Week #16 : 'The Frogs' by Aristophanes

Aristophanes, the only playwright whose comedic plays are the only left surviving from the Greek period to this day.  His play 'The Frogs' written 405BC and presented at the Lenaia Summer Festival where it won first prize.  Since then this play is not often performed in modern day, being overlooked by the classic Tragedies of the genre.  Yet, he was one of the most clever of al the Greek playwrights.  Incorporating philosophers, including Euripides, Sophocles and Aeschylus – not to mention Dionysus himself, he created the Old Comedies which encompass topics that the other great playwrights did (the Peloponnesian War, Family relationships, sex and death) he wrote in a comedic style that was more for the educated and intelligent than the general public.  Although he also wrote with an astonishing ability for comedy (now called Old Comedy) that was adopted into a Vaudevillian/Absurdist style of  comedy that is still used today.  Take for instance the first few lines of the play:

XANTHIAS: Shall I crack any of those old jokes, master, 

At which the audience never fail to laugh?

DIONYSUS: Aye, what you will, except "I'm getting crushed": 

Fight shy of that: I'm sick of that already.

XANTHIAS: Nothing else smart?

DIONYSUS: Aye, save "my shoulder's aching."

XANTHIAS: Come now, that comical joke?

DIONYSUS:With all my heart.
Only be careful not to shift your pole, 

And-

XANTHIAS:What?

DIONYSUS: And vow that you've a belly-ache.

XANTHIAS: May I not say I'm overburdened so 

That if none ease me, I must ease myself?

DIONYSUS: For mercy's sake, not till I'm going to vomit.

I believe that this showed a great forbearance to how we now perceive the comedy stylings of a duo: Abbot and Costello,  Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis, Laurel and Hardy and even Walter Mattau and  Jack Lemon.

Aristophanes' play ‘The Birds’ was turned into a popular Opera, yet ‘The Frogs’ is much lesser known despite the list of characters he uses to unravel the processes of travelling to the underword to bring back to Earth one of the great dramatists of the age – Euripides.

The basis of the play is simple – Dionysus travels to the underworld with his servant to bring back Euripides from the dead.  Yet he does not bet on the journey being so difficult and fraught with decisions.

We are introduced to Dionysis as a theatre-goer.  He bemoans to the audience the sever lack of good dramatists in the world.  As the God of Wine, Theatre and Merry Making, he feels that this reflects upon him personally.  He resolves to go with his servant Xanthias and return with Euripides, the Prince of Dramatists.

With a lion-skin in tow, he disguises himself as Heracles (the Gatekeeper of Olympus) to herald his strength and ward against the possible dangers of the journey to the underworld.

Ferried across to the Underword by the boatman Charon, we are introduced to a huge croaking chorus of frogs – who seem to be the vocal link between the Earth and the Underworld.  In the meantime, servant Xanthias was denied a boat trip, he has had to walk across the lake to the entrance to the Underworld.

Taking the opportunity to get even with Heracles for misdeeds committed in the underworld, Dionysus forces his servant to change clothing/costumes with him (which alludes to a great banter between the two as a modern musical Vaudevillian style comedy).  The change is barely complete when a handmaiden of Proserpine to bid Xanthias (thinking he is Heracles) to a great banquet.  Dionysus insists that he changes back into the lion skin – that is until two housekeepers of Pluto (the God of the Underworld – in classical Greek mythology) attack Dionysus thinking that he is Heracles and wanting revenge for the damages he had done on his last visit to the Underworld. In a rush to prove his identity the chorus of frogs help to substantiate his true form.

The news soon spreads throughout the Underword that Dionysus has arrived to herald one of the great dramatists back to Earth.  There is a great disturbance and we hear quarreling from Aeschylus and Euripides, each trying to prove his worth to gain the position of the King of Tragedy and to take the high honour alongside Pluto for the great banquet.  It is soon decided that as both their plays were written and performed for the Dionysus Festival, that he should make the decision and decide who is to be the King of Tragedy.

A trial is set where Aeschylus and Euripides both need to prove their worth by presenting the first lines and verses from their plays.  Dionysus is torn between the two and originally takes the side of Euripides as he was the original intent of his visit to the Underworld.  Finally Aeschylus is declared with winner, yet it has also change the mind of Dionysus as to whom he wants to bring back to Earth.  Dionysus and Xanthias leave the Underworld, bringing back Aeschylus to write on Earth again, thus leaving Sophocles in the place of honour of King of Tragedy.

Like most classical Greek plays, the chorus is used as an intermediary between the main actors and the audience, both in representing what happens off stage to the audience and sometimes to the main actors, re-delivering imperative information to the audience and becoming the main conductors of movement on stage.  This play is no different, however there is a comedic prescense, not only used by the vaudevillian style comedy between Dionysus and Xanthias, but also with the information that the frogs deliver to the audience - always beginning with the requisite croaks and brekekex's of a typical frog call.

Brekekekex, ko-ax, ko-ax, 

Brekekekex, ko-ax, ko-ax! 

We children of the fountain and the lake 

Let us wake 

Our full choir-shout, as the flutes are ringing out, 

Our symphony of clear-voiced song. 

The song we used to love in the Marshland up above, 

In praise of Dionysus to produce, 

Of Nysaean Dionysus, son of Zeus, 

When the revel-tipsy throng, all crapulous and gay, 

To our precinct reeled along on the holy Pitcher day, 

Brekekekex, ko-ax, ko-ax.

