In The Eumenides and Agamemnon of The Oresteia trilogy, Aeschylus constructs an over-arching metaphor for elements of the new Athenian democracy. The chorus in each play represents the people who feel under-represented and disrespected, by the society's changing values. In The Eumenides, the chorus of Furies is frustrated with the younger gods and infringements on their power; in Agamemnon the chorus fears more the control of an effective woman in Clytemnestra rather than the leadership of fruitless Agamemnon. Both choruses take direct actions thought to ensure their prominence.
Agamemnon picks of the story eponymous Greek king following the conclusion of the Trojan War. In his absence, his wife Clytemnestra has assumed the throne, and the polis has flourished under her. However, as a woman, Clytemnestra is nonetheless seen as unsuited to continue her reign given the morays of Argos. The chorus of Agamemnon relates with Clytemnestra and the thematic frustration with the control of women. Consisting of the bitter old men who were not allowed to go to the Trojan War, the chorus is opposes Clytemnestra's leadership as a woman for the sake of their own pride. They are relieved by Agamemnon's return, and see it as their salvation from being Argos' "dishonored ones." (Agamemnon, Ln. 79) Therefore they spend the play working to critique and delegitimize her reign, ultimately calling for her death for by Orestes hand.
The chorus views Agamemnon's return as "justice com[ing] to birth." (Agamemnon, Ln. 1001) Their surprising willingness to accept the loss of an entire generation of young Greek men in exchange for Agamemnon's return to the throne leaves no doubt about how crucial they believe the perseverance of older structures of po...
... middle of paper ...
...gic is working ... I can feel the hate, the fury slip away." (The Eumenides, Ln. 907) This magic is realization that Athena's offer ensures their continuing respect despite the trial's outcome, and that by reconciling themselves to it, they will retain some power.
In both The Eumenides and Agamemnon the choruses relate significantly to the actions and characters in each tragedy. While the characteristics and constituents of each chorus differ, both represent the groups left behind in a new era of government. The completion of The Oresteia shows the transformation of power both within the context of the plays and contemporary Greek society which was changing to a new democratic system. The struggle to retain power and tradition in changing governments is consistent throughout history, and clearly exemplified through the battles of the choruses of The Oresteia.
Agamemnon survived the ten year long Trojan War, even as other great warriors such as Achilleus fell. Tales of the war are widespread and it is described by both its veterans and non-participants in glorified terms. Agamemnon is often singled out for leadership and accomplishments. Demodokos sings of the “famous actions/ of men on that venture” and “that lord of men, Agamemnon” while performing for Odysseus on Alkinoos.(VIII, 73-74, 77). Agamemnon stands out as one of “the leaders of the bronze- armored Achaians” who fought at Troy and is recognized as a major hero of the war (IV,496).
Odysseus and Agamemnon are heroes who fought side by side to take down the city of Troy during the Trojan War. In Homer’s The Odyssey, why is Agamemnon slaughtered when he arrives home while Odysseus returns to find his loved ones still waiting for him? The reasons for the heroes’ differing fates are the nature of their homecoming and the loyalty of their wives.
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.
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.
What Price Glory? was the title of a Maxwell Anderson play about World War I. Although the Oresteia deals with the period following a much different war, the same question can be asked of it. In the trilogy Aeschylus presents the reader with a stunning example of ancient Greek society, in which warrior ideals were firmly held, and glory in battle was considered the supreme good. The question of moral justification in the trilogy brings in many complex issues, but all of them revolve around the construction of Greek society and the role of different individuals in this system. Two of the most extraordinary characters are the personages of Agamemnon and his wife Clytemnestra. This couple confronts the reader with a myriad assortment of issues, but one of the most thought-provoking is the issue of justification. We are presented with two unnatural murders: that of Iphigeneia by her father Agamemnon, and later that of Agamemnon by Clytemnestra. It is very difficult to argue from merely these facts as to who was more justified in the killings. Many would say Clytemnestra because it was Agamemnon who began the whole situation, but others would argue that society forced Agamemnon into this position. These responses are based only on circumspect and superficial evidence and do not drive to the heart of the issue. To fully understand these characters and to answer the question of their justification one must view their actions in the context of the society in which they lived, and also the role of free-will or self-determination in this society. I will argue that although both characters were victims of the warrior society in which they lived, it was Clytemnestra who was more justified ...
The Chorus sing as Clytemnestra moves around the stage, lighting fires and unmoved to their appeals for news. Their song tells the history of the Greek expedition's problems as they set off for Troy. It would seem that, whilst uplifting the name of Agamemnon ("with the power of Zeus" 47) they also describe the death of Iphigenia with great pity ("gentle curving lips... her glance... wounding every murderer"). They describe his heartache ("pain both ways" 212) between both courses of action, whether to obey the oracle or save his daughter. But undeniably, the Chorus does not approve with what he did ("cause of all our grief" 222) and tell with great sorrow a flashback of Iphigenia singing at the feasts to Zeus ("transfixed with joy" 246). It is with this in our mind that we finally talk to Clytemnestra, the mother of the slaughtered child.
