Employing an advanced technique, Aeschylus fills his tragedy, Oresteia: The Agamemnon, with layers of multiplicity. Essentially, multiplicity in this tragedy entails using dialogues containing several meanings to convey truths about Greek society and to shed light on situations outside the current action. Aeschylus’ use of this dramatic tool contributes to the success of the novel and adds depth to the meaning of the characters’ conversations. Furthermore, it affords the audience an opportunity to personally interpret the underlying message is. Aeschylus does not use multiplicity as embellishment; rather, he uses it to present a developed argument enhanced by the characters’ experiences and positions in society.
While the majority of the characters
…show more content…
contribute to this dramatic effect to some extent, Clytemnestra and the Chorus are the primary participants in the demonstration of multiplicity. The perspective of a powerful female in the queen of Argos is paramount to avoid solely male opinions, which the chorus provides. Both characters contribute both individually and in response to one another. The scenes in which the chorus and queen interact are the most powerful because there are two sides to each issue discussion. Aeschylus did this intentionally, since they are the two characters that engage in conversation the most. This phenomenon ebbs and flows throughout the tragedy. It is not always present, and therefore the instances in which it is present are increasingly impactful. The cycle reaches its peak toward the middle and the end of the tragedy. Clytemnestra’s speech upon Agamemnon’s return, the choral songs, and the exchange between the Chorus and Clytemnestra are some of the scenes with the highest concentrations of multiplicity. Aeschylus carefully chose how to use this literally tool in a manner that was effective without becoming overbearing. A large portion of The Oresteia: Agamemnon deals with how to determine and achieve justice, particularly regarding the murder of another member of society. What is the appropriate punishment for murder, and how does such a violent action pollute and affect the surrounding society? The chorus’ last song attempts to answer this inquiry by contemplating the ethicality of murder and comparing Agamemnon’s murder of Iphigeneia to Clytemnestra’s murder of Agamemnon. In the end, there is no decision that will always hold true; however, the chorus surmises that “it is hard to judge” (Aeschylus ln. 1561). This broad statement can be condensed into the idea that without knowing the entire story, casting blame becomes difficult. The multiplicity herein lies in the surrounding phrases that discuss how each individual perpetrator should receive individualized punishment. The use of multiplicity helps decipher these dilemma’s both for the characters in the play as well as for society. The scene between the chorus and Clytemnestra when they discuss the appropriate retribution for killing her husband contemplates the ethics and morality resulting from such as crime.
Furthermore, it addresses in what way the queen’s actions disrupted the normal flow of society. After the chorus accuses her of polluting the city with her inhumane act, Clytemnestra protests this treatment and calls into question why the chorus “raised no opposition to this man”, referring to Agamemnon and his murder of Iphigeneia (Aeschylus ln. 1413). By incorporating this major plot issue into the conversation between the chorus and queen, Aeschylus unearths various opinions regarding this specific situation, but also the overall perception of “polluting acts” and how they affect Greek values (Aeschylus ln. 1421). The remainder of the banter between the queen and the elders of the chorus focuses on the difference between the two murders. Pollution in Greek society was taken quite seriously because they prided themselves on the appearance the put forth to other cities. An act of murder negatively impacts a community, and so often the citizens rise against the murderer: either retaliating with murder or exile. In this case, Clytemnestra convinced the chorus that “worthy was what he suffered” and she remained in power (Aeschylus ln. 1527). This ending unfolded through the multiplicities supplied in this section because the words of the chorus and queen were outwardly simple, but upon further …show more content…
examination they divulged a lot of history regarding the pattern of Greek justice and atonement. Another significant component of the tragedy is the role that women are expected to have. In general, ancient Greek society perceived women as submissive and weaker than men. Women were not to have their own opinions nor voice opposition to male leaders or their husbands. The Agamemnon challenges the typical role of women with a strong personality in Clytemnestra. She, like Penelope in The Odyssey, assumes control of the land while her husband fights in the Trojan War. This position of power and independence defies the quiet role that society expects females to undertake. Both the chorus alone and Clytemnestra address the role of women in society. The chorus compares Clytemnestra speech to that of “a prudent man” and criticizes women as being “too persuasive” and having opinions that “comes to nothing: (Aeschylus ln. 351, 485). By saying these things about women, the chorus chastises Clytemnestra’s leadership and indicates the compared to a male, people will not hear a woman’s words. This social construct reflects beyond the situation in Argos and affects all Greek women. Clytemnestra serves as hope that women will not always conform to the wishes of society and will work toward sexual equality. Later in the play, Clytemnestra herself addresses the issue of the female presence by criticizing those who told her that “indeed it is like a woman to let her feelings carry her away” (Aeschylus ln.
