...
Show More
when the entire play is a subtweet of Aeschylus and Homer…
Ease Reading-Find Your Next Favorite Book
Community Reviews
Rating(4 / 5.0, 100 votes)
5 stars
33(33%)
4 stars
29(29%)
3 stars
38(38%)
2 stars
0(0%)
1 stars
0(0%)
100 reviews
...
Show More
Iphigenia at Aulis is the last play of those extant written by Euripides. It is a prequel to his Iphigenia in Tauris which was written some years earlier. Interestingly, the story of Iphigenia’s sacrifice to speed the Greek fleet gathered at Aulis on its way to Troy is not mentioned in The Iliad. Iphigenia does however appear in Aeschylus’ Agamemnon which recounts her sacrifice by her father for the sake of the Geek fleet and army.
Different versions of Iphigenia at Aulis exist: in some Iphigenia is sacrificed, in others a deer is sacrificed instead. Some scholars believe the play was left unfinished by Euripides and that the end was written by another hand, which may explain the different versions. In the Iphigenia in Tauris sequel, Artemis is said to have whisked Iphigenia away to Tauris at the last moment. It strikes me that whether she was killed or not is incidental to the subsequent tragedy of Agamemnon and his house because Clytemnestra discounts tales of the goddess’ intervention and holds Agamemnon responsible for her eldest child’s death; in Clytemnestra's heart she knows that he chose to kill his daughter for the sake of fame and fortune, out of loyalty to his brother, and from fear of his army.
Euripides’ characters are complex and torn by conflicting loves and needs. They ask which is more valued, the love of a father for his child or the expectation and demands of kingship and community? We read a dialogue between Agamemnon and Menelaos on this that has all the hallmarks of a real-life dispute between brothers. We are surprised to see that the “great” Achilles is vain and shallow. Deceit brings Iphigenia to Aulis where the men’s sense of their own importance and their need to save face condemn her. I maintain that the real heroes at Aulis are Clytemnestra, who values her children above all, and Iphigenia, who after much pained thought, agrees to sacrifice herself for the sake of her father, the House of Atreus, and the Greeks. The crisis is initiated by the vengeance of Artemis, who we will hear more about in Iphigenia is Tauris.
Iphigenia at Aulis is fraught with emotional tension, even anguish. Agamemnon and the entire army avert their eyes at the movement of the sacrifice, so there is confusion as to what actually happened. The story that is put about is not believed by all; the closure is indefinite.
I recommend most highly the Oxford University Press edition, part of its series on “Greek Tragedy in New Translations.” The text is readable and coherent with a useful introduction, endnotes, and glossary. As an object the hardbound book is something to be treasured; I believe is only available as a used book.
Different versions of Iphigenia at Aulis exist: in some Iphigenia is sacrificed, in others a deer is sacrificed instead. Some scholars believe the play was left unfinished by Euripides and that the end was written by another hand, which may explain the different versions. In the Iphigenia in Tauris sequel, Artemis is said to have whisked Iphigenia away to Tauris at the last moment. It strikes me that whether she was killed or not is incidental to the subsequent tragedy of Agamemnon and his house because Clytemnestra discounts tales of the goddess’ intervention and holds Agamemnon responsible for her eldest child’s death; in Clytemnestra's heart she knows that he chose to kill his daughter for the sake of fame and fortune, out of loyalty to his brother, and from fear of his army.
Euripides’ characters are complex and torn by conflicting loves and needs. They ask which is more valued, the love of a father for his child or the expectation and demands of kingship and community? We read a dialogue between Agamemnon and Menelaos on this that has all the hallmarks of a real-life dispute between brothers. We are surprised to see that the “great” Achilles is vain and shallow. Deceit brings Iphigenia to Aulis where the men’s sense of their own importance and their need to save face condemn her. I maintain that the real heroes at Aulis are Clytemnestra, who values her children above all, and Iphigenia, who after much pained thought, agrees to sacrifice herself for the sake of her father, the House of Atreus, and the Greeks. The crisis is initiated by the vengeance of Artemis, who we will hear more about in Iphigenia is Tauris.
Iphigenia at Aulis is fraught with emotional tension, even anguish. Agamemnon and the entire army avert their eyes at the movement of the sacrifice, so there is confusion as to what actually happened. The story that is put about is not believed by all; the closure is indefinite.
I recommend most highly the Oxford University Press edition, part of its series on “Greek Tragedy in New Translations.” The text is readable and coherent with a useful introduction, endnotes, and glossary. As an object the hardbound book is something to be treasured; I believe is only available as a used book.
...
Show More
Kitap, savaşın getirdiği zor seçimler ve fedakarlık temalarını işliyor.
Iphigenia Aulis'te, Agamemnon'un Troya'ya gitmek üzere Aulis'te bekleyen ordusuyla karşılaştığı güçlükleri konu alıyor. Büyük bir ordunun lideri olarak savaş hazırlıkları yaparken, Agamemnon beklenmedik bir sorunla yüzleşir: tanrıça Artemis’in öfkesi nedeniyle rüzgar kesilmiş ve ordusu Aulis'te hareketsiz kalmıştır.
Tanrılardan bir işaret gelmediği için ordusu Aulis'te beklemeye devam ederken, Agamemnon’a bir kahin tanrıların öfkesini yatıştırmak için kızı Iphigenia'yı kurban etmesi gerektiğini söyler. Agamemnon, bu noktada büyük bir ikilemle karşı karşıya kalır. Kızını feda ederek ordusunu sefere çıkarabilir ya da bu isteği reddedip, aylardır bekleyen askerlerini hayal kırıklığına uğratarak geri gönderebilir. Ancak geri dönerse, Troya seferindeki liderlik konumunu ve kazandığı itibarı kaybetme korkusu yaşar.
