There are two strains of comedy: the comedy of situations and stories, and the comedy of satire which lampoons people and institutions. The first strains comes down to us from the New Comedy of Menander and the Roman playwrights through Shakespeare to the TV sitcoms of today. The second strain comes from Aristophanes and descends directly to the political comedy of Jon Stewart. As political comedy is often topical and ephemeral, reading the satires of earlier eras can be daunting and more work than fun. Reading political satire which is 2500 years old can be impossible.

After I completed my traversal of all the Greek Tragedies I turned to the works of Aristophanes in another translation and was soon stumped. Since then I have been looking for an edition that would have enough annotations to let me in on the jokes and to give me an inkling of why Aristophanes is revered as the greatest of the comic authors.

The volume is what I was looking for. Copious notes on obscure historical figures and references to the works of other playwrights being parodied really give the laymen a good feel for the anarchic brain of Aristophanes as well as a great sense of how these pieces must have played in the theater.

Reading the comedies is still more work that reading the tragedies, but if you are willing to do the work, this edition is very rewarding.

As a proud prude, I found most of the sexual and potty humour in these plays rather un-funny, but I could see how they must have been entertaining to watch in an over-the-top Monty-Python-esque way. I did enjoy some of them - the Sausageman in Knights was lots of fun, Clouds had hilarious conversations with Socrates and his students that spoofed his circular arguments, and I especially enjoyed Frogs for its banter between Greek poets/playwrights Euripides and Aeschylus as they critiqued each other's work to see who was better.

I like to think of Old Comedy as something like Monty Python and New Comedy as more Three's Company. Aristophanes is our best evidence of the former type: emphasis on topical political debate, direct attacks on persons in the polis, an uncensored scatological and sexual interest, handling of unreal and mythological settings and characters.

The most abiding interest here is protest against the Peloponnesian War, which shows up in all eleven plays in one way or another. Other interests are the distribution of wealth (Ecclesiazusae and Plutus), developments in arts & learning (Clouds and Frogs), law (Wasps), gender and the rights of women (Thesmophoriazusae, Lysistrata, Ecclesiazusae), and the establishment of a utopia of sorts (Birds).

Plenty might be said about these texts individually. Aristophanes is kinda a crotchety jerk: too pious, too patriotic, too intolerant of difference. He has a roll call of standard victims to abuse, such as cowards in battle, political informants, demagogues, other playwrights, philosophers and rhetoricians, persons of whose sexual practices he disapproves, stereotypical foreigners, and so on.

One of the most salient things for me--and this occurs while reading Plato, too--is the relentless reference to texts that no longer exist--these plays are in a sense an inventory of loss, so much that was burned in the warfare against which Aristophanes lodged his unsuccessful protests, whether it was the Spartans or the Persians or the Romans or the Christians or the Nazis. Whoever burned up all the ancient works--fuck those guys.

I like this edition of aristophanes plays, introduction (to Aristophanes and to each individual play) are informative enough to let you understan play but not too long. Plays are in order of them being made and every play is full of really informative footnotes.

But not all Aristophanes plays are good and maybe collection of his best known plays would suffice.

More so for the bashful and retiring translation of Hadas was this given a low rating.

comprado para reler Lysistrata.
segue-se The Byrds

A hilarious comic genius.

I love Aristophanes, but I hated this translation. I wish I could pinpoint exactly what was wrong, but I can't unless I could compare the modern Greek (I don't know enough Ancient Greek) with it. The translation felt dry and dull to me as if the translator was trying too hard. I just didn't like this one. I'll have to try a better translation. I had the same issue with Sophocles. I love Antigone and I had read a translation that just didn't feel right. The one I have on the completes Sophocles now (I can't remember the translator on top of my head) made me feel more at ease as if the language fits better. Of course, nothing will be like the original ancient Greek or even like the modern Greek, but with some English translations I feel more comfortable than others. Otherwise, I'll have to find and read the book in Greek (modern).

"Tyranny and conspiracy? There you go again ... It’s been a good fifty years since I’ve even heard the word, but now it’s commoner than pickled herring. Just listen to the way it crops up in the marketplace. If someone buys perch and not anchovy, the anchovy seller in the next stall pipes up: “What a disgrace! See him? He buys fish like a tyrant.” And if he asks for an onion to pep up his sardines, “See that?” says the offended lady selling greens. “He wants an onion because he wants to be a tyrant. He thinks Athens has to humor him—how errant!"

I've read these plays over a period of years. Some were good and some weren't. On the whole, entertaining and recommended!

None

I wondered when I read that Aristophenes was the first Greek playwright, and therefore possibly the oldest playwright in recorded history, why I didn't read him in high school. A few pages into Lysistrata and I figured it out. I am always surprised that I am continuously surprised by finding innuendo (if you can call it that in Aristophonenes) in the classics.