592). Additionally, when Agamemnon returns, his wife greets him and pressures him into walking on precious tapestries meant for the gods. A few multiplicities indicate suspicion within the home. First, the tapestries are a deep-red color, like blood. By walking on this fabric, he is essentially walking through a trail of his blood to his death which awaits him inside. More importantly, the fact that Clytemnestra persuaded her husband by instigating competition through remarks about “what Priam would have done” and his “judgement” draw upon Clytemnestra’s deceptive side and show her power as a woman (Aeschylus ln. 934). The multiplicity in this instance is not a hidden meaning of words, but a subtle advancement of women in
society. Clytemnestra’s defiance of those who rebuked her shows that she refuses to act the way others choose to see her. Throughout the tragedy, Aeschylus utilizes multiplicity both in the Chorus and Clytemnestra to show the discrimination between the sexes. On the surface, these statements primarily describe the wife of Agamemnon; however, they hold significance for the majority of women in Greek society. The multiplicities surrounding femininity work well because both sides contribute thoughts: male (chorus) and female (the queen). Clearly each side has a bias, but when combined, it is obvious that Aeschylus tries to show that Greek society constructs gender roles in an unjust manner. Athenians created Greek tragedy with the intent to attract the masses and actively involve the audience: multiplicity heightens this effect by appealing to the inner beliefs of the members of society. Aeschylus demonstrates superior control over his language as he manipulates words to impact both the plot in the tragedy as well as make the issues of murder and gender roles relatable to the audience. Aeschylus carefully crafts the speech patterns of the chorus and Clytemnestra to invoke multiple meanings and play a significant role in determining solutions to the issues presented. By changing the number of referents throughout the play, the multiplicities have a deeper effect on the audience and highlights the important aspects of Grecian society called into question. Eloquently executed, Aeschylus’ use of multiplicity helps explain pertinent issues such as the justified consequence for murder and the role of women in society. As with several Greek tragedies, the initial installment of The Oresteia contains heightened emotions and leads one to ponder if society needs to change, and, if so, how to enact that change.
It is without fail that throughout Aeschylus’ trilogy, The Oresteia, the presence of light and dark can be found in the characters, the plot and the themes. The trilogy follows the House of Atreus its emergence from darkness into the light. However, the light and darkness are often presented symbolically throughout the trilogy and often appear as pairs, which are constantly at odds with each other like Clytaemnestra versus Orestes and Apollo verses the Furies. Light and dark are not defined, nor strictly categorized, as good against evil, rather they move towards the primal versus civilized nature of the culture, and the two merging, and moving into a new era of Greek civilization. The dark is not pure evil, the light is not pure good; they are a coming together of two different times, and because of that transition, from primitive to civilized, tension builds and breaks, which causes the tragic events of The Oresteia throughout the three plays: Agamemnon, The Libation Bearers, and The Eumenides.
When a person is accused of a crime they are either found innocent or guilty. This is the basic idea of justice and it is what many feel needs to happen if someone has done something controversial. In the play The Oresteia by Aeschylus, the story of Clytemnestra guilt or innocents is questioned. She does many things that people are not too happy with and those controversial actions throughout the story, mainly in the first part Agamemnon get her into the trouble. As we explore the case that builds against her innocents by exploring the killings of Agamemnon and Cassandra and the boastful expression about the killings.
Antigone is a play about the tension caused when two individuals have conflicting claims regarding law. In this case, the moral superiority of the laws of the city, represented by Creon, and the laws of the gods, represented bt Antigone. In contrast, Oedipus The King is driven by the tensions within Oedipus himself. That play both begins and concludes within the public domain, the plot being driven by the plague that troubles the city, and which is so graphically brought to life by the Priest. In both Antigone (ll179-82) and Oedipus The King (ll29-31) the city is likened to a storm tossed ship, and it cannot be merely coincidence that Oedipus The King was written at the beginning of the Peloponnesian War, a time when Athens itself was suffering the effects of plague. Oedipus The King reaches its climax with a now blinded Oedipus daring to show himself to the people of Thebes, forgetting that he is no longer the leader of the state. In Antigone, it is Creons abuse of absolute power that leads to his tragic downfall. Whilst Oedipus determinedly tried to get to the root of his peoples ills, ultimately discovering that he was in fact the cause of them, Creon morphs from a supposedly caring leader into a tyrannical despot, eager to take the law into his own hands. It is the actions of Antigone that helps to bring about Creons fall from grace, as her steadfast refusal to accept th...
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.
Aeschylus. Aeschylus, The Oresteia A New Translation for the Theater by Aeschylus,. Translated by Wendy Doniger and David Greene. University of Chicago Press, 1989.
