Read this for familiarity with the story.

¡Fascinante! Gran capacidad de drama de Eurípides.
Se desarrolla muy bien el tema del dilema entre el amor a la patria o el amor a la familia.
También la dureza de la realidad: el hombre que nace sufre y no puede escapar del dolor, ni siquiera siendo el rey de los Griegos en todo su poder.
Pongo el párrafo de súplica y desesperación de Ifigenia y Clitemnestra.
Quizá también domine la idea del dolor en la guerra, perder a un hijo, perder a un padre como pare de ella.






Las voluntades
de los Dioses son imprevistas para los mortales, y ellos salvan a los que aman. Porque el día de hoy ha visto a tu hija
muerta y viva de nuevo.

Clitemnestra
Escucha, pues, ahora. Voy a hablar, y no ya por enigmas. Y ante todo, he de reprocharte esto: te casaste conmigo mal de
mi grado y raptándome a la fuerza, [1150] después de matar a mi primer marido Tántalo y estrellar vivo contra tierra a
mi hijo, arrancado violentamente de mis pechos. Los hijos de Zeus, mis hermanos, ilustres por los caballos, te hicieron la
guerra; pero mi anciano padre Tindareo, a quien suplicaste, te protegió, y de nuevo poseíste mi lecho. Reconciliada
contigo desde entonces, tú mismo puedes atestiguar que he sido para ti y para tu morada una esposa irreprochable,
casta, [1160] que ha aumentado tus bienes patrimoniales. Y regocijándote en tu morada y fuera de ella, eras dichoso.
Rara caza es para un marido tal mujer. ¡Además de tres hijas, he parido para ti este hijo, y quieres arrebatarme!
cruelmente una de ellas! Y si te preguntase alguien por qué quieres matarla, responde, ¿qué dirías? ¿Es preciso que?
hable yo en tu nombre? ¡Pues para que Menelao recobre á Helena! ¡Buena costumbre es la de redimir á una mala mujer
á costa de nuestros hijos, [1170] lo más odioso por lo más querido! Pero, si partes para esa guerra, abandonándome en
las moradas, y estás ausente mucho tiempo, ¿qué corazón crees que voy á tener en estas moradas desiertas, junto á la
estancia vacía de la virgen, en la soledad, bañada en lágrimas y llorándola siempre? Diré: ¡Oh hija! ¡el padre que te ha
engendrado es quien te ha perdido, quien te ha degollado, y no otra mano que la suya! ¡Esa es la recompensa que deja á
su familia traicionada! [1180] No hará falta entonces más que un ligero pretexto para que yo y las hijas que abandonas te
recibamos como conviene que se te reciba. ¡Por los Dioses, no me obligues á ser tu enemiga, y no lo seas tú mismo para
mí! ¡Oye! Degollarás á tu hija; pero ¿qué plegarias pronunciarás entonces? ¿Qué pedirás de bueno para ti, degollando á
tu hija? ¿Sin duda un mal retorno, después de haber dejado tan vergonzosamente á tu familia? Y yo, ¿qué pediré de
bueno para ti? ¡Ciertamente, sería creer insensatos [1190] á los Dioses rogarlos por un parricida! ¿Y abrazarás á tus hijos,
de vuelta en Argos?¿Cuál de tus hijos va á mirarte, si has meditado matar á uno de ellos? ¿Has pensado en eso tú solo?
¿No debes pensar más que en llevar el cetro y en ser estratega? Te convenía decir con justicia á los argianos: «¿Queréis,
acayanos, navegar hacia la tierra de los frigios? Echad suertes para ver quién debe hacer morir á su hija.» Esto sería justo;
[1200] pero no que seas tú solo entre todos el que ofrezca para víctima á su hija. O si no, que Menelao mate á Hermione
á causa de su madre, que asunto suyo es. ¡Y ahora, yo, que he respetado la fe nupcial, voy á verme privada de mi hija, y
la que ha pecado, conservando la suya en Esparta bajo su techo, será dichosa! Responde á esto, y si he hablado bien, no
mates á la que es hija tuya y mía, y serás cuerdo.
El coro
¡Consiente! ¡Es bueno conservar á los hijos, Agamenón! [1210] Ningún mortal dirá lo contrario.
Ifigenia
Si tuviera la elocuencia de Orfeo, ¡oh padre! y si cantando pudiera persuadir á las rocas á seguirme y enternecer con mis
palabras á quien quisiese, recurriría á ella; pero por toda elocuencia te ofreceré mis lágrimas, pues sólo puedo eso. A tus
rodillas pongo, como una rama de suplicantes, mi cuerpo, al que ha parido para ti esta mujer. ¡No me mates antes de
tiempo, que es dulce ver la luz! ¡No me fuerces á ver las cosas que hay bajo la tierra! [1220] ¡He sido la primera en
llamarte padre mío, y túme has llamado hija tuya; he sido la primera en dar y recibir sobre tus rodillas caricias dulces! Y
me hablabas así entonces: «¿Te veré dichosa ¡oh hija! enlas moradas de tu marido, viva y floreciente, como es digno de
mí?» Y á mi vez te decía yo, colgando mis brazos á tu cuello y oprimiendo tus mejillas con mis manos, como ahora: «Y yo,
padre, ¿te veré envejecer en la dulce hospitalidad de mis moradas, [1230] devolviéndote los cuidados que tuviste para
criarme?» ¡He guardado el recuerdo de estas palabras; pero tú las has olvidado, ¡y quieres matarme! ¡No! ¡Te conjuro á
ello por Pelops, por tu padre Atreo, por esta madre que me ha parido y que sufre por segunda vez los dolores del parto!
¿Qué tengo yo que ver con las bodas de Alejandro y de Helena? ¿Por qué ¡oh padre! ha venido él para atraerme la
muerte? ¡Mírame! Otórgame una mirada y un beso, para que, al menos, me lleve yo, al morir, una prenda tuya, [1240] si
no cedes á mis palabras. ¡Hermano! débil apoyo eres para tus amigos; llora conmigo, sin embargo, y pide, suplicante, á tu
padre que no muera tu hermana. Los niños tienen alguna percepción de los males. ¡He aquí que te suplico en silencio,
padre! ¡Piensa en mí, ten piedad de mi vida! Sí, los dos, que te somos caros, te suplicamos por tus mejillas, él un niño
todavía, y yo adolescente. Lo resumo todo en una palabra, y convenceré: [1250] dulcísimo es para los hombres ver la luz;
pero los muertos ya no son nada. ¡Insensato quien desee morir! Más vale vivir miserablemente que morir gloriosamente.

