in Aeschylus’s Oresteia. This thread, with its complexity of contemporary and universal implications lends itself quite well to – in fact, almost necessitates – deeply interested study. While a brief summary of the Oresteia will inevitably disregard some if not much of the trilogy’s essence and intent, on the positive side it will establish a platform of characters, events, and motives with which this paper is primarily concerned. As such, I begin with a short overview of the Oresteia and the relevant history that immediately precedes it.
This paper aims to study two significant playwrights, Sophocles and Euripides, and compare their respective attitudes by examining their plays in respect to plot and character structures. To achieve this goal, the paper is organized into two main sections. In the first section, we provide a brief biography of both Sophocles and Euripides. The second and last section includes summaries of Sophocles’ Electra and Euripides’ Electra which were based on same essentials and give an opportunity to observe the differences of the playwrights. This section also includes the comparisons that are made by our observations about the plays.
Aristotle. Poetics. Trans. Gerald F. Else. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 1967. Dorsch, T. R., trans. and ed. Aristotle Horace Longinus: Classical Literary Criticism. New York: Penguin, 1965. Ley, Graham. The Ancient Greek Theater. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1991. Reinhold, Meyer. Classical Drama, Greek and Roman. New York: Barrons, 1959.
Swann, Darius L. "Indian and Greek Drama: Two Definitions." Comparative Drama 3.2 (1969): 110-9. Web. 5 Apr. 2014.