It's nice to enjoy the lighter side of Classical Antiquity!

Next Week: 'The Room' by Harold Pinter

Week #6 : 'Electra' by Euripides (and Sophocles... and Aeschylus...)

"And if death in justice demands death, why, then, I and your son Orestes must kill you to avenge our father's death; For if the one revenge is just, so is the other."  

(Peter Vellacott's translation of Euripides Electra.)

Electra, with accounts written by the three most powerful Greek playwrights - Euripides, Sophocles and Aeschylus, each wrote plays surrounding her and her tragic tale of murder, revenge and redemption.  
Each playwright wrote differing accounts of her tale, and depending on which Greek Tragedian you prefer, you are bound to find a version to suit your tastes (Me... I will always have a soft spot in my heart for Euripides).  


She is one of the great female characters in Greek Tragedy.  Set aside from her counterparts of the defective and rejected muse 'Cassandra' (again, this depends entirely on who's version of Cassandra you're reading) and the revengeful and tortured soul 'Medea'; Electra is terrifyingly brutal in her attack on her own mother and (step) father.

Stamford University 2009 Electra Festival

In Euripides version the audience first hears the story of Agamemnon and his conquests in Troy retold by a Peasant.  We soon hear that he has been murdered by Aegisthus who has also returned to Argos and married Agamemnon's widow Clytemnestra.  With the thoughts that Clytemnestra's children Electra (and her future children) and Orestes will revenge their fathers death - Aegisthus then removes Orestes to Phocis to be bought up by strangers and waits until Electra is of childbearing age, he marries her off to a Peasant (who is retelling this story now) so her children will grow up poor and lowly, and therefore less likely to have the ability to avenge the death of Agamemnon. 
Electra, whom is still a virgin (as the Peasant will not touch her as he believes that he is not of noble enough birth to bed her) laments her situation and the loss of her mother and father.  One day she is visited by a man who delivers her information about her brother.  After receiving some cryptic information from an Old Man (who used to be her fathers servant), she realises that this man is her brother.  Soon they conspire to avenge Agamemnon's death and discuss how they are to kill Aegisthus and realise that they must also take vengeance on their mother Clytemnestra.  Electra takes this challenge for herself:

"The killing of my mother I shall claim myself."

Orestes attends the sacrificing ritual to honour the Nymphs that Aegisthus is presiding over.  Aegistus is killed and bought to the hut that Electra lives in.  During this time Clytemnestra is told that Electra has given birth and she is to come and witness her grandson for the customary 10th day sacrifice.  Just before she arrives, Orestes tried to convince Electra that she does not have to kill her mother, that killing Aegisthus was enough to avenge their fathers death.  Yet Electra, convinced that it is the only thing to do, is resolved to kill Clytemnestra.
The time comes for vengeance and Electra is steely in her resolve.  Clytemnestra enters the house and as an aside to the audience we see Electra's vengeance is cold and hard.

"All is prepared.  The sword of sacrifice which felled the bull, by whose side you shall fall, is sharpened for you.  In the house of death you shall be still his bride whose bed you shared in life.  This 'favour' is all I grant you.  In return I take justice, your life in payment for my father's life."

Clytemnestra is slaughtered and bought next to Aegisthus' body.  
As a final act of retribution to the slaying of these two bodies, the Gods send The Dioscori to demand that Electra and Orestes come to Olympus to be trialed for their crimes. 

The Sophocles version, written in about 410BC directly addresses the character of Electra which focuses on the reasoning of why a daughter would want to so vehemently murder her mother.  In this version Electra prevails and triumphs, which turns his version into more of a case study of female desires as a revenge drama and as a psychological account of Electra herself.

Aeschylus' account of Electra is interwoven into the Oresteia Trilogy.  This version focusses more on the ethical issues of the murders within the frame of a family blood feud.

Euripides, similarly to Sophocles, focuses somewhat on the character traits of Electra, but also brings Orestes into the plot further.  His version is less of a case study on the blinding revenge that Electra has - Euripides also facilitates the cost of the blood revenge and makes Electra account for her vengeance. 


According to  Ruth Hazel in her article 'Electra: A Fragmented Woman' Sophocles Electra is one of the most performed, stating that this is because of a more realistic style of performance which offers a more complex and challenging role for the actress portraying Electra. She has less of an urge to force her brother Orestes into the revenge on their mother and father and has no qualms about committing matricide.  Hazel describes Euripides version as 'the most unappealing, the least heroic, the most mentally disturbed and disturbing.'  Whereas Aeschylus' version of Electra as stylised, more likely to be performed by a man and and with traditional primitive masks.

It is not possible to count how many performances and adaptations of Electra there have been.  Besides Euripides' 'Women of Troy' and 'Medea' , it amounts to being one of the most performed and re-envisioned Greek plays of the modern Greek theatrical experiences.
 

                      

Some of the most recent adaptations bought to the   stage have been: set in America in John Deere Country with modern singers and dancers and Washburn University (Topeka, Kansas, USA) hosted British playwright, Nick Payne, adaptation based on Neo-Freudian psychology to revision Sophocles text.  
Last year at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, Tadashi Suzuki bought his adaptation of Euripides text which was described as 'Euripides, meets Beckett, meets The Exorcist'...

Each and every director has their own take on how Electra needs to be portrayed, especially with the choice of playwright.  
Had I enough time, I would have read the other three versions.  I may be remiss in doing so, and it may have given me further abilities in discussing this text at length.




Next Week: 'Equus' by Peter Shaffer