The Central Characters in Phdre by Jean Racine - Essay Example

To what extent is the central character in Phdre simply one in a series of monsters created by Racine in this play Racine's tour de force is reflected throughout the exemplary text of seventeenth century French drama in the form of 'Phedre'. The author 'Racine' has supplemented the magnum opus of his text with preface that recounts the genesis of his work and name source of foreign origin. Racine acknowledges his debt to Euripides' Hippolytus. Racine has portrayed 'Phedre' in such a manner that it seems to be a monster's tale rather than human, it is all about the ethics and behaviour representing moral code of mankind and is considered to be the greatest of Racine's secular tragedies, Phedre is also the last. An interesting case in this point can be round in Racine's preface to Phedre. The seventeenth-century reader would likely have been surprised to find there no mention of pardon, whose parasitic rival version of the same story set off an unusually venomous battle. (Bold, 2001) Racine has, thus, involved at least an undercurrent of subtle irony in the opening line's placid sophistication: "Voici encore une tragedie dont le sujet est pris d'Euripide." (Bold, 2001) According to Bold "Racine's own creation is modestly represented, as a carefully charted divergence from the Eurpidean 'Route' to which Racine remains richly indebted, serving 'Phedre' as an exemplary character". "ce que j'ai peut-etre mis de plus raisonnable sur le theatre." (Bold, 2001) "The litotes of this opening, which might be read as a ritual gesture of authorial self-effacement, conceals in fact a far more complex irony in as much as it erases more than we at first think more, that is, than the simple vanity of a purely original creation, an inventio ex nihilo. One is, upon reflection, struck by a number of things in this apparently modest statement. This is certainly one of the very few places where one can find the character of Phedre described, at whatever level, as reasonable. It has also been fairly argued that Euripides's tragedy Hippolytus given the play's title and the stepmother's early guilt-ridden suicide is not really about Phedre anyway. More importantly, as it implies only a difference between the Latin and the French versions, Racine's dismissive reference identifies the Senecan text as the site of corruption and consequently, as an alibi for his own text's purer origins". (Bold, 2001) 'Phedre' the entire play revolves around the concept of 'monster'. To how much the statement is true can be determined from the fact that 'Phedre' represents the corruption and evil enriched in the social attitude of French culture of the then seventeenth century. Racine wanted the society to confront to the social dilemmas so it seems as if he has shown the French society, a mirror so that they might acknowledge their reality in the form of corruption and vulgarity. The main monster according to my perception is the evil that resides deep within a human, now it depends upon the person as to whether he feeds and nourishes that evil so that the evil grows up to become a 'monster' or he remains callous towards the evil, so that eventually he is alleviated. Let us see and examine every central character of 'Phedre' in the light of 'monstrous' appeal. 'Hippolytus' in other monsters Though Hippolytus is unmonstrous as compared to other characters in 'Phedre', but he fails to succeed through the rein of monstrous characters. One reason might be the strength of his inner self and conscience, which escorted him to remain aloof from participating in the devilish works of 'Phedre'. His reason for being morally ethical is the true love of 'Aricia', which lead him towards the light instead of thrusting into the darkness of horror which otherwise would have transformed him into the monster. He is the only character perceived to be 'human' as he knows the morals of relations, and unlike other characters in 'Phedre' he has trained his ego towards goodness and moral values. The reason for other characters being monstrous and nefarious is that they have encouraged and feed the negative ego within them, which has turned into a monster. Such monsters, which make shy the humanity. 'Phedre' the main monstrous character The main bone of contention, the character that encourages other characters to be in a series of list of monsters is the character of 'Phedre'. Monster lies within her in the form of monstrous act, which she does, in the absence of Theseus, when she tries to seduce her stepson. Whether in love or in hatred, seducing a son (no doubt he is step son) escorts us to think about as to what extent is her inner being monstrous who lead her towards betrayal of her husband, betrayal to the relation of a mother and son. According to Brereton, "The character of Phedre complemented by Oenone is so tremendous that it dwarfs the other personages of the drama". (Brereton, 1951). Brereton also presents his view that Phedre is half innocent and half evil, and the half evil is due to Oenone". In my opinion her half evilness has infected her whole self, and this half evilness is the greatest monster in 'Phedre'. 'Theseus' - urged to be monstrous The monster within Theseus emerges when recalled by 'Phedre', and emerges to an extent where he forgets and misinterprets those circumstances that lead Theseus to think about Hippolyte as an offender, even forgetting that Hippolyte is his own son. Here the monster is so much brawny within Theseus that he makes him forget about the real offender, Phedre, and cogate him to order other monstrous characters 'Neptune' to obliterate Hippolytus. 'Neptune' - The triumphant monster Neptune according to Lockert "is the most horrible face in the form of sea-monster as fire breathing and shaped like a bull in front and like a scaled dragon monster" (Lockert, 1958) is created by Racine in his play, to kill Hippolytus just like worst kills goodness. Neptune in the form of Giant wave, comes and sweeps over Hippolytus when he being aware of the circumstances and despite of all his innocence wants to get out of the town. The death Neptune presented to Hippolytus represents another gigantic monster, which under Theseus is liable to obey him. Hence we can see in this play a chain of monsters and each monster is emerged by the monster next to him. 