Kitabın ortalarına doğru çaresizlik zirveye ulaştığında, Akhilleus devreye giriyor. Başta cesur ve kararlı bir duruş sergilese de, yaşanan olaylar ve kendi iç çatışmaları onun da tereddütler yaşamasına neden oluyor.
Iphigenia Aulis'te, Agamemnon'un Troya'ya gitmek üzere Aulis'te bekleyen ordusuyla karşılaştığı güçlükleri konu alıyor. Büyük bir ordunun lideri olarak savaş hazırlıkları yaparken, Agamemnon beklenmedik bir sorunla yüzleşir: tanrıça Artemis’in öfkesi nedeniyle rüzgar kesilmiş ve ordusu Aulis'te hareketsiz kalmıştır.
Tanrılardan bir işaret gelmediği için ordusu Aulis'te beklemeye devam ederken, Agamemnon’a bir kahin tanrıların öfkesini yatıştırmak için kızı Iphigenia'yı kurban etmesi gerektiğini söyler. Agamemnon, bu noktada büyük bir ikilemle karşı karşıya kalır. Kızını feda ederek ordusunu sefere çıkarabilir ya da bu isteği reddedip, aylardır bekleyen askerlerini hayal kırıklığına uğratarak geri gönderebilir. Ancak geri dönerse, Troya seferindeki liderlik konumunu ve kazandığı itibarı kaybetme korkusu yaşar.
Kitabın ortalarına doğru çaresizlik zirveye ulaştığında, Akhilleus devreye giriyor. Başta cesur ve kararlı bir duruş sergilese de, yaşanan olaylar ve kendi iç çatışmaları onun da tereddütler yaşamasına neden oluyor.
...
Show More
Puanım 4/5 (%76/100)
“Kısa ve öz konuşarak kendini güzel tanıttın,
ama ben kadınlarla konuşmaya utanırım.”
Iphigenia Truva Savaşı’nda savaşmış ünlü komutan Agamemnon’un kızıdır. Bir kehanet sebebiyle savaşı kazanmak için Agamemnon’un kızını kurban etmesi gerekir. Tanrıların isteği olduğu ve kızını vatanı ve askerleri önünde tutmaması gerektiği halde Agamemnon kendi öz kızını kurban etmek istemez. Kardeşi ve ünlü Helen’in eşi olan Menelaus ise kurbanın gerekli olduğunu söyler. Olaylar gelişir ve Agamemnon da kurbanın gerekli olduğuna karar verir. Fakat bu sefer Menelaus yeğenini ölmesini istemez. Agamemnon karısı Klytaimnestra’ya Iphigenia ile birlikte Aulis’e gelmesi için mektup yollar. Iphigenia’nın ünlü savaşçı Akhilleus ile evleneceği yalanını ortaya atar. Anne kız Aulis’e gelir fakat haberler Akhilleus’un kulağına gitmiştir. Agamemnon’un böyle davranmasına öfkelenen Akhilleus Iphigenia’yı korumaya yemin eder. Akhilleus’un askerleri Myrmidonlar bile kurbanın gerekli olduğunu düşündüğü için komutanlarının üstüne yürür. Ne yapılırsa yapılsın Agamemnon ikna edilemez ve Iphenia kaderini kabullenir. Kurban edilmek için ayrılır ve sonra bir haberci aracılığıyla neler olduğunu öğreniriz. Iphigenia öldürülmek üzere sunağa yatırılır fakat o sırada Artemis kendisini gösterip onun yerine bir geyik koyup kızı kurtarır. Hikaye böyle bitiyor ve Iphigenia Tauris’te adlı kitapta devam ediyor.
“Kısa ve öz konuşarak kendini güzel tanıttın,
ama ben kadınlarla konuşmaya utanırım.”
Iphigenia Truva Savaşı’nda savaşmış ünlü komutan Agamemnon’un kızıdır. Bir kehanet sebebiyle savaşı kazanmak için Agamemnon’un kızını kurban etmesi gerekir. Tanrıların isteği olduğu ve kızını vatanı ve askerleri önünde tutmaması gerektiği halde Agamemnon kendi öz kızını kurban etmek istemez. Kardeşi ve ünlü Helen’in eşi olan Menelaus ise kurbanın gerekli olduğunu söyler. Olaylar gelişir ve Agamemnon da kurbanın gerekli olduğuna karar verir. Fakat bu sefer Menelaus yeğenini ölmesini istemez. Agamemnon karısı Klytaimnestra’ya Iphigenia ile birlikte Aulis’e gelmesi için mektup yollar. Iphigenia’nın ünlü savaşçı Akhilleus ile evleneceği yalanını ortaya atar. Anne kız Aulis’e gelir fakat haberler Akhilleus’un kulağına gitmiştir. Agamemnon’un böyle davranmasına öfkelenen Akhilleus Iphigenia’yı korumaya yemin eder. Akhilleus’un askerleri Myrmidonlar bile kurbanın gerekli olduğunu düşündüğü için komutanlarının üstüne yürür. Ne yapılırsa yapılsın Agamemnon ikna edilemez ve Iphenia kaderini kabullenir. Kurban edilmek için ayrılır ve sonra bir haberci aracılığıyla neler olduğunu öğreniriz. Iphigenia öldürülmek üzere sunağa yatırılır fakat o sırada Artemis kendisini gösterip onun yerine bir geyik koyup kızı kurtarır. Hikaye böyle bitiyor ve Iphigenia Tauris’te adlı kitapta devam ediyor.
...
Show More
"How indeed could it have been credible in Euripides' time to Greeks who had outgrown human sacrifice centuries before? One obvious answer is that, as in all Greek tragedies, the dramatist is skilful enough to make the audience accept the conditions of the tragic dilemma as set forth in the myth. But the second reason - related to the first - is that the play really is not about the institution of human sacrifice at all. It might have been, but it isn't. What then is the play about?