El coro
¡Oh funesta Helena! ¡por causa tuya y de tus bodas, entre los Atreidas y sus hijos se produce una grave discordia!
Agamenón

Sé hasta qué punto hay que mostrar piedad, y hasta qué punto no tenerla. Amo á mis hijos; de otro modo sería un in-
sensato. Estoy cruelmente afligido por atreverme á semejantes cosas, mujer, y también por no atreverme; pero ¡tengo

que realizarlas! Ved cuán numerosa es esta armada naval, [1260] y cuántos son los reyes de los helenos armados de
bronce. No les será dable llegar á las torres de Ilios mientras no te sacrifique yo, como ha dicho el adivinador Calcas, ni
les estará permitido derribar las ilustres moradas de Troya. Un deseo furioso arrastra á la armada de los helenos á
navegar muy rápidamente hacia la tierra de los bárbaros, para impedir el rapto de las mujeres helénicas. Matarán en
Argos á mis hijas, á vosotros y á mí, si no cumplo el oráculo de la Diosa. No es Menelao quien me obliga, hija, [1270]
pues no le obedezco, sino que es la Hélade á quien tengo que sacrificarte, quiera ó no. Somos impotentes en eso. Es
preciso, hija mía, que la Hélade sea libre por ti y por mí, y que no sean despojados de sus mujeres los helenos por los
bárbaros.

Elegant portrayal of lost family found

This was a pretty good story. I just had a bit of a hard time reading it. I would recommend it to others to read if they want to read an interesting story.

Read it for a class

This play (and the story of Iphigenia in general) is frustrating on a number of levels, and this version couldn't redeem it for me, but Clytemnestra's monologue rebuking Agamemnon is one of the best things I've read in Greek tragedy. In fact, this is probably my favorite incarnation of Clytemnestra so far. Spending so long with the Oresteia and other plays that focus on the supposed justice of her murder by Orestes, I felt like I'd waited years to hear her take Agamemnon to task for Iphigenia. It also shows an interesting side of Achilles, especially in comparison with the Iliad. Unfortunately, the story ends where it always does, and Iphigenia's voluntary sacrifice under the banner of patriotism really doesn't cut it for me when you look at the aftermath of the Trojan War as it's presented in Orestes, as well as her own dissatisfaction in Iphigenia in Tauris.
(Original review: 3 stars, translation Charles Walker)

