Analysis of Euripides Hippolytus - Assignment Example

TMA 02 Q: Read the following extract from Euripides’ Hippolytus and in not more than 500 words explore its significance for the interpretation of Phaedra’s role in the play and the myth. [Extract] A: In this extract from Euripides’s Hippolytus, Phaedra is announcing her decision to commit suicide. This is a crucial point in the narrative as it heralds the death of one of the protagonists and is turning point for the progress of the rest of the play. The declaration is also important as Phaedra reveals that she intends to use her suicide to harm Hippolytus also. Her purpose in leaving the incriminating letter behind is possibly to teach Hippolytus a lesson for what she considers to be his arrogance. An important word in Greek tragedy, ‘sôphrosunê’, is used in this extract. Derived from ‘saos’ and ‘phren’, meaning ‘healthy’ and ‘mind’ respectively, this word in its broadest sense means a sound, healthy mind (Block 1, 1.9, 36). In various contexts, however, the connotation of this word may change. In Line 667 of the play, Hippolytus uses the word in condemning all women, asking them to control their sôphrosunê, presumably their excessive sexual desires. Later, in this extract, Phaedra uses the word in an entirely different sense. When she says ‘he shall learn what restraint is’, she uses the word sôphrosunê to mean restraint of temper and morality, rather than restraint of sexual desires (Block 1, 1.9, 37). This speech, in my opinion, allows the reader or viewer of the play to sympathise with Phaedra. The bitterness she feels at having been rejected by Hippolytus, the desire to be avenged, although disturbing, is a familiar one. Her own recognition of her vanquished state – ‘a cruel love will bring me low’ – serves to make her position more pitiable than repellent. The viewer will also remember that Phaedra initially tries to resist Aphrodite’s designs. At the beginning, Phaedra would rather starve herself than reveal her shameful love for Hippolytus. Furthermore, it is not her who brings about the catastrophe but the interference of the nurse. Hippolytus, with his blustering denunciation of all women, foolish scorn for Aphrodite and tactless dealing with his father, is not likely to evoke the sympathies of the audience (Davie, 2003). The speech follows another line of Phaedra where she says she would rather do anything than bring shame upon her family and home. This reveals another motive for her to kill herself, and a motive less vengeful. That she dies of shame brought on by circumstances beyond her control is evident and is another reason for the audience to sympathise with her state. Phaedra’s nobility too is preserved in this extract. Despite the damning circumstances that threaten and persecute her to the point of committing suicide, Phaedra uses whatever agency she can garner, the last iota of her pride, to rein in the pride of her tormentor. This assertion of her selfhood at the end reinstates some of her lost nobility and heightens the pity of the audience. (467 words) Q. ‘The Hippolytus myth suggests that there are no limits to how much ancient writers and artists could alter myth’ Discuss. A. Hippolytus provides clear evidence of how myth can be transformed, extended or truncated to suit the needs of individual writers. The writer Ovid highlights the significance of Phaedra’s letter in the play; he and Apollodorus give Phaedra the greater initiative. On the other hand, Euripides and Hyginus focus more on Hippolytus himself. Naupactia, Telestes and Cinesias emphasise Hippolytus’s return to life (Section 1.4). Richard Buxton, in his study of myth in Greek tragedy, poses the question: ‘What happens in Greek tragedies?’ One of the first claims Buxton makes is that Greek tragedians do not use mythology to retell heroic exploits. Instead, the downfall of the heroes is noted, especially in the ‘disruptions and dilemmas’ generated in the household because of their heroic exploits (Secondary Source 1.1). For instance, in Hippolytus, we do not hear of how courageously Theseus overcame the Minotaur. We are shown instead, the wrath incurred on his son and his family for disrespecting the goddess Aphrodite. Buxton suggests therefore, that Greek tragedy used mythology primarily to reveal the ‘underside’ of heroism. This phenomenon of the writers altering the myth can be observed across a wide spectrum of Greek tragedies. Narratives about great heroes like Hercules, Oedipus, Theseus, Agamemnon and others have dealt with their heroic exploits and triumphs over monsters and ogres and of their valour and charisma in war. However, the representation of these heroes and the treatment of the myth in tragedy are altered to suit the purpose of the tragedy and tragic practices of those times. For example, in the tragedy of Oedipus several of the heroic deeds of the protagonist are ignored in order to highlight the horror of his tragic flaw. Sophocles in his Oedipus Tyrannus (Tragedy and Greek Myth- Richard Buxton-167) has ignored the heroic deeds of Oedipus as the saviour of Thebes and focused largely on his hamartia of killing his father and engaging in an incestuous relationship with his mother. Euripides’ Hippolytus was treated less and was probably not as popular in comparison to the legends of Medea, Oedipus and the sacking of Troy in early Greek literature and consequently, has less visual representations as well. There are a few visual representations of the Hippolytus story in the form of vase paintings, from the early 4th century BCE. However, according to Philodemus’s reference Hippolytus was known in Athens. (Block 1 Myth of Hippolytus and Phaedra. pp 22) In addition to the version of Euripides’ Hippolytus there was another treatment of dramatizing the myth of Hippolytus by Sophocles called Phaedra. In fact, there seems to have been an earlier version of the myth of Hippolytus written by Euripides