Aeschylus' The Oresteia features two characters burdened by seemingly hopeless decisions. First is Agamemnon, king of Argos, whose army was thwarted by the goddess, Artemis. Agamemnon was faced with the decision to call off the army's sail to Troy, and thus admit defeat and embarrassment, or to sacrifice his daughter, Iphigenia, to satisfy Artemis whom had stopped the winds to delay Agamemnon's fleet. Second is Orestes, son of Agamemnon, who was given the choice by Apollo to avenge his father's murder, thus committing matricide, or face a series of torturous consequences. Although both Agamemnon and Orestes were faced with major dilemmas, their intentions and their characters are revealed through their actions to be markedly different.
The Theme of Corrupted Xenia in Aeschylus' "Oresteia" Paul Roth Mnemosyne , Fourth Series, Vol. 46, Fasc. 1 (Feb., 1993), pp. 1-17
1 Aeschylus, The Oresteia: A New Translation for the Theatre, Translated by David Grene and Wendy Doniger-O'Flaherty (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989).
The Ancient Greek poet Aeschylus’ play The Agamemnon is a tragic play about the House of Atreus and its curse. In this play two characters, Agamemnon and Clytemnestra, were both faced with difficult decisions. However, neither of their decisions are justified since their motives were not pure and they murdered their family members and expected to witness no retaliation. Agamemnon sacrificed his innocent daughter, Iphigenia, in order to lead his fleet to Troy, which was unjust and disrespectful in the eyes of Artemis. Clytemnestra killed Agamemnon for power over Argos, even though initially Power is an unjust motive and not a motivation of the blood feud, therefore Clytemnestra's only protection is extraneous. Both Agamemnon and Clytemnestra
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.
The play was considered comic by the ancient Athenians because of its rhyming lyricism, its song and dance, its bawdy puns, but most of all because the notion and methods of female empowerment conceived in the play were perfectly ridiculous. Yet, as is the case in a number of Aristophanes’ plays, he has presented an intricate vision of genuine human crisis. In true, comic form Aristophanes superficially resolves the play’s conflicts celebrating the absurdity of dramatic communication. It is these loose threads that are most rife with tragedy for modern reader. By exploring an ancient perspective on female domesticity, male political and military power, rape, and efforts to maintain the integrity of the female body, we can liberate our modern dialogue.
The Chorus, in this play, guides the audience. In the end, it is up to the individual as to what reaction they have to the play, but the Chorus is there to, in a way makes this reaction more complicated. One could leave the play totally condemning Medea, but the Chorus display’s Medea in a way that makes the audience sympathise with her, and so the moral conclusions that need to be come to side, become more complex. The audience has to base their reaction to Medea on what crimes they have seen her commit, and on what they have heard of her through the Chorus. Their integral part in the play acts in many ways, to follow, revise, and extend the plot of the play, and to influence the opinions and sympathies of the audience. It is a literary, and dramatic device that Euripedes uses, and uses well, to help portray a tragedy, and also a moralistic play, in which the Chorus is the voice that provides the morals.
In Aeschylus’ The Agamemnon, Agamemnon and Clytemnestra have to make tough decisions throughout the play, decisions they believe are justified. The actions of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra are not justified because they are caused by their blinding hubris and desire for power. Agamemnon makes the choice to kill his daughter just so he could lead his troops to Troy. Clytemnestra kills her husband, not just for revenge, but for his position and power as king of Mycenae. They make selfish choices and do not believe they will be punished for them. By exposing their true motives, Aeschylus makes it clear they are not justified in their actions.
The character Clytemnestra develops dramatically over the course of the play. When Ag first arrives back home she presents herself as very sweet and innocent; “And he will find a home a wife as faithful as he left.” (662) She furthermore tries to convince him of how much she suffered without him there. Her goal by covering up her true feelings is to gain his trust. Clytemnestra makes the remark,“At a cruel message noosed my throat in a hung cord” in reference to when she was fearful of bad news from the war. (921) This act of innocence is all in hope to try to convince him to walk upon this red tapestry she has laid out for him. By him doing this she knows it will disgrace the gods and leave him at fault. This devious act of disloyalty to her
Agamemnon is the first part of the trilogy known as the Oresteia. Agamemnon is a story where the main character sacrifices his own daughter to a God, Artemis to win a battle and then his wife revenge him for the sacrifice. The concept of fate plays an important role in the tilogy Agamemnon which led to the tragic endings of the play. According to the meaning of fate it means the development of events outside a person’s control, regarded as predetermined by a super natural power. Fate is what send Agamemnon to the war with Menelaus to fight against Paris, fate is what predetermined Agamemnon to sacrifice his own blood for the sake of his ship and companions and fate is what determined Cassandra his wife to plot to kill him and to revenge him for her daughter.