EDIT FEB 2023 (3 to 5 *): Reread the play in the W. S. Merwin & George E. Dimock translation. A very convincing introduction by Dimock argues an interpretative plot twist I should've seen coming years ago: that frustration and contradiction is very much the point of the ending. He maintains that Iphigenia's willing sacrifice is a satirical condemnation of the patriotic militant frenzy Euripides would have seen in the Peloponnesian War. It's not glorifying her death, but challenging the very notion of dying for a war. As for Clytemnestra…well, sing, goddess, of her rage, more than that of Achilles, because she is still glorious here. Against all odds, this may end up being one of my favorite Greek plays––have changed to 5 stars for the pure, unadulterated catharsis of watching Clytemnestra say everything that usually can't be spoken.

I really appreciated Einhorn's appendix on Iphigenia's "one man's life is worth more than the lives of ten thousand women" line and how, despite her entire speech being steeped in propaganda, THAT is always the part that shocks modern audiences, even though the rest of her beliefs are just as absurd.
Iphigenia positions herself as a martyr whose sacrifice will save them all, but this isn't true even contextually. She isn't being sacrificed for an assured victory; she is dying in order to possibly bring the soldiers smooth waters for safe travels. Yet she wholeheartedly believes that her death will turn the tide in their favor, just as she wholeheartedly believes that "one man's life is worth more than the lives of ten thousand women". It's an astute observation that prompts the reader to reevaluate the entire scene without the veneer of nationalist propaganda, and to reflect on how deeply ingrained this brand of warmongering propaganda is within our own societies.

ახალი ლიტერატურული წლის ბერძნული ტრაგედიით დაწყებას არაფერი ჯობია. ისე კი იფიგენიას პერსონაჟი, ჩემთვის ერთ–ერთი ყველაზე საყვარელია ამ ეპოქიდან. ტექსტში ევრიპიდე სხვა კუთხით გვანახებს აგამემნონს, ოდისევსს, კლიტემნესტრას, მენელაოსს, ელენეს, აქილევსს. სიუჟეტის განვითარების მანძილზე ყოველ გმირზე თანდათან გეცვლება წარმოდგენა. ჩემთვის იფიგენიას ხასიათში მომხდარი ცვლილები იყო ყველაზე საინტერესო, რომელიც ერთი შეხედვით შეიძლება ვერც კი შეამჩნიო. ასევე ძალზე კარგი იყო დასასრულიც, არატრაგიკული მაგრამ ზუსტი, რადგან ვერ ვიგებთ თუ რას ეტყვის სამსხვერპლოდან მობრუნებულ ქმარს კლიტემნესტრა. მისი პასუხი აქ არ ჩანს, ხოლო წლების შემდეგ ეს პასუხი რაც აღმოჩნდა ყველამ კარგად ვიცით. მოკლედ ძალიან ჩემია ძველბერძნული ლიტერატურა და ძალიან ძალიან მიყვარს. დამამშვიდებელი ეფექტი აქვს და მიუხედავად სიძველისა, თითქოს ჯერ კიდევ ცინცხალი, უახლესი, უტკბესი ხილია.

Read the translation by Charles Walker, it was pretty good.

One Final Play
29 August 2018 – Sydney

tWell, as it turns out, this was Euripides’ last play, the reason being that he died before he could finish it. This is sort of a bit of a turn of events where Greek plays are concerned because most of the time the reason we don’t have the plays is because they have been lost (you can probably blame Julius Caeser for that, among other people, but then again the Great Library did seem to be a bit of a fire magnet). However, just because he didn’t finish it doesn’t mean that it is necessarily incomplete, namely because somebody else came along at a later date and decided to fix up what Euripides didn’t get to do. The problem is that when you have situations where a genius dies and his work is incomplete, basically anybody who comes along to finish it off is basically going to do an incredibly shoddy job – this was the case with Herge’s final Tintin album.

tSo, this play is basically about the time when the Greeks are trying to get to Troy but the gods seem to be against them because, well, the winds are blowing in the wrong direction. That can be a bit of a problem when all you have are ships that are powered by sail. Well sort of since not only were they powered by sail, but they were also powered by the fact that they also had lots of people with really strong arms pushing and pulling on the oars in unison (slaves if you will, but I don’t think the people who staffed the oars were slaves in every instance, but then again this is ancient Greek drama, so the normal people basically don’t matter anyway).

