I have started Aeschylus's trilogy of tragedies, The Oresteia.

This is a reread for me, I try to give important works a second go around from time to time.

As I am interested in History, particularly that of ancient Greece and Democracy, I find this work especially intriguing, as I believe it says a lot about Aeschylus's views on certain Democratic ideals.

Ok, I'm done with Omens - I'll start this one up for some light reading, too. I have Voltaire on my night stand but I don't want to tackle it until I have some time to dedicate to it. I still haven't finished my other non-fiction book for the same reason.

nice to have an ancient Greece reading buddy.

I have a lot to go through. I haven't even read the Iliad or the Odyssey yet!

President Camacho wrote:nice to have an ancient Greece reading buddy.

I have a lot to go through. I haven't even read the Iliad or the Odyssey yet!

Cool.

Both the Iliad and Odyssey are well worth the read. I also recommend the complete works of Sophocles as well as those of those of Euripides and Aristophanes.

Please let me know what you think of Aeschylus as you go.

It might not be a bad idea to brush up on the story of the House of Atreus before you start,Wikipedia should probably be sufficent, as the verbiage of the translation can be confusing in regard to the "history". There is lots of fun stuff there. Fathers unknowingly being fed their children for dinner and the like.

I am reading the Richmond Lattimore translation of the plays.

Yes, I'm reading the introduction and I see that Atreus has fed his own brother his brother's children.

I'll read the Wiki.

I'm reading the Philip Vellacott translation.

I've read the Introduction and the first couple pages of Agamemnon.

On the very first page is a pretty ambiguous line.

"Great news for Clytemnestra, in whose woman's heart a man's will nurses hope."

This can be interpreted different ways. She is either the hope of Agamemnon, Aegisthus, or she herself has the will of a man - the will to do a deed wicked enough for only a man to execute.

The rhyming in this version is really distracting. I hate poetry. I'd much rather have just a straight prose version or anything but this rhyming.

The idea of the furies or some kind of god-sent, inevitable revenge for injustice is seen in the first Chorus. The Elders are talking about the history of Agamemnon and his brother Menelaus and how they will have revenge for Paris' and Helen's transgression.

This is the first exploration of justice. Man taking revenge for a wrong done against him. This is the idea of the furies. It's a very basic, primitive, brutal, and reactionary form of justice. It's based on emotions - furies.

If there seems to be something that early Greeks hate it's the pride that comes with success seen in other people. They hate, hate, hate proud people - especially the ones that have something to be proud about. So Clytemnestra is seen in the first couple of pages to be really outdoing herself in the welcoming of her husband and his fleet. She wants everyone to take notice of him and possibly to be filled with jealousy? I may be reaching here.

The Elders seem to know that bad times are approaching with the arrival of Agamemnon.

I don't really get the pregnant hare thing when the Elders are talking about the sacking of Troy.

The Sorrow, Sorrow - yet let good prevail! Is a great line. I like that very much. Aeschylus goes one step further and explains that Zeus' plan for man is to teach him through life experience - through suffering. That man must learn from his mistakes and strive to improve. If he makes a mistake he will be penalized. It's tough - "Man grows wise against his will." Life's referee is always watching. "By ruthlessness they command their love."

The Elders talk of Agamemnon sacrificing his virgin daughter. Agamemnon chooses war over family. He commits an awful sin. This sets a foreboding mood.

The events that will be set in motion are inevitable. Justice must prevail - mortal or divine.

The play continues and there is a part I really like. It seems to sum up the message of the play so far:

One said, 'The gods disdain to mark man's wanton way who tramples in the dust beauty of holy things.'
Impious! The truth shows plain: Pride now has paid its debt, and they who laughed at Right and put their boastful trust in arms and swollen wealth of kings, have gone their destined way.
A middle course is best, not poor nor proud; but this,
By no clear rule defined, eludes the unstable, undiscerning mind, whose aim will surely miss.
Thenceforth there is no way to turn aside; when man has once transgressed, and in his wealth and pride spurned the high shrine of Justice, nevermore may his sin hope to hide in that safe dimness he enjoyed before.

President Camacho wrote:I've read the Introduction and the first couple pages of Agamemnon.

On the very first page is a pretty ambiguous line.

"Great news for Clytemnestra, in whose woman's heart a man's will nurses hope."

This can be interpreted different ways. She is either the hope of Agamemnon, Aegisthus, or she herself has the will of a man - the will to do a deed wicked enough for only a man to execute.

The rhyming in this version is really distracting. I hate poetry. I'd much rather have just a straight prose version or anything but this rhyming.

The idea of the furies or some kind of god-sent, inevitable revenge for injustice is seen in the first Chorus. The Elders are talking about the history of Agamemnon and his brother Menelaus and how they will have revenge for Paris' and Helen's transgression.

This is the first exploration of justice. Man taking revenge for a wrong done against him. This is the idea of the furies. It's a very basic, primitive, brutal, and reactionary form of justice. It's based on emotions - furies.

