This book offers a selection of papers from the fifth decennial Greek Drama conference held in Vancouver (Greek Drama V, 2017), supplementing the series of proceedings from previous conferences (Greek Drama III [2006] and Greek Drama IV [2012]). This is an edition that brings together sixteen essays written from a field of international contributors that examine a range of topics (from the politics of the ancient theatre, to the role of the chorus, to the earliest history of the reception of Aeschylus’ Oresteia), employing various critical methods (anthropological, historical and psychological approaches alongside performance analysis and textual criticism).
As the editors note in the preface, the selection represents an emphasis on fragmentary works and on the perception of Athenian drama in antiquity, both in Greece and beyond. However, this is more of a loose intention than a coherent factor that draws together the sixteen papers collected here.
The first chapter is a keynote lecture by E. Csapo and P. Wilson, ‘The Politics of Greece's Theatrical Revolution, c. 500–c. 300 bce’, that establishes the chronological range of the volume, of the fifth and fourth centuries bc, drawing on the authors’ recently published second volume of ‘A Social and Economic History of the Theatre’ (Theatre beyond Athens [2020]). Aiming to contribute to the question of whether theatre was linked in some way with Athenian and/or democratic culture, it examines the evidence of theatrical tradition in the Greek poleis compared with their political status (democracies, oligarchies and autocracies). Although their conclusion does not challenge what seems to be a strong affiliation between theatre, Athens and democracy, it also pays particular attention to the specifics of time, place and purpose and succeeds in making an important contribution to the critical issue of the politics of Athenian drama.
The next fifteen chapters are organised in five sets of three-part thematic sections, the first dealing with Sophocles. In the first paper of the Sophoclean group, ‘Selective Memory and Epic Reminiscence in Sophocles’ Ajax’, S. Murnaghan offers a lucid, well-structured discussion of the multifaceted portrayal of Ajax by Sophocles with respect to the different epic narratives that each of his portraits projects, namely, Ajax's duel with Hector, the Judgement of the Arms and his departure from Salamis. Even though Ajax's relation with Homer has been much discussed before, this reading offers a fresh perspective that highlights the complex indebtedness that Sophocles pays to Homer as his mentor. Next, in a study about Philoctetes, K. Mattison, in ‘Elegy and Sophocles’ Philoctetes: a Reflection on Generic Resonance’, suggests a rather hypothetical but well-grounded connection between Sophocles’ drama and the elegies of Archilochos, Tyrtaeus and Solon, on the grounds of thematic relevance with the theme of flight. Her suggestion, however, that the basic premise can be applied to other tragedies as well, has yet to be supported. In the last paper about Sophocles, ‘A Dramaturgy of the Self: Deianira between the Grid and the Couch’, E. Papazoglou attempts to reconcile structuralist and psychological approaches to tragic character by providing an up-to-date and original reading of Trachiniae from the perspective of what the author calls ‘dramaturgy of the self’