Esquilo a diferencia de Sófocles o Eurípides, en mi opinión es más político. Sin embargo la ironía y la crítica se deja ver en sus textos y fue lo que más me gustó, además de que los diálogos me parece que fluyen con ritmo.

Quieren leer tragedia? Esta es una con todas las letras. Engaño, venganza y muerte. Una familia que arrastra el asesinato por generaciones y con una historia de fondo, conocida por muchos.

χρόνος ανάγνωσης κριτικής: 55 δευτερόλεπτα

Το πενθήμερο μεταξύ 27-31 Οκτωβρίου διάβασα έξι βιβλία.
Και πιο συγκεκριμένα την 30η Οκτωβρίου διάβασα τρία βιβλία σφηνάκια.
Την δυστοπική νουβέλα και πρώτη μου επαφή με Μιχάλη Μακρόπουλο
Το ημερολόγιο ενός τιμονιέρη του Νίκου Καββαδία που αποτελεί
ένα από τα τελευταία του βιβλία που διαβάζω και τον Αγαμέμνονα

Τον Ιούλιο του 2021 πήγα και είδα τον Αγαμέμνονα του Αισχύλου.

Το πρώτο έργο που ανεβάστηκε από τον ΘΟΚ (Θεατρικός Οργανισμός Κύπρου) και ανέβηκε ξανά πέρσι για να τιμήσει τα 50χρονα του οργανισμού.

Εξαιρετική παράσταση όπου οι γνωστοί ηθοποιοί ήταν μέλη του Χορού (ο οποίος ίσως γι' αυτό το λόγο έκλεψε την παράσταση) και οι άγνωστοι (σε μένα) ηθοποιοί πρωταγωνιστές
που φυσικά δεν υστερούσαν.

Μου έκανε επίσης εντύπωση ότι στο ρόλο της Κασσάνδρας ήταν η Ελληνοβελγίδα ηθοποιός Aurora Marion με κάποια λόγια της στα περσικά αραβικά και αρχαία ελληνικά. Αυτό την έκανε να μοιάζει όντως ξένη στο παλάτι των Ατρειδών και έκανε το ρόλο της πιο αυθεντικό.

Και έτσι όταν ένα χρόνο μετά, τον φετινό Ιούλη πήγα Αθήνα και βρήκα το συγκεκριμένο έργο σε βιβλίο το άρπαξα και το διάβασα.

Εδώ θεωρώ κατάλληλη ώρα να πω ότι η αρχαιογνωσία ήταν από τα αγαπημένα μου μαθήματα (Οδύσσεια, Ιλιάδα, Ελένη, και Οιδίποδας)

Και φυσικά θα συνεχίσω και με άλλα θεατρικά έργα του Αισχύλου όπως και των άλλων Μεγάλων Τραγικών Σοφοκλή και Ευριπίδη, από τις εκδόσεις Κάκτος που συμπεριλαμβάνουν το αρχαίο κείμενο, την νεοελληνική μετάφραση και τον σχολιασμό.

The first part of the known trilogy Oresteia is one amazing work and I've put it on my number 3 spot,because of it's discussions about the plans which comes to fruition at the end of the tragedy.It revolves around the intentions of the Agamemnon's wife to assassinate her husband,as a payment for a crime her husband has done so many years ago.This is one of the works (which we will later see with Euripides and his tragedies) where female characters shine,as we see their perspective,as a woman,wife and a mother.Alongside the theban cycle,the tragedy of the Atreus family is one of the most known myths,which opens a debate for discussions of what is right.The fact that everyone knows his or her place within the family (of that time) isn't something they can or should agree upon,especially when the deed's been done.At the end of this tragedy,I believe you'll be interested in the next two works,just to see the conclusion of this story.I forgot to mention that this was my first trilogy that I've read (my second was the Raven trilogy,that I've reviewed earlier this year,after 13 years span) and I didn't have problems understanding the bigger picture of the story.With this,it's only two works left for the rest of the week,so I'm going to wish you all a pleasant day.

Screaming crying rending my garments

[...] Γιατί όσο στέκει ο Δίας
στο θρόνο του, κι αυτό θα στέκει:
έπραξες, θα το λάβεις· είναι νόμος.

Όσο μεγαλώνω,τόσο περισσότερο το αγαπάω αυτό το έργο. Πρώτη φορά που το διάβασα, πριν χρόνια, βαρέθηκα τα μεγάλα χορικά και με κούρασε. Κάτι με τραβούσε όμως και μου έλεγε να το ξαναπιάσω. Και το ξανάπιασα. Κι από τότε δεν το έχω αφήσει, ούτε πρόκειται.

n  God of the long road,
Apollo Apollo my destroyer-
you destroy me once, destroy me twice -n

A classic Greek tragedy- haunting, beautifully written, and telling of the pitfalls of cyclical vengeance. It definitely builds up a sense of foreboding. Themes surrounding power, sacrifice, revenge and righteousness.

n  For their mad outrage of a queen we raped their city - we were right.n

Niet gedateerd, ook al is de tragedie meer dan 2000 jaar oud. We filosoferen over rechtvaardigheid en Aeschylus neemt ons mee om elk personage te proberen te begrijpen. Met bijzondere taal wordt een bekend verhaal van alle kanten belicht en dat vond ik heel mooi.

I read this in Dutch in the adaptation by Johan Boonen, very comprehensible. The play has a weak dramatic effect, and little depth. Aeschylus is the most archaic of the great ancient Greek play writers.

the five stars are more for the experience of performance than for the text itself - at this point, i've become far too emotionally attached to this play to give it anything less. perhaps you could say that i, too, have been caught in the trap-net of the unforgetting furies of the atreidae, singing praise for the house even as it falls into a rainstorm of blood

Had no clue what was going on the whole time, but husband getting stabbed in the bathtub was pretty funny.

This play was really quite a shock. I came to it after having read Sophocles' Theban plays, expecting more or less the same sort of style. What I discovered was that while there were particular similarities, Aeschylus and Sophocles have very different takes on the way that plays should be written.

The most noticeable difference is the role of the Chorus. From having read Sophocles, my take on the Chorus was that it really had three options. They could either talk as a collective group or city like the men of Athens in Oedipus at Colonus, as a more general response to the goings on of the play in poetic terms, or as almost the voice of a single character debating another (which is more often just the Leader). In Aeschylus, he uses the Chorus more as a collection of all three of these with the additional fact that he uses them a lot more. Their speeches are almost three times longer, and they are more poetic even than Sophocles's Chorus. This already puts the play into a much more unique ball park than just a similar play to the more famous Oedipus cycle.

Another important feature is the lack of its title character's presence. Of course much later down the road we would have plays like Waiting for Godot that deliberately keep the title character out of sight. Yet in Agamemnon it is more expected for the title character to play a larger role not only from his legendary status but also that the reader of Sophocles are used to this central focus on the title character. In Agamemnon we hardly ever see the man at all. And almost as soon as he arrives he pretty much instantly gets killed.

There's not as much of a focus on action as there is in Oedipus the King. It's more of a philosophical work questioning justice ala Antigone and At Colonus. This and the poetry is the main reason for my high rating. On the scale of excitement this doesn't rank too high, and I don't see myself remembering it very well on down the line. Despite this I think objectively it is a five star work, but if I was going off of sheer interest and enjoyment it would rank much lower. I'm giving it four mainly because of this and the fact that it doesn't get very good until half way in when the title character himself arrives. The poetry is almost too good, the play is walking on the fine line of just the right amount of great poetry and so much that it's too dense. Despite these issues I am excited to see where this trilogy is going to go.