'Oenone' - Next to Phedre Oenone is the monstrous woman linked to Phedre, who is responsible for awakening the devilish needs within Phedre. It is because of her advice that Phedre confesses her love for her stepson Hippolytus. "It is Oenone who suggests the accusation to her mistress, Oenone who makes it to Theseus with her mistress's passive consent": "Fais ce que tu voudras, je m'abandonne toi. Dans le trouble o je suis, je ne puis rien pour moi". (Brereton, 1951) "She is, however, the willing servant of the evil which lies in posse in Phedre's emotions, waiting for some interpreter bold enough and fool enough to define it as a policy". (Brereton, 1951) When one great dramatist so obviously builds upon the work of another great dramatist and so deliberately vies with him, comparisons are inevitable. It must be clearly understood at the outset that one difference between the Hippolytus and Phedre is not, as some French critics assert, that the subject of the former is a contest between two goddesses, between Aphrodite and Artemis, in which the human characters are but irresponsible puppets, instead of free agents as in the play of Racine. (Lockert, 1958) Que de soins m'et cots cette tte charmante! Un fil n'et point assez rassur votre amante: Compagne du pril qu'il vous fallait chercher, Moi-mme devant vous j'aurais voulu marcher; Et Phdre au Labyrinthe avec vous descendue Se serait avec vous retrouve, ou perdue. (Rawlings, 1962) The play simply represents 'Phedre' as one of the most monstrous creations of mankind. She as a woman is represented by Racine some sort of disgust and nastiness which a reader feels when examines her character. The reason is obvious that when she is acknowledged as a wife, represents an example of betrayal. An unfaithful wife, when trusted. Phedre in the from of a mother represents shame and disgust. What could be more monstrous and devilish than a mother who stains motherhood, or a wife who betrays her husband So, the concept of monster as Racine has created in 'Phedre' is not the physical grim, it is the evil that lives within humanity, evil which resides with all the pleasures and pains. Pleasures, when the evil is nourished and acknowledged and pain when it is obliterated. Hippolytus cannot be referred to as monster because his evil is obliterated whereas Phedre herself is monster as he listens and approves the monster within her, this monster that makes her forget the morals of relation, that makes her put into oblivion that besides a wife, she is also a mother, and a mother can betray a husband, but never a son. How strong is the monster within Phedre that leads her to the thresholds of devilish acts, those acts that will not permit the humanity to uphold them. Phedre is so much influenced by the monster that after confessing her love to Hippolyte, she acknowledges: J'ai dit ce que jamais on ne devait entendre. Ciel! comme il m'coutait! Par combion de dtours L'insensible a longtemps lud mes discours! (Rawlings, 1962) Although she knew that she is on the wrong side, on the wrong path, and obviously on the wrong lane, but after that she is so much used to feed her monstrous conscience that she is unable to alleviate it. Racine has created and represented monster so beautifully that one might think as if he has really experienced in some way by the hands of his inner self. If one starts research Racine's 'Phedre' he would conclude with a view that it seems on the back end Racine has shown the development of monster. Just like a human development, which emerges from a child and ends up at old age or death, so is the monster. The only difference Racine wants us to realise is in the case of humans; there is an end in the form of death. But in the case of monster, it is the opposite. The monster if not alleviated from childhood can grow into a powerful demon, his roots within humans gradually becomes so strong that instead of ending up, he influences the humans towards corruption and selfishness. So the success or failure lies within humans. In the case of 'Phedre', she is unskeptically a looser, as she is a victim of her inner self, her inner monster. While on the other hand, Hippolytus despite being defeated by a dragon like wave in the form of death, is the winner because he is not under the influence of any demon like monster. Racine has created monster not only through the character of 'Phedre', but through the supernatural forces so active in a play which continue to haunt humanity; Phedre recognizing the extent of her sins acknowledges the monster within her but because of the deep influence and the solid grounds of monster within her she is bound to obey the devil. The burden of Phedre monstrous sins cause her to say "Je reconnus Vnus et ses feux redoutables" (Corneille, 1996) Phedre is aware of the immortality of the God intersects the generations of humanity to produce a pattern of irregular yet fearful return. But this contact with the mythic is only one way to account for Racine's cyclical time. The incarnate and immanent character of each human being produces cycles in human behavior. Cycles, which reflects the morals of actions and deeds as in the case of Phedre. Theseus in the end announces that he will adopt his son's lover, Aricia, as his daughter. This is another aspect of the extent of monster created by Racine as the reader can easily understand what Theseus meant to be. One plausible reading of this text is that Theseus is about to begin a new cycle of a monster, his seduction of women, and this time with the possible cumulative addition of the incest that has already manifested itself. (Corneille, 1996) Hence a new monster is born! References Bold Stephen, 2001. "The Anxiety of Senecan Influence in Racine, or Phedre in the Labyrinth". Journal Title: "The Romanic Review". Volume: 92. Issue: 4. Page Number: 417+. COPYRIGHT 2001 Columbia University, Brereton Geoffrey, 1951. "Jean Racine: A Critical Biography": Cassell: London. Corneille Pierre, 1996. "The Tragedy of Origins: Pierre Corneille and Historical Perspective": Stanford University Press. Place of Publication: Stanford, CA. Lockert Lacy, 1958. "Studies in French-Classical Tragedy": Vanderbilt University Press. Place of Publication: Nashville, TN. Marder Elissa, 1989, "The Mother Tongue in Phedre and Frankenstein" in "Yale French Studies" 76, Autour de Racine: "Studies in Intertextuality", ed. Richard E. Goodkin, (1989), 59-77 Rawlings Margaret, 1962. "Racine, Phdre, in Oeuvres completes" Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1962) ll. 249-50. All subsequent quotations refer to this edition, and all line numbers will be indicated in the text. English translations are my modified versions of Phdre, trans. Margaret Rawlings. Read More