Unit 9

English 201:    Masterpieces of Western Literature

Reading: 

Read:
Wilkie & Hurt: pp: 606-663, Aeschylus' Agamemnon, the first play in the Orestia trilogy.  We will read the other 2 plays (Libation Bearers, Eumenides) in unit 10.

Writing:
In the next 3 units (9, 10, 11) we will study ancient Greek drama.   For unit 11 you will send me a short essay that analyzes some feature of the plays we will study.

Essay #2: Due for unit 11

Assignment: Write a succinct analytic essay explicating a theme from the plays we read. 

Method:Review the introduction to classical theater in your text (pp.  3-7). You should also be aware of the conventions of Greek tragedy, especially aware that tragic drama was formulaic. The tragic hero is initially someone we admire & emulate. His/her tragic downfall must be the result of a tragic flaw, i. e.  a mistaken moral judgment (hubris), not the result of some implacable fate beyond his/her control. Many tragedies are named for their protagonists: Agamemnon, Antigone, Medea. Because of the conventions or definitions of classical tragedy, protagonists cannot be exonerated. Their definitive action or decision is wrong & they suffer as a consequence.   Obviously, their action/hubris is plausible & we easily identify with their anguish & perhaps even with the tragic act that they hoped would solve their dilemma. Classical tragedy seeks to illustrate irresolvable moral conflicts. Its function is educational: to forewarn the audience of such crises. 

Possible Theses:

1. The clash in Antigone is between family (&/or religious) obligation/values & the obligations of citizenship. Creon has twice picked up the pieces of Thebes: after Oedipus absconds & again after his two sons, Polyneices & Eteocles, have killed each other in a civil war. He argues for patriotism & peace. Of course he becomes tragically imbalanced in exclusively advocatingcivic values. Antigone loves both of her brothers & cannot live with the guilt she would incur if she neglected funeral rites for Polyneices. She seems to have no feelings of civic obligation; to care whether or not her actions fan the civil war back into flames (cf.  Klytemnestra in Aeschylus). On the other hand, Creon seems to be a cynical creature dedicated to political expediency (soldiers take bribes; prophets are avaricious; everyone is jealous of his power; cf.  Agamemnon in Aeschylus). What are the best arguments foreach side?  What does each side neglect or overlook?   Is a resolution possible between obligations to church & state, family & state; does one supersede the other? Consider contemporary analogues: religious judgments on abortion vs.  political rights; or military draft & patriotism vs.  conscientious objectors; or religious “separatists” like the Amish or Catholic monastic orders like the Carmelites or Trappists vs.  obligations of citizenship to be informed & involved. Don’t too quickly or glibly sell either side short. If Antigone is unpunished, she may very well re-ignite the civil war; cf.  Yugoslavia. In any case, she suggests that the obligations of citizenship can be ignored when they conflict with religious principles or family obligations.   Can you have an efficient, just, & prosperous state under these conditions? Mahatma Gandhi might be illustrative of the problems that Antigone evokes. After successfully leading the independence movement to rid India of imperial Britain, Gandhi had no interest in accepting political office. He wanted saints, not citizens. He advocated abolition of the military & even police functions. If India were invaded or in regard to criminal acts, he advocated passive resistance & moral confrontation. The idea is to cause the perpetrator to be ashamed of his behavior. This didn’t work so well with the Chinese in a 1967 border war. Is a state viable under these conditions? Creon’s position is easier to criticize, e. g.  when he advocates that “the man appointed by the city .  .  .  must be obeyed in everything, little or great, just or unjust. ”

2.  Orestia:consider the questions of #1 in Aeschylus. Klytemnestra & the Furies argue that (blood) family relationships are more primal than oath relationships (marriage, citizenship). Agamemnon sacrifices his daughter for a civic project (cf.  Abraham). Orestes sacrifices his mother for Apollonian justice. How convincing is the resolution of establishing legal institutions? Does this solve the problem? Are there better options?   Is a solution possible? 

3. The clash in the Orestia is most obviously about justice. When we are personally & emotionally involved as victims of injustice, we want vengeance. Acts of vengeance may satisfy the victims, but of course the acts are perceived by others as fresh acts of outrage that require new acts of vengeance. The social consequences are destructive. Society can only be a patch-work of clan grudges, gang wars, & temporary alliances. On the other hand, the Furies express their dissatisfaction with “blind” justice, the cold & mechanical function of the legal process. Ultimately some perpetrators get off on technicalities & by the talents of accomplished lawyers. Explain the problem in more depth with reference to the dramatic illustrations. How can the dilemma be resolved?  How is it resolved or at least how is the dilemma acknowledged in our society?  Is Aeschylus’ solution adequate?  Consider the commemorative aspect of the last play. What does it commemorate?  How does this contribute to solvingthe dilemma?  How does it affect the audience? 

4. Orestia: explicate Aeschylus’ psychology of personality. What psychic components or stages of maturity do Apollo & the Furies/Eumenides represent?  What does Athena represent?  How do these components relate to each other?  What are the clashes?  Can they be reconciled?  How so?  Is it worth the effort?  What happens if they are not reconciled, politically, personally? 

5. Orestia: explicate the position of one of the major characters: Agamemnon, Klytemnestra, or Orestes. What was the dilemma they were involved in?  How “pure” were their motives?  For example, KLY’s grief for her daughter is understandable, but is it her only motive in slaying AG ten years later?  What about her involvement with Aegisthus?  She seems less motivated by grief & justice than by an interest in power. Consider the end of the 1st play: “Let them howl -- they’re impotent. You & I have power now”;& the fact that she exiles her son & obviously has no interest in seeing that he inherits the throne. What has AG done to KLY to explain her motives & character?  Or consider AG. He does not kill his daughter because he does not love her. Why did he slay her?  What does the act symbolize?  Compare it to Abraham’s willingness to slay his son, Isaac. Why does he go through with it?  What does this & his subsequent treatment of women-- Khryses, Briseis, (from Homer) & Cassandra --tell you about his values? 

6.   Do you have a question or insight that you wish to pursue?    E-mail me with your suggestion. 

Evaluation: Before you get too far into writing, reflect for a moment on your audience -- viz., me.   What am I looking for?    First I am looking for evidence that you study-read the play.   How do I assess this?    If you quote important lines in the play, I am impressed.   I am impressed again when you explicate the significance of quotations.   The second thing I look for is abstract thinking.   Book reports passively paraphrase the plot.   Boring.   Analytic papers begin with a thesis that makes a judgment on the work.   So I look for the quality of your thesis & how much insight you demonstrate about why & how the play is significant.

Study:
Now begin to work through the maroon navigation bar at the top for unit 9, starting at Introduction.