(...)
"Helen, through selfish love, has brought 'travail and trouble' upon all the Greeks. Iphigenia, by selfless sacrifice, rescues the Greek expedition from futility and becomes, so both she and the other characters believe, a 'true savior of Greece.' Perhaps there is a hint of the meaning of the play in this contrast of the two women. Again the reader or spectator will inevitably compare Iphigenia, the girl who loves her father in spite ofhis weakness and his intention to kill her, with Clytemnestra, who hates her husband and will one day kill him (as the legend tells us) when here-turns from Troy.
(...)
But they perhaps also point toward what Euripides was saying in the play. She [Iphigenia] is wholly blind to his weakness. To her - and to her alone in the play - he is a great man, committing her to her death for the sake of Greece. Her attitude toward him is one of love throughout." (pp
212-213).
-------------------
"But perhaps he believed that Iphigenia and Clytemnestra were both 'right'." This sentence cinfused me at first, but then reading both character's statements it's very hard to say that only one or the other is correct. Their arguments are solid, their motivations seem legitimate and are condoned by the other characters of the play. Also, Achilles makes a point that both characters come to an impasse could be right at the same time. He doesn't elaborate, but we can see as the dialogue develops that the hero is both marriage bound - and not bound - to Iphigenia and to the army. It wouldn't be a first (nor second, nor third) when it comes to principles that are completely contrary which, notwithstanding, coexist. It's complicated though, because such principles never seem to lead to a very satisfying conclusion (duh). Every single character seems to judge their own and one another's actions, yet there is never a verdict. Vengeance creates more vengeance. Selflessness doesn't stop carnage. Giving in is unthinkable, stubbornness is condemnable. Justice seems to confuse the debtor. Honour and reputation always have their tolls and not one character knows if they're worth it, but they just can't stand doing without. Euripides obviously sums it all up a lot better:
"High honors are sweet
To a man's heart, but ever
They stand close to the brink of grief.
Many things can bring calamity.
At one time, it is an enterprise
Of the gods which, failing,
Overturns a man's life. At another,
The wills of men, many and malignant,
Ruin life utterly."
"I don't like words
Like these from a king. Agamemnon,
Atreus begat you, but not to have
All good things in your life. No,
It is necessary and it is fated
That you be glad and that you
Be sad too, for you were born
Human, and whether you like it or not,
What the gods will comes true."
"Zeus' breath - it brings delight -
And doom - to mortals;
At one time the sails laugh
In a favoring breeze,
At another, Zeus the Almighty
Blows down upon mortals
Delay and doom.
O toil-bearing race, 0 toil-bearing
Creatures living for a day -
Fate finds for every man
His share of misery.
----------
These quotes by the chorus kind of reminded me of Sophocles, they felt that much more ¿moral?
"O blest are those who share
In Aphrodite's gifts
With modesty and measure,
(Agamemnon and Menelaus go out.)
Blest who escape the frenzied passion.
For Eros of the golden hair
Shoots his two arrows of desire,
And the one brings happiness
To man's life, the other ruin."
"Many are the natures of men,
Various their manners of living,
Yet a straight path is always the right one;
And lessons deeply taught
Lead man to paths of righteousness;
Reverence, I say, is wisdom
And by its grace transfigures-
So that we seek virtue
With a right judgment."
However, both the multiplicity of men's characters and the story that unfolds contradict the idea that a single path, a single judgement could be perfectly right, which kijnd of brings us back to the irony above.
----------
Another problem!! The Clytemnestra in this play is not the same one as in Electra.
"Oh, what a power is motherhood, possessing
A potent spell. All women alike
Fight fiercely for a child."
I don't understand how she could then proceed to abandon Electra and Orestes. She seems genuinely eager to protect and care for her children.
From what is said she seems to have a temper, a dominant character, a thirst for revenge which doesn't fall that far from Medea's (perhaps she "kills" her children by agamenon off of her life for that reason?). Even her adulterous marriage, we don't have any reason to suppose she's been faithful before Agamamnon's betrayal and she makes it quite clear that her marriage is not a loving one.
But I can't quite pin it down, why she would mistreat her own children like that. Is it just out of anger and fear? Out of spite? Even after she's already killed Agamemnon? But what could ever be justice for a child murdered by the hands of the same man that ought to protect her, and through such a hateful lie? Worse yet, the second child that he murders.
"And this reproach I first hurl in your teeth,
That I married you against my will, after
You murdered Tantalus, my first husband,
And dashed my living babe upon the earth,
Brutally tearing him from my breasts."
Maybe that act, her revenge, is the turning point, where something inside her changes or some potential develops into action?
"No! by the gods, do not
Force me to become a woman of evil!
Or to betray you! And you, against me
Do not commit this sin! Tell me now,
After the sacrifice of your child, what prayer
Can your mouth utter? What things of good
Can you ever pray for when you have
Slain the girl?"
Maybe she's in fact incapable of love, but living a peaceful life she manages to do what is expected of her (to an extent at least?). Or she has a competitive spirit that is way too fierce, but which left unprovoked had been sleeping up until then? She keeps a new family after the deed is done. Perhaps she believes that nothing can be saved of her first one? But something about Euripides' Clytemnestra is very different from the former ones. She has done monstruous deeds, none of which we see ourselves. We see the other side, her losses and hurts. One side can never erase the other, because both have been taken to extremes. However, this is all in all a more complex character.
(...)
"Helen, through selfish love, has brought 'travail and trouble' upon all the Greeks. Iphigenia, by selfless sacrifice, rescues the Greek expedition from futility and becomes, so both she and the other characters believe, a 'true savior of Greece.' Perhaps there is a hint of the meaning of the play in this contrast of the two women. Again the reader or spectator will inevitably compare Iphigenia, the girl who loves her father in spite ofhis weakness and his intention to kill her, with Clytemnestra, who hates her husband and will one day kill him (as the legend tells us) when here-turns from Troy.
