4.5
Naprawdę fantastyczna książka. Nigdy wcześniej nie sądziłam, że może mi się podobać dramat antyczny, a to było naprawdę niesamowite i prześmieszne.
Uwielbiam.
Trochę średnio mi się podobało rozwiązanie głównego wątku bo mam wrażenie, że akcja zwolniła wtedy, ale poza tym fajne ;))

ancient greeks were so entertaining then something shifted in the universe and nothing's been fun ever since.

Even though the play is called The Frogs, they only appear in one scene, and make quite a fuss, but still. Maybe the play should've been called Euripides vs Aeschylus. The main characters however are Dionysus (yes, the Dionysus) and his slave, Xanthias. Dionysus wants to bring back Euripides from the dead and after asking Hercules, a known sojourner to the underworld, how to get there, Dionysus and Xanthias set off on their quest. 

I laughed several times throughout this and I have to give credit to R.H. Webb for letting the humor shine through so well in his translation. There's a lot of absurd situations here that provide plenty of opportunity for jokes. Hercules tells Dionysus that one of the easiest ways to get the underworld is the hang himself. Dionysus gets into an argument with the frogs and their famous Brekekekex ko-ax croaking. He's then afraid of disguising himself as Hercules because of the infamy the demigod left behind in his visit, so Xanthias has to put on the costume. Dionysus then regrets the decision when Xanthias disguised as Hercules attracts the attention of the underworld ladies. The pair also gets beaten up by the underworld police. 

At the heart of the matter though this still is a political satire written in the context of the Peloponnesian War. There are a lot of targets here and I have to admit that many of the names went over my head. Then when the chorus appears to start lamenting that undeserving people have gotten suffrage and public offices it kind of seemed out of place to me.

The main target is actually Euripides, and this isn't even the only play Aristophanes wrote going after him. He's accused of corrupting the youth by desecrating the heroes and myths of Greece, and honestly Euripides is did have a reputation for attacking the traditional Greek religion inbetween the lines of his plays. 

The key scene is when Euripides and Aeschylus face off for the privilege of getting to dine sitting next to Hades. My favorite joke was when Aeschylus points out that he is at a disadvantage since they are in the underworld and his own plays didn't die with him as they did with Euripides. They make fun of each other's plays, not just the content, but even the syntax, like Aeschylus' habit of adding anaphora to his introductions. Aeschylus ruins all of Euripides introductions by inserting the phrase “lost his oilcan.” They even weigh each others verses with literal scales. In the end of course Aeschylus is the winner. Pluto allows him not only the privilege of sitting next to him, but also to go back to the world of the living with Dionysus, and is provided a list of prominent Athenians to bring back with him afterwards. 

It really does help to be familiar with both the plays of Aeschylus and Euripides to get the most out of this play, and you can gauge their popularity by noting that the audience is presumed to be well versed in both of those playwrights. Who would've known that such a comedy could be made out of an essay in literary criticism.

Βρεκεκεκέξ κοάξ κοάξ, Βρεκεκεκέξ κοάξ κοάξ, Βρεκεκεκέξ κοάξ κοάξ
read for one of my tutees (for the greek theatre component of ocr a level), and then re-re-read for gk2004 as i'll be translating a chunk of it after spring break.
honestly, i've never really liked ancient greek comedy that much - perhaps because i've studied it, so it's been more associated with cramming for an exam than actual enjoyment. lysistrata was fantastic, and the birds was just... mildly strange? but frogs? i was laughing, genuinely, out loud.
dionysus is hilarious, and i absolutely love seeing my two favourite tragedians having a go at each other for the entire second act.

��نها بخش جالبش رقابت بین اشیل و اوریپید بود که دوستاره بهش دادم،ولی آن قسمت هم آنقدر جالب نبود که بخواهم توصیه اش کنم.
به هرحال این ها اولین ها بودند و انتظاری ازشان نمی رود.

Witty and funny, and a lot more understandable if you're more familiar with Aristophanes and after having to write a college essay on it. Very interesting how you can address topics as literary criticism and the mission of playwriters with humor and still have very strong points.

Translator: Richard Lattinmore

Richard thinks he's SOOOOOOOOO funny......... People love to hate on Anne Carson for using modern phrases AND YET MR LATTINMORE GETS NO SHIT FOR DOING THE SAME THING BUT BADLY. HE IS THE RECOMMENDED TRANSLATION ON MY COURSE?????

Not very impressed by Aristophanes either... He is slaying penis except there's no slay only penis

Adorei esta leitura... uma comédia fantástica, com crítica social à mistura.. que mais se pode querer?? Agradeço ao professor Mário de Grandes Textos Universais por ter incluído esta obra na lista de leituras para este semestre, porque este livro é mesmo qualquer coisa.

While parts of this play were opaque to me (I assume references to other classical Greek plays that I have not read), other sections were quite amusing. I particularly enjoyed the fight between Aeschylus and Euripides for the position of best (dead) writer of tragedy!

An interesting play, which would have been made more interesting had I sufficient knowledge of the characters from Greek mythology whom Aristophanes was casting in this calamitous journey to Hades.

The comical slapstick was jovial enough, the dialogue and references to the audience surreal. I just wasn’t as engaged as I should be, and I can confidently justify that with my ignorance of background and references.

Another addition to the Little Black Classics range which I couldn’t fully enjoy simply due to lack of intelligence. Onwards.

As funny today as it must have been 2,500 years ago when it had them rolling in the aisles in Athens.

Aristophanes lived a long time ago. His way of viewing the world was completely different from my paradigm of life.
So, it follows, that his comedy would be diffrent.
But no.
Oh, humans.
It was very, very, funny. I loved that I actually understood a lot of the "inside jokes" - things I would not have understood if I didn't read so much about Ancient Greece.