3.7

Not as good as Trojen Women or Medea but its still good. Plus it kinda felt a tad different from Euripides' usual take on events but I could still feel his dramatic and criticising tone lol

She dies because of patriarchal bullshit, that's what happens.

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.

I hate you Agamemnon

I've always preferred the Sophoclean and Aeschylan versions to the Euripidian one not just because I consider the former two, especially Sophocles, wrote it much better but also because of the ending, as unlike the other tragedians, Euripides changed the ending to have Iphigenia survive the sacrifice. That, to me, took away from the tragedy of it all. The sheer unfairness of the sacrifice, the difficult decision Agamemnon has to make that'll cost him his marriage and the enmity of his wife, the hatred and justification for Clytemnestra to murder her husband, Electra's blind love for her father, etc., lose their punch if it turns out Iphigenia was saved on the last minute and spirited away to the Taurians. The whole curse on the House of Atreus also reads diminished. Even the "One man's life is worth ten thousand lives of women" line Einhorn talks a bit about in the afterword has far more impact when Iphigenia actually dies, I would think.

Euripides liked to subvert and go against the grain, but he didn't always consider the bigger picture when writing his retellings with a twist, methinks, and he often didn't care for consistency and avoiding contradictions. Einhorn tries to make more sense of this interpretation of Iphigenia's story by adapting Euripides' play to get an emphasis on Iphigenia's going from sacrifice to willing martyrdom on her part, as it says on the afterword. He's made the play simpler in language, more fluid to read, and more accessible, pairing his translation with illustrations by Eric Shanower, who did the "Age of Bronze" adaptation of the Iliad.

I don't think this works so well as an illustrated version of the play, basically a picture book adaptation, because this work is one of those that are better "seen" than "read." There's a stage play of Einhorn's translation already, so for a book version it would've worked much better to have this be a graphic novel like "Age of Bronze," instead of having illustrations inserted here and there, sometimes superfluously so. Besides, the illustrations are too similar in overall appearance to Shanower's other work, with the same buxom females with too perfect features that look like they have make up on. It doesn't add pathos or gravity to the scenes, and can be distracting. I have seen Greek epics at the theatre, and they're an experience for the senses that the written text can't transmit no matter the quality of the artwork.

I received an ARC via Edelweiss in exchange for an honest review.

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

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.

"Ένα λόγο μονάχα θα πω και θα νικήσω·
γλυκιά η ζωή κι ο θάνατος μαυρίλα·
είναι τρελός όποιος ποθεί το θάνατο.
Κάλλιο πικρή ζωή,παρά καλή θανή."

I worry that it is a reflection on my middlebrow approach to literature that this was one of my favorite plays (and if I were left to my own devices I would rate it above Oedipus Rex). It feels very contemporary: the plot mostly advances through dialog, there are a number of twists and turns, the chorus plays a minimal role, there is no deus ex machina, and relatively minimal intrusions of exposition. In other ways it feels very much like a Greek tragedy as characters wrestle with moral dilemmas that (tautologically) have no good answers.

This is the 14th Greek play I've read set in the world of the Trojan War (I didn't set out to read all of them, it was more of a binge read where one led to another, and at this point only Rhesus is left so I might as well read this). Plus I've read the Iliad, Odyssey, other fictional treatments, and more. And this is the very first time that Agamemnon seemed sympathetic and interesting, instead of various combinations of arrogant, stubborn and aloof. Iphigenia at Aulis begins with his second thoughts about sacrificing his daughter and what is ultimately a ham-handed effort to stop it. He then argues with his brother Menelaus and you can feel for his balancing of an absolutely horrific act with his broader responsibility (and self interest). Menelaus is also more human than he is elsewhere, eventually persuaded by his brother that his niece shouldn't be sacrificed.

The drama really is an action-oriented one, even a melodrama. Clytemnestra shows up having believed the ruse that Iphigenia is going to be married to Achilles, she is excited about it after Achilles is described to him (which itself is fascinating since she didn't previously know him so he is described to the reader from scratch). Achilles himself is among the less interesting characters, much less interesting than the rage character that dominates the Iliad, instead he feels young, inexperienced, and his impulse to defend Iphigenia feels laudable but also naive and possibly more about his vanity than morality.

The least satisfying part was Iphigenia's abrupt and unexplained conversion to the accepting saintly victim who accepts her own sacrifice without trying to use Achilles to escape from it. She even tells her mother not to blame her father, which evidently didn't work out that well.

It's possible that this play does not repay repeated readings in the way that so many of the others do, I've only read it once so I'll tell you when I read it again in a decade or so. But for a first read it was a real page turner, made me think, and I don't think I'll forget the way these characters grapple with their fates or maybe their choices.

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.

Una vez más los griegos culpando a las mujeres de todo mal y haciéndolas las verdaderas víctimas de la guerra de Troya. El pasaje de Ifigenia aceptando su muerte y entregándose a favor de los dánaos ante Artemisa es una pasada. Un beso a Eurípides por ser el mejor poeta trágico de la antigüedad.

Honestly svo skemmtilegt plot, mjög áhugaverðar heimspekilegar pælingar og djúpstæðar persónur eeeeen full langt. Allavegna miðað við öll hin.