In Aeschylus’ Agamemnon there are many different opinions about what kind of king and commander Agamemnon was. Some argued that he was good, while others dispute that his motives were wrong. Clytemnestra, Agamemnon’s wife, gained a strong hatred for him, after he sacrificed his own daughter so he could go to war. Many believe that this was not necessary and could have been overcome. The chorus seems to agree with this to an extent, and feels that Agamemnon could have prayed and requested that he not sacrifice his daughter.
During the time of Euripides, approximately the second half of the fifth century B.C., it was a period of immense cultural crisis and political convulsion (Arrowsmith 350). Euripides, like many other of his contemporaries, used the whole machinery of the theater as a way of thinking about their world (Arrowsmith 349). His interest in particular was the analysis of culture and relationship between culture and the individual. Euripides used his characters as a function to shape the ideas of the play (Arrowsmith 359).
Clytemnestra has the ten years of the Trojan War to plan her revenge on Agamemnon. Upon his return Clytemnestra shows him some love. That love she showed quickly changes to rage and hatred when Clytemnestra she’s Agamemnon with his mistress Cassandra.
In this essay I intend to discuss how Aeschylus presents Clytaemnestra in the Oresteia and how he marks the extent to which traits of Clytaemnestra's character remain defiantly unchanged as she manipulates events and characters around her. Clytaemnestra is the only character who appears in all three plays in the trilogy, but despite her immense stage presence she remains a troublesome character to interpret due to the highly ambiguous nature of her words. I intend to show that the key to unlocking Clytaemnestra's manly heart lies in the fact that she hated Agamemnon, not simply because he had killed her child, nor because she loved Aegisthus, but out of a jealousy that was not a jealously of Cassandra, but of Agamemnon himself and his status as a man. Therefore, I intend to show how Aeschylus presents Clytemnestra as a character who ventures throughout the Oresteia to fight, think and talk like a man, but also plot with the wiles of a woman, act the role of faithful wife, and argue with passionate conviction of a bereaved mother.
“The body says what words cannot” is a quote by Martha Graham that relates to how dance can be used as creative practice that people can use to help understand different pieces of literature. Agamemnon is a play written by Aeschylus that affirms the gender roles society imposes on the characters in the play, specifically Clytaemenstra and Agamemnon, that can be interpreted in the creative art form of dance. Dance is an art form under appreciated by society and reinforces the gender roles illustrated in Agamemnon, through the idea that women are inferior to men in different aspects, which will be expressed and explained by the dance piece made.
In Euripides' 'Electra', there are a number of parts, speaking and non-speaking, that reveal the redeeming features of the otherwise pitiful characters. This essay will consider the roles of Orestes, Electra, Clytemnestra, the Peasant and Aegisthus (whose actions are only reported to us).
In the list of characters at the beginning of the play, the Chorus is stated to be a chorus of Corinthian Women. This draws the first link between them and Medea. The Chorus follows Medea on her journey through this play. They act as narrators on important occurrences in the play; however, they also act as a device Euripedes uses to influence the opinion of the audience. He does this by presenting to the audience a moral voice in the Chorus. The audience can relate to them, because the Chorus is in a neutral position in the play. They are definitely an integral part of the play, but their role is not so much to influence the actual plot of the play, but more to echo what has happened in the plot and the thoughts of the protagonists, and to suggest moral solutions the audience. The Chorus uses language which almost makes it seem that they are speaking from the perspective of the audience, and in doing this they are guiding the audience responses to what Euripedes wants it to be:
Throughout the Iliad, a conflict develops through the process of each chapter which rests on the surface over a Maiden. The disagreement is caused due to one person or the other feeling far more powerful or superior than the other and is left to sense as if they should receive what is rightfully theirs even if it is not a fair exchange. This conflict is seen between two leaders who view each other with different status: Agamemnon the Argive leader of the expedition to Troy, who had inherited the role of king through his father, and Achilles the leader of Myrmidons. As the dispute develops, it is apparent that the discord between Agamemnon and Achilles is more than something about women; it seems to be their mindset distracting them from having a dispute between their views on power, honour, glory and pride amongst themselves.
“‘Who walks his own high-handed way, disdaining/True righteousness and holy ornament; /Who falsely wins, all sacred things profaning; /Shall he escape his doomed pride’s punishment? /Zeus! If thou livest, all ruling, all-pervading, /Awake; old oracles are out of mind; /Apollo’s name denied, his glory fading; /There is no godliness in all mankind.’” ( Sewall, The Vision of Tragedy,