(...)
But they perhaps also point toward what Euripides was saying in the play. She [Iphigenia] is wholly blind to his weakness. To her - and to her alone in the play - he is a great man, committing her to her death for the sake of Greece. Her attitude toward him is one of love throughout." (pp
212-213).
-------------------
"But perhaps he believed that Iphigenia and Clytemnestra were both 'right'." This sentence cinfused me at first, but then reading both character's statements it's very hard to say that only one or the other is correct. Their arguments are solid, their motivations seem legitimate and are condoned by the other characters of the play. Also, Achilles makes a point that both characters come to an impasse could be right at the same time. He doesn't elaborate, but we can see as the dialogue develops that the hero is both marriage bound - and not bound - to Iphigenia and to the army. It wouldn't be a first (nor second, nor third) when it comes to principles that are completely contrary which, notwithstanding, coexist. It's complicated though, because such principles never seem to lead to a very satisfying conclusion (duh). Every single character seems to judge their own and one another's actions, yet there is never a verdict. Vengeance creates more vengeance. Selflessness doesn't stop carnage. Giving in is unthinkable, stubbornness is condemnable. Justice seems to confuse the debtor. Honour and reputation always have their tolls and not one character knows if they're worth it, but they just can't stand doing without. Euripides obviously sums it all up a lot better:
"High honors are sweet
To a man's heart, but ever
They stand close to the brink of grief.
Many things can bring calamity.
At one time, it is an enterprise
Of the gods which, failing,
Overturns a man's life. At another,
The wills of men, many and malignant,
Ruin life utterly."
"I don't like words
Like these from a king. Agamemnon,
Atreus begat you, but not to have
All good things in your life. No,
It is necessary and it is fated
That you be glad and that you
Be sad too, for you were born
Human, and whether you like it or not,
What the gods will comes true."
"Zeus' breath - it brings delight -
And doom - to mortals;
At one time the sails laugh
In a favoring breeze,
At another, Zeus the Almighty
Blows down upon mortals
Delay and doom.
O toil-bearing race, 0 toil-bearing
Creatures living for a day -
Fate finds for every man
His share of misery.
----------
These quotes by the chorus kind of reminded me of Sophocles, they felt that much more ¿moral?
"O blest are those who share
In Aphrodite's gifts
With modesty and measure,
(Agamemnon and Menelaus go out.)
Blest who escape the frenzied passion.
For Eros of the golden hair
Shoots his two arrows of desire,
And the one brings happiness
To man's life, the other ruin."
"Many are the natures of men,
Various their manners of living,
Yet a straight path is always the right one;
And lessons deeply taught
Lead man to paths of righteousness;
Reverence, I say, is wisdom
And by its grace transfigures-
So that we seek virtue
With a right judgment."
However, both the multiplicity of men's characters and the story that unfolds contradict the idea that a single path, a single judgement could be perfectly right, which kijnd of brings us back to the irony above.
----------
Another problem!! The Clytemnestra in this play is not the same one as in Electra.
"Oh, what a power is motherhood, possessing
A potent spell. All women alike
Fight fiercely for a child."
I don't understand how she could then proceed to abandon Electra and Orestes. She seems genuinely eager to protect and care for her children.
From what is said she seems to have a temper, a dominant character, a thirst for revenge which doesn't fall that far from Medea's (perhaps she "kills" her children by agamenon off of her life for that reason?). Even her adulterous marriage, we don't have any reason to suppose she's been faithful before Agamamnon's betrayal and she makes it quite clear that her marriage is not a loving one.
But I can't quite pin it down, why she would mistreat her own children like that. Is it just out of anger and fear? Out of spite? Even after she's already killed Agamemnon? But what could ever be justice for a child murdered by the hands of the same man that ought to protect her, and through such a hateful lie? Worse yet, the second child that he murders.
"And this reproach I first hurl in your teeth,
That I married you against my will, after
You murdered Tantalus, my first husband,
And dashed my living babe upon the earth,
Brutally tearing him from my breasts."
Maybe that act, her revenge, is the turning point, where something inside her changes or some potential develops into action?
"No! by the gods, do not
Force me to become a woman of evil!
Or to betray you! And you, against me
Do not commit this sin! Tell me now,
After the sacrifice of your child, what prayer
Can your mouth utter? What things of good
Can you ever pray for when you have
Slain the girl?"
Maybe she's in fact incapable of love, but living a peaceful life she manages to do what is expected of her (to an extent at least?). Or she has a competitive spirit that is way too fierce, but which left unprovoked had been sleeping up until then? She keeps a new family after the deed is done. Perhaps she believes that nothing can be saved of her first one? But something about Euripides' Clytemnestra is very different from the former ones. She has done monstruous deeds, none of which we see ourselves. We see the other side, her losses and hurts. One side can never erase the other, because both have been taken to extremes. However, this is all in all a more complex character.
...
Show More
Agamemnon: I'm so sad.
Old Man: Yo, what's up?
Agamemnon: Helen, that hot chick from Troy, picked my brother Menelaus to marry. But Paris stole her. Now we gots to get her back, but some prophet said that we can't leave to do that until I kill my daughter Iphigenia!
Old Man: Uh... okay.
Agamemnon: Take this letter to my wife. I sent her one already that lied and said that I was marrying Iphigenia to the hot dude Achilles, but this one says it was all a lie and not to come here. I don't want to kill my daughter.
Menelaus: What's this? A letter?
Old Man: No! Give it back!
Menelaus: *reads the letter* That bastard!