If there seems to be something that early Greeks hate it's the pride that comes with success seen in other people. They hate, hate, hate proud people - especially the ones that have something to be proud about. So Clytemnestra is seen in the first couple of pages to be really outdoing herself in the welcoming of her husband and his fleet. She wants everyone to take notice of him and possibly to be filled with jealousy? I may be reaching here.

The Elders seem to know that bad times are approaching with the arrival of Agamemnon.

I don't really get the pregnant hare thing when the Elders are talking about the sacking of Troy.

The Sorrow, Sorrow - yet let good prevail! Is a great line. I like that very much. Aeschylus goes one step further and explains that Zeus' plan for man is to teach him through life experience - through suffering. That man must learn from his mistakes and strive to improve. If he makes a mistake he will be penalized. It's tough - "Man grows wise against his will." Life's referee is always watching. "By ruthlessness they command their love."

The Elders talk of Agamemnon sacrificing his virgin daughter. Agamemnon chooses war over family. He commits an awful sin. This sets a foreboding mood.

The events that will be set in motion are inevitable. Justice must prevail - mortal or divine.

I think that another way to look at the line -

"Great news for Clytemnestra, in whose woman's heart a man's will nurses hope."

is that a women who has a man's heart is unnatural and wrong.

At times Clytemnestra does seem to be a very vain and conniving character. Perhaps more so when this work was written. However I think that she has now become, viewing her through the lens of modern morality and ideas about gender equality, a somewhat sympathetic character. Agamemnon has sacrificed, I would say murdered, their daughter, Iphigeneia. Furthermore, he returns from the Trojan war, with Cassandra, now a slave-concubine, and expects Clytemnestra to accept the arrangement. It seems that most commentary of this work that I have read indicates that, when this was written, Clytemnestra's desire for revenge as well as her jealousy, would have been seen as unjustified. This is a "problem' for me, as I expect it would be for any modern reader. I do believe that Aeschylus wanted the theater goer, to relate to Clytemnestra's predicament, at least a little.

I agree with what you wrote about the sorrow and Zeus teaching man through suffering. As this is my second time reading these plays, I think that man will have learned an important lessen at the end of the cycle. A lesson that is still very much a part of many modern twenty-first century Democracies. I will not give any more away

I too struggled with the meaning of the pregnant hare. The below link seems to shed light on the subject.

http://www2.cnr.edu/home/bmcmanus/oresteia.html

I'm done with both Agamemnon and The Choephori.

Thank you very much for the link, I'm reading it now.



The themes in this play are still relevant but you're absolutely right about what you said about gender equality. I have been reading this through the eyes of a modern man that is accustomed to women having somewhat of an advantage over men. In Athens, at the time this play was written, women were little more than slaves. From what I've read, women had it better during the time of Agamemnon. So those who heard this play in Athens were probably extremely shocked at the actions of Clytemnestra.

From what I've read, a marriage during this time was pretty much it for the wife. Her father arranged it and she had little say in the matter. On the wedding night she would arrive with some barley - signifying she was to be responsible for the cooking! (YES, that is awesome!) If the marriage didn't work out she could, as in the case of Alcibiades' wife, go to the Archon in front of everyone in person to plead her case for divorce. All Alcibiades had to do was pick her up, which he physically did, and carry her home. Case closed. No divorce. Women could not own property and were little more than property themselves.

That's why this play's shock value was probably very high!

I wonder what I'd think of Clytemnestra if I was a regular joe back in ancient Athens. I don't think Aeschylus wanted his audience to be somewhat swayed in favor of Clytemnestra's decision to kill her husband. I feel that his intention was to prove that divine justice is inevitable and that blood begets blood. Clytmnestra is cheating on her husband and murders through ambush and trickery. She doesn't deserve a whole lot of sympathy. Iphigenia deserves sympathy but not her mother. In this play it seems her mother uses her daughter's death as an excuse for murder.

Orestes killing his mom is the second murder in the trilogy. He is the snake in the dream that Clytemnestra has. Clytemnestra has been dwindling Orestes inheritance, stolen his birth right and given it to Aegisthus, and made his sister somewhat of a slave. This lady needs to die but there is an incredible moral dilemma here. Orestes is sent by Apollo to kill his mother.

To kill a parent is very bad... to kill your mom is worst of all. That's probably like right up there with slapping Zeus in the face. You don't do it. So the Choephori ends with Orestes being immediately haunted by the furies after killing mama.

Is what Orestes did right? Was justice on his side? Could he have handled it differently?

I have a hard time getting past the politics in plays like these. I concentrate on what I feel to be the real reason things happen. Like Clytemnestra wanting to usurp the throne for her lover and then her son killing both of them to get his kingdom. I see political factions and greed more than I see a moral argument.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around if what Orestes did was just or not. Is it morally acceptable? Would my judgment be fair seeing how I'm a product of a far removed generation and culture? If this were to happen today... If a man killed his mother who had killed his father for these same reasons or very close to it - how would I feel?

I think it's wrong to take life. I think criminals should be punished. I think it's very noble for a man to take responsibility for his family's misdeeds and correct them. He doesn't leave society to do it for him. But this is a man killing his mother. Right now, I have to say that I think what Orestes did was tragic but completely forgivable. He shouldn't have had to do it. I feel sorry for him.