himself which like Sophocles’ Phaedra is lost and this version may have been his second treatment of the myth. In all of this one can observe the difference in treatment of the same myth by different dramatists; namely Sophocles and Euripides. This helps to demonstrate the multi-dimensional facets of myths and how individual treatment by individual playwrights can modify aspects of the myth and stretch it to suit the purpose of the tragedy. Phaedra, in Greek mythology is portrayed as a Cretan princess who tries to wilfully seduce her stepson, Hippolytus, and accuses him of rape when he spurns her with anger and contempt. Theseus believes Phaedra and condemns his son to an unfair and terrible death. In the end Phaedra kills herself in remorse. Sophocles has, however, treated the story differently in his Phaedra and has painted the character of Phaedra in more humane and compassionate terms. According to what has been reconstructed from the lost play, Phaedra believed her husband Theseus to be dead and proposed an alliance with Hippolytus in order to safeguard her children. Phaedra’s proposition was in keeping with the idea of sôphrosunê but Hippolytus, though he was sexually pure, demonstrated a lack of sôphrosunê (Block 1 Myth of Hippolytus and Phaedra. pp 38), in the sense of moral restraint, by treating Phaedra with contempt. In Sophocles’s version, Phaedra is treated more as the victim who gets enmeshed in a lot of misunderstandings and her guilt in being lustful is mitigated by the excessive arrogance and anger of Hippolytus. In Euripides’s Hippolytus II the treatment is slightly different and Phaedra is portrayed as less intent on adultery than in Hippolytus I where her character was made the butt of jokes by Aristophanes. The Phaedra of Hippolytus II is more restrained and Euripides’s attempt at taking up the challenging task of providing spectators the opportunity to compare and contrast the character of Phaedra in both versions demonstrates his versatility (Block 1 Myth of Hippolytus and Phaedra. pp 24). There were other minor deviations between the two versions. The first version of the tragedy of Hippolytus was set in Troezen while the latter was set in the city of Athens. The reason of Theseus being away is also different in the two versions; in Hippolytus I Theseus is away on a trip to an oracle while the later version has him visiting the Underworld. Euripides exhibits his mastery in skillfully manipulating the plot to explore the potential of myth and how it can be altered to suit the purpose of the play. The fact that Euripides wrote a second version of the story of Hippolytus does not signify an unsatisfactory first version or that the first play was not received well by the audience. What he probably did was to experiment with writing a full length play by highlighting a different facet of the same tragic story. He tried to test his versatility by altering his treatment of the same subject by bringing changes into the characters of the play and gauging the reaction of the spectators and how conversant they are with the myth of Hippolytus. His innovative treatment of the myth of Hippolytus demonstrates that the myth of Hippolytus and Phaedra is not rigid or fixed and can be altered depending on the playwright’s treatment of the topic of tragedy. The perpetual conflict between the chaste Artemis and the sensual Aphrodite is hinted at right at the beginning of the play when both Goddess appear in the prologue and lay down the framework of the action throughout the play. When Hippolytus, the hunter, decides to follow virtuous pursuits and ignores Aphrodite’s sensual temptations, she orchestrates his agonizing death and punishes his insulting behavior towards her disciple, Phaedra. However, after Hippolytus is dead Artemis decides to avenge the death of her devotee and promises to wreak vengeance on Phaedra. The purpose of the play is to highlight the context of the myth and how they relate to the tragedy represented by gods and how myth can be modified at the will of the writer. The ancient dramatists like Aeschylus, Ovid, Sophocles, and Euripides used mythical material selectively and altered their treatment of the mythical material to suit the purposes of high tragedy. Their treatment of other myths like that of Heracles, Agamemnon and Oedipus also demonstrate variance from the popular heroic narratives of the Greek myths. Euripides’ treatment of the myth of Heracles is also different from the tales of his heroism in that in his play The Madness of Heracles, Euripides focuses his attention on the tragic aspect of Heracles’ story where he kills his wife and children after being visited by a frenzy sent to him by Hera and only just misses killing his father by Athena who smites him with a rock. In Agamemnon, Aeschylus emphasizes the tragedy of Agamemnon, the brave and valiant conqueror of Troy, when he is killed by his unfaithful wife Clytemnestra in his bath. In the same way, Sophocles in his Oedipus Tyrannus lays stress on Oedipus’ tragic flaw rather than on his heroism. This was done, perhaps, to present to the audience a different aspect of heroism and hero-worship. They uphold the tragic quality of the dilemmas that can be created by the gods in the lives of the heroes so that they and their entire families are made to suffer and this enhances the awe and pathos of the tragedy. Hence, we see that almost all ancient playwrights though choosing to dramatize the stories of mythical heroes and use mythical material to write their plays usually altered the myth to suit their genre of drama. In doing so they often highlighted certain aspects of the mythical tales and ignored certain other aspects that did not necessarily add value to their plot. The selective use of mythical material was almost always used to suit the purpose of the play and to set the proper context of the myth to the contemporary society. (1455 words) Read More