Old Man: Agamemnon! Help!
Agamemnon: What is going on?
Menelaus: You tell me.
Agamemnon: Uhh... why do you have my letter?
Menelaus: A-HA! You're going back on your promise to kill your daughter! You're a lying bastard!
Agamemnon: Yeah, well... at least I don't have a whore for a wife!
Menelaus: You were never a good leader at all! No one can count on you. Greece is going to lose to Troy and I will never get my wife back because you won't kill your daughter.
Agamemnon: You are married to a whore and you would have a young girl slain just to get your wife back! Why should I kill my daughter, who has nothing to do with the whole mess, just so you can keep a whore?
Menelaus: Grrr.
Agamemnon: Grrr back at you.
Messenger: Iphigenia and her mother, your wife Clytemnestra have arrived!
Agamemnon: Oh, shit.
Menelaus: Yo, dude. Wait. I totally see your point now. Let's not kill Iphigenia, k?
Agamemnon: Whoa, dude... I didn't expect this. Um, too bad that I decided that I am going to sacrifice her after all. Otherwise, the guys that I told about the sacrifice would be pissed at me and would probably kill me.
Iphigenia: I love you, daddy!
Agamemnon: I love you too.
Iphigenia: I am blessed to be married to Achilles!
Agamemnon: *drops lots of hints about the fact that he's actually going to kill her*
Clytemnestra: So who is this Achilles?
Agamemnon: A good man.
Clytemnestra: Okay, let me handle the wedding stuff.
Agamemnon: No, no, no-- go home to be with your other daughters, I'll take care of everything.
Clytemnestra: Uh... the domestic realm is MY realm, thank you very much. You can't stop me.
Agamemnon: Oh, shit.
Achilles: I am Achilles!
Clytemnestra: Oh. Hello, Achilles.
Achilles: What's up?
Clytemnestra: Nothing, just preparing for your wedding to my daughter.
Achilles: What? I am not being married.
Clytemnestra: What? Yes you are.
Achilles: Am not.
Clytemnestra: Oh, shit.
Old Man: Yo, guys. C'mere. Agamemnon just lied; he's going to sacrifice Iphigenia. He sent a letter telling you not to come, but his brother took it.
Clytemnestra: Damn him!
Achilles: I will not allow your daughter to die; let me be a man and protect her!
Clytemnestra: Okay.
Agamemnon: Let us prepare Iphigenia!
Clytemnestra: Uh... I have a bone to pick with you.
Agamemnon: Go ahead.
Clytemnestra: Are you trying to kill our daughter?
Agamemnon: What makes you think such a thing?!
Clytemnestra: Are you trying to kill her, or not?
Agamemnon: Oh, shit. Yes, I am. Sorry.
Clytemnestra: You bastard. You took me into marriage by force, I gave you children, treated you well even though you were a bastard, and you repay me by killing our first-born child? To honor some whore?
Agamemnon: *gulps*
Iphigenia: Don't kill me! A lowly virgin am I.
Agamemnon: Damned if I do, damned if I don't.
Clytemnestra and Iphigenia: *weep*
Achilles: A mob is coming!
Clytemnestra: What?
Achilles: I tried to tell them they wouldn't kill Iphigenia and they stoned me. They are coming to kill her themselves.
Clytemnestra: Oh noes!
Achilles: Don't worry; I'll protect her!
Iphigenia: No, you won't. I am sacrificing myself.
Clytemnestra: WHAT??
Iphigenia: It is an honor to sacrifice myself for Greece. I'll be like, famous and shit. To the altar!
later...
Messenger: Extra! Extra!
Clytemnestra: What now?
Messenger: Your daughter is alive.
Clytemnestra: What? How?
Messenger: She went to sacrifice herself and when the priest went to slit her throat, everyone looked away. When they turned back, there was a deer killed in her place.
Clytemnestra: Joy!
Messenger: But your daughter is still gone. But she's at least still alive, right?
Clytemnestra: WTF?
Old Man: Yo, what's up?
Agamemnon: Helen, that hot chick from Troy, picked my brother Menelaus to marry. But Paris stole her. Now we gots to get her back, but some prophet said that we can't leave to do that until I kill my daughter Iphigenia!
Old Man: Uh... okay.
Agamemnon: Take this letter to my wife. I sent her one already that lied and said that I was marrying Iphigenia to the hot dude Achilles, but this one says it was all a lie and not to come here. I don't want to kill my daughter.
Menelaus: What's this? A letter?
Old Man: No! Give it back!
Menelaus: *reads the letter* That bastard!
Old Man: Agamemnon! Help!
Agamemnon: What is going on?
Menelaus: You tell me.
Agamemnon: Uhh... why do you have my letter?
Menelaus: A-HA! You're going back on your promise to kill your daughter! You're a lying bastard!
Agamemnon: Yeah, well... at least I don't have a whore for a wife!
Menelaus: You were never a good leader at all! No one can count on you. Greece is going to lose to Troy and I will never get my wife back because you won't kill your daughter.
Agamemnon: You are married to a whore and you would have a young girl slain just to get your wife back! Why should I kill my daughter, who has nothing to do with the whole mess, just so you can keep a whore?
Menelaus: Grrr.
Agamemnon: Grrr back at you.
Messenger: Iphigenia and her mother, your wife Clytemnestra have arrived!
Agamemnon: Oh, shit.
Menelaus: Yo, dude. Wait. I totally see your point now. Let's not kill Iphigenia, k?
Agamemnon: Whoa, dude... I didn't expect this. Um, too bad that I decided that I am going to sacrifice her after all. Otherwise, the guys that I told about the sacrifice would be pissed at me and would probably kill me.
Iphigenia: I love you, daddy!
Agamemnon: I love you too.
Iphigenia: I am blessed to be married to Achilles!
Agamemnon: *drops lots of hints about the fact that he's actually going to kill her*
Clytemnestra: So who is this Achilles?
Agamemnon: A good man.
Clytemnestra: Okay, let me handle the wedding stuff.
Agamemnon: No, no, no-- go home to be with your other daughters, I'll take care of everything.
Clytemnestra: Uh... the domestic realm is MY realm, thank you very much. You can't stop me.
Agamemnon: Oh, shit.
Achilles: I am Achilles!
Clytemnestra: Oh. Hello, Achilles.
Achilles: What's up?
Clytemnestra: Nothing, just preparing for your wedding to my daughter.
Achilles: What? I am not being married.
Clytemnestra: What? Yes you are.
Achilles: Am not.
Clytemnestra: Oh, shit.
Old Man: Yo, guys. C'mere. Agamemnon just lied; he's going to sacrifice Iphigenia. He sent a letter telling you not to come, but his brother took it.
Clytemnestra: Damn him!
Achilles: I will not allow your daughter to die; let me be a man and protect her!
Clytemnestra: Okay.
Agamemnon: Let us prepare Iphigenia!
Clytemnestra: Uh... I have a bone to pick with you.
Agamemnon: Go ahead.
Clytemnestra: Are you trying to kill our daughter?
Agamemnon: What makes you think such a thing?!
Clytemnestra: Are you trying to kill her, or not?
Agamemnon: Oh, shit. Yes, I am. Sorry.
Clytemnestra: You bastard. You took me into marriage by force, I gave you children, treated you well even though you were a bastard, and you repay me by killing our first-born child? To honor some whore?
Agamemnon: *gulps*
Iphigenia: Don't kill me! A lowly virgin am I.
Agamemnon: Damned if I do, damned if I don't.
Clytemnestra and Iphigenia: *weep*
Achilles: A mob is coming!
Clytemnestra: What?
Achilles: I tried to tell them they wouldn't kill Iphigenia and they stoned me. They are coming to kill her themselves.
Clytemnestra: Oh noes!
Achilles: Don't worry; I'll protect her!
Iphigenia: No, you won't. I am sacrificing myself.
Clytemnestra: WHAT??
Iphigenia: It is an honor to sacrifice myself for Greece. I'll be like, famous and shit. To the altar!
later...
Messenger: Extra! Extra!
Clytemnestra: What now?
Messenger: Your daughter is alive.
Clytemnestra: What? How?
Messenger: She went to sacrifice herself and when the priest went to slit her throat, everyone looked away. When they turned back, there was a deer killed in her place.
Clytemnestra: Joy!
Messenger: But your daughter is still gone. But she's at least still alive, right?
Clytemnestra: WTF?
...
Show More
There are so many modern “feminist retellings” of Greek mythology, especially with a focus on the Trojan War (Natalie Haynes, Pat Barker, Jennifer Saint), and many of these modern books claim to have been written due to a dearth of women-centric ancient stories, which baffles me—have y’all never heard of Euripides’s “The Trojan Women” or what about his plays “Iphigenia at Aulis,” “Medea,” and “Iphigenia in Taurus” And “Antigone” by Sophocles ?? All of these plays, written in the 5th century B.C., center around women and I would argue are more feminist than many of the modern stuff being churned out today.
Just because a book was written by a woman and is about a woman doesn’t automatically make it a feminist retelling. Reimagining a story to highlight the heroic acts of a female protagonist IS what makes something a feminist retelling, and that is exactly what Euripides does with “Iphigenia at Aulis.” Instead of being portrayed as a passive victim without agency (as she was portrayed in Madeline Miller’s “Song of Achilles”), Iphigenia is portrayed as a noble heroine among a cast of bumbling and hysterical characters.
Just because a book was written by a woman and is about a woman doesn’t automatically make it a feminist retelling. Reimagining a story to highlight the heroic acts of a female protagonist IS what makes something a feminist retelling, and that is exactly what Euripides does with “Iphigenia at Aulis.” Instead of being portrayed as a passive victim without agency (as she was portrayed in Madeline Miller’s “Song of Achilles”), Iphigenia is portrayed as a noble heroine among a cast of bumbling and hysterical characters.
...
Show More
AGAMEMNON
Thou too hast a voyage to make to a haven where thou wilt remember thy father.
IPHIGENIA
Shall I sail thither with my mother or alone?
AGAMEMNON
All alone, without father or mother.
yeah, I cried
Thou too hast a voyage to make to a haven where thou wilt remember thy father.
IPHIGENIA
Shall I sail thither with my mother or alone?
AGAMEMNON
All alone, without father or mother.
yeah, I cried
...
Show More
5/08/18 Upon reading this play again, my feelings concerning the character's actions have definitely changed.
Last I read this play I described Agamemnon as morally divided on what course he should take, but now I kinda seeing Menelaus' point - he can't stick with the decision he's made and in the end he no longer has the choice. Iphigenia, who I had previously described as choosing to sacrifice herself for Greece, really didn't have a choice either like I said she did. I imagine she put on a brave face and only described her death as something noble for the sake of her parents like she had a choice in the matter.
And Achilles' role in all of this! To him, defending Iphigenia from the mob that was the Greek army, was something he was willing to die for. Sure, he involved himself because he felt that it was wrong that his name should be used by Agamemnon without his prior consent, but he still stood by Iphigenia.
This truly is a heart-breaking play. By the end of the play, a mother and father had no choice but to watch their daughter walk to her death with a smile on her face, as if her death was a noble sacrifice.
14/06/16 I went into this book with the wrong expectations. Or rather I went into this expecting the story and characters as the online classics community tends to know them in general, which looking back on it would had provided me with one-dimensional characters and a rather weak plot-line. It certainly didn't help that the only other interpretation I've read is that of The Song of Achilles.
To put it simply, I found myself blown away by the story I found.
For in this interpretation, Agamemnon, while still extremely problematic, finds himself morally divided throughout the play. I was presented with an entirely different dynamic in the relationship between Menelaus and Agamemnon, something that I felt just wasn't present in the Iliad. I found that Clytemnestra was actually present during the events, and looking back on it why wouldn't she attend her eldest daughter's wedding? And Iphigeneia was not the damsel in distress I expected, instead at the end she chose to sacrifice herself for the sake of Greece.
Achilles, was perhaps that only one I didn't find myself surprised with as from what I can gather, what he cared most about was his honour and how Agamemnon attempted to use his name without his prior knowledge. Though he was willing to fight the army to protect her and tarnish his reputation so perhaps a bit of his humanity was shown.
The story itself is extremely tragic. A mother accompanies her daughter to what she expects to be a wedding and instead finds her husband wanting to sacrifice her daughter for the sake of the army instead. And although in the end, none of the key players wish to go through with the sacrifice as originally planned they find their hand is forced by the Greek army itself.
The mob mentality and the lethal damage that it can do shines through in the end. Instead of bringing ruin to her family the daughter allows herself to be sacrificed ignorant that her actions will lead to the downfall of the family. A family, might I add, that while they had their differences were presented as a healthy family during the story.
Last I read this play I described Agamemnon as morally divided on what course he should take, but now I kinda seeing Menelaus' point - he can't stick with the decision he's made and in the end he no longer has the choice. Iphigenia, who I had previously described as choosing to sacrifice herself for Greece, really didn't have a choice either like I said she did. I imagine she put on a brave face and only described her death as something noble for the sake of her parents like she had a choice in the matter.
And Achilles' role in all of this! To him, defending Iphigenia from the mob that was the Greek army, was something he was willing to die for. Sure, he involved himself because he felt that it was wrong that his name should be used by Agamemnon without his prior consent, but he still stood by Iphigenia.
This truly is a heart-breaking play. By the end of the play, a mother and father had no choice but to watch their daughter walk to her death with a smile on her face, as if her death was a noble sacrifice.
14/06/16 I went into this book with the wrong expectations. Or rather I went into this expecting the story and characters as the online classics community tends to know them in general, which looking back on it would had provided me with one-dimensional characters and a rather weak plot-line. It certainly didn't help that the only other interpretation I've read is that of The Song of Achilles.
To put it simply, I found myself blown away by the story I found.
For in this interpretation, Agamemnon, while still extremely problematic, finds himself morally divided throughout the play. I was presented with an entirely different dynamic in the relationship between Menelaus and Agamemnon, something that I felt just wasn't present in the Iliad. I found that Clytemnestra was actually present during the events, and looking back on it why wouldn't she attend her eldest daughter's wedding? And Iphigeneia was not the damsel in distress I expected, instead at the end she chose to sacrifice herself for the sake of Greece.
Achilles, was perhaps that only one I didn't find myself surprised with as from what I can gather, what he cared most about was his honour and how Agamemnon attempted to use his name without his prior knowledge. Though he was willing to fight the army to protect her and tarnish his reputation so perhaps a bit of his humanity was shown.
The story itself is extremely tragic. A mother accompanies her daughter to what she expects to be a wedding and instead finds her husband wanting to sacrifice her daughter for the sake of the army instead. And although in the end, none of the key players wish to go through with the sacrifice as originally planned they find their hand is forced by the Greek army itself.
The mob mentality and the lethal damage that it can do shines through in the end. Instead of bringing ruin to her family the daughter allows herself to be sacrificed ignorant that her actions will lead to the downfall of the family. A family, might I add, that while they had their differences were presented as a healthy family during the story.
...
Show More
This is an extremely readable adaptation of Euripides' Iphigenia at Aulis, which is a great anti-war play questioning the sacrifices people are willing to make just for the chance to fight in a war without any real goal or benefit.
Teevan does two things I find particularly interesting in this adaptation. First, he incorporates a frame narrative where the old servant from Iphigenia at Aulis reflects back on the sacrifice from the end of the Trojan War when Agamemnon and the Greeks have returned home. This immediately layers time, bringing us back from the storyteller's present to his remembered past, in a way that also complicates our relationship with time as viewers of an adaptation. We are reviewing, as the servant is remembering. But this also locates us at the cusp of Aeschylus' play Agamemnon, the first play of the Oresteia trilogy, which is set immediately after Agamemnon has returned from Troy. This is important because Teevan emphasizes (through repetition) Klytaimnestra's threat that if Agamemnon sacrifices Iphigenia she will repay him in kind. And the frame story locates us as viewers at that moment of retribution.
The other interesting thing, and I'm not totally sure what to make of it, is that Teevan seems to devote a lot of page space (though maybe not as much stage time) to the chorus of girls looking admiringly at the Greek warriors. They discuss the men extensively, debating which ones are better looking, braver, kinder, etc. I think this is supposed to be part of Teevan's anti-war emphasis, showing the romanticization of war, and the eroticism instilled in militarism. Edith Hall suggests this in the introduction, but I don't totally see it myself.
Teevan does two things I find particularly interesting in this adaptation. First, he incorporates a frame narrative where the old servant from Iphigenia at Aulis reflects back on the sacrifice from the end of the Trojan War when Agamemnon and the Greeks have returned home. This immediately layers time, bringing us back from the storyteller's present to his remembered past, in a way that also complicates our relationship with time as viewers of an adaptation. We are reviewing, as the servant is remembering. But this also locates us at the cusp of Aeschylus' play Agamemnon, the first play of the Oresteia trilogy, which is set immediately after Agamemnon has returned from Troy. This is important because Teevan emphasizes (through repetition) Klytaimnestra's threat that if Agamemnon sacrifices Iphigenia she will repay him in kind. And the frame story locates us as viewers at that moment of retribution.
The other interesting thing, and I'm not totally sure what to make of it, is that Teevan seems to devote a lot of page space (though maybe not as much stage time) to the chorus of girls looking admiringly at the Greek warriors. They discuss the men extensively, debating which ones are better looking, braver, kinder, etc. I think this is supposed to be part of Teevan's anti-war emphasis, showing the romanticization of war, and the eroticism instilled in militarism. Edith Hall suggests this in the introduction, but I don't totally see it myself.
...
Show More
This is hardly a straightforward play.
At this point in our society's history it will likely resonate strongly with Game of Thrones viewers, as the play neatly mirrors recent events Shireen's being burnt at the stake by her father, including her devotion to him, but not many others, I think. Self-sacrifice of this sort, where the sacrifice's identity is diminished to that of an object a gift, has been regarded as barbaric for so long that it's an alien notion, intellectually accessible, but not emotionally. Nowadays, sacrifice is depicted as something that augments someone's image, because it's usually voluntary - but that's a tangential thorny issue.
There are two themes here, the will to be and the ease with which we can deny the humanity of others. In his n Sceptical Essaysn, Russell uses another play by Euripides, n The Trojan Womenn to argue that we distance ourselves from most emotional aspects except hate when judging people we perceive as different or distant and argue rationality to its extremes. Is it not the same here, when a all the soldiers demand the death of a girl who wasn't in any way involved, to start the war? Even her uncle wants to sacrifice her and he only stops when he emphatizes with Agamemnon, as a father and realizes he would be killing his own niece in his quest to retrieve a woman who left him.
Thus Iphigenia finds herself wanted dead by thousands of people. However, after a few token protests she consents. An argument can be made that this is the "voluntary sacrifice" of our more civilised days, to protect Achilles, her mother and the rest of her family who the army would have lynched. Moreover, she often mentions that she does not belong to herself but to Greece and that each man's life is more precious than a thousand women. Considering that she was promised a life in heaven and that she was acting in accordance with society her timely agreement would make sense. On one hand she regains a bit of her identity through this "choice", leaves her family with closure and a last dignified image of her and she does her duty as a princess, on the other hand, she would have died either way, so either she chose not to or didn't think to proclaim her will to be herself.
From this point of view, I think she is more like a representative of contemporary morality for Greek women of the time. Her mother had had another child by her first husband who Agamemnon slew as a baby before marrying her, and she was devoted to him until he tried to take her daughter, Iphigenia, it could be argued, would have argued until she understood her family would die. Hence a woman would have been taught not to be, unless for someone else.
I said it's not straightforward, because the men and the family are rewarded and Iphigenia is spirited away through divine intervention leaving the play on a strong patriarchal note. One the other hand Euripides is considered a feminist, he could have chosen the ending because some characters were needed to appear in the sequel n Iphigeneia in Taurisn.
The ending was quite rushed. After the gut-wrenching events of, say fifteen minutes ago, Agamemnon was 'bye, babe, off to play with the boys' pretty quickly, as if this wasn't the last time he saw his wife before war against a citadel built by the gods.
At this point in our society's history it will likely resonate strongly with Game of Thrones viewers, as the play neatly mirrors recent events Shireen's being burnt at the stake by her father, including her devotion to him, but not many others, I think. Self-sacrifice of this sort, where the sacrifice's identity is diminished to that of an object a gift, has been regarded as barbaric for so long that it's an alien notion, intellectually accessible, but not emotionally. Nowadays, sacrifice is depicted as something that augments someone's image, because it's usually voluntary - but that's a tangential thorny issue.
There are two themes here, the will to be and the ease with which we can deny the humanity of others. In his n Sceptical Essaysn, Russell uses another play by Euripides, n The Trojan Womenn to argue that we distance ourselves from most emotional aspects except hate when judging people we perceive as different or distant and argue rationality to its extremes. Is it not the same here, when a all the soldiers demand the death of a girl who wasn't in any way involved, to start the war? Even her uncle wants to sacrifice her and he only stops when he emphatizes with Agamemnon, as a father and realizes he would be killing his own niece in his quest to retrieve a woman who left him.
Thus Iphigenia finds herself wanted dead by thousands of people. However, after a few token protests she consents. An argument can be made that this is the "voluntary sacrifice" of our more civilised days, to protect Achilles, her mother and the rest of her family who the army would have lynched. Moreover, she often mentions that she does not belong to herself but to Greece and that each man's life is more precious than a thousand women. Considering that she was promised a life in heaven and that she was acting in accordance with society her timely agreement would make sense. On one hand she regains a bit of her identity through this "choice", leaves her family with closure and a last dignified image of her and she does her duty as a princess, on the other hand, she would have died either way, so either she chose not to or didn't think to proclaim her will to be herself.
From this point of view, I think she is more like a representative of contemporary morality for Greek women of the time. Her mother had had another child by her first husband who Agamemnon slew as a baby before marrying her, and she was devoted to him until he tried to take her daughter, Iphigenia, it could be argued, would have argued until she understood her family would die. Hence a woman would have been taught not to be, unless for someone else.
I said it's not straightforward, because the men and the family are rewarded and Iphigenia is spirited away through divine intervention leaving the play on a strong patriarchal note. One the other hand Euripides is considered a feminist, he could have chosen the ending because some characters were needed to appear in the sequel n Iphigeneia in Taurisn.
The ending was quite rushed. After the gut-wrenching events of, say fifteen minutes ago, Agamemnon was 'bye, babe, off to play with the boys' pretty quickly, as if this wasn't the last time he saw his wife before war against a citadel built by the gods.
...
Show More
4.5 achilles best boy of all eternity
Leave a Review