tYou could say that this is a tragedy namely because the events here in Aulis basically resulted in the whole mess that Orestes landed up in, though if we follow through his life we learn that he was a pretty hot headed individual anyway. However, the story isn’t so much about Orestes, but rather about Agamemnon, his daughter Iphigenia, and a few others – Clytemnestra probably shouldn’t be forgotten because she does happen to be Agamemnon’s wife.

tWell, long suffering Clytemnestra – it turns out that Agamemnon wasn’t her first husband, and the reason that she is the wife of Agamemnon is because he basically killed her first husband and took her as his wife. Gee, I sense a bit of hypocrisy here since I get the impression that while it was okay for him to steal somebody’s wife, when Paris did the same thing to his brother, the entire Greek nation gets up in arms and goes to war. Then again Paris wasn’t Greek, and even today there is still a lot of people who are incredibly uncomfortable with inter-racial marriage, especially when they happen to marry one of us white barbarians.

tThe thing is that Agamemnon is being pretty sneaky. Then again if he had went to his wife and said ‘can you send our daughter to me, I have to sacrifice her so that Artemis will change the direction of the winds’ I suspect that he wouldn’t have received a positive reply. So, instead, he says that he has arranged for her to be married. Well, sort of because it ends up being a lie, namely because he did actually want to sacrifice her so that Artemis would change the direction of the winds. Talk about a dedicated man – this guy is willing to sacrifice his own daughter to save the unfaithful wife of his brother. Then again, as some have suggested, there is the whole oath that they swore to defend Helen’s, or should I say Menelaus’, honour. Or was it, there is also the suggestion that Helen really was just an excuse to destroy a powerful city at the entrance to some very important trade routes – hey, it isn’t as if anybody else has gone to war based upon some really flimsy proposition.

tActually, let us consider the anti-war aspects here for a second, because there are some, particularly with Agamemnon wanting to sacrifice his daughter. The thing is that I never really thought about the whole idea of sacrifice when I initially read the play, but while this whole ‘oh, no, he’s going to sacrifice his daughter’ mentality, we sometimes forget that there are a whole bunch of men, somebodies son nonetheless, who are also going to be sacrifice into the meat grinder that happens to be a war. Funnily enough, these young men tend to be the ones who end up in the firing line, while the kings and commanders, the important people if you will, usually end up sitting the whole thing out from a tend at the top of a hill. You know, we can’t have the generals in the firing line because who is going to lead the men otherwise. Well, it seems that this didn’t particularly bother Alexander, or Napoleon.

tStill, we shouldn’t forget that this is Ancient Greece that we are talking about, and as it happens, these guys are going to be in the thick of battle – we know that from the Iliad. However, I guess Euripides is drawing on the fact that while wars are played out between the kings and the generals, the pieces they are fought with armies, and it is the individuals who make up these armies that end up being the ones who suffer the consequences, and in fact they happen to be the ones that never come home. Does that make the generals and kings cowards though? I guess that is a question that I’ll leave up in the air for the time being because it does raise some interesting thoughts.

tWell, the story is great, but the play itself, well, honestly, I can’t tell which is Euripides and which isn’t, but then again I read the English and not the Greek, and even though I sort of understand Greek, I certainly am not fluent in it so I wouldn’t be able to tell the difference anyway. Actually, I suspect that you have to have a pretty good eye, and also a pretty good understanding of the author’s style, to be able to pick up some of these differences. Honestly, while I do like my books, I’m certainly not that good that I’d be able to spot such things.

This story is heart-breaking, especially the long speeches from Clytemnestra and Iphigenia. In Clytemnestra’s monologues, when she argues hard why her husband Agamemnon should not sacrifice their daughter, made me rethink how later she will welcome her husband’s return home. Let’s just say it’s not a heroic’s welcome.

My second read is an edition with notes. This I found helpful in reassuring me that I was roughly on the right track, as I continue my journey to read old stories and myths.

Et græsk skuespil der ikke ender tragisk? Mere sandsynligt end man skulle tro. Skuespillet er noget af Euripides smukkest sprog, og en af de få skuespil der kigger på Agamemnon familiens tragedie på en nuanceret måde der udforske alle sider af sagen i et enkelt skuespil( aischylos gør noget lignede, men det er i forskellige skuespil, og i det enkle skuespil kan konflikten virke meget ensidig på trods af sens nuance).

Jeg elskede også skuespillets analyse af den græske kvindes relation med døden gennem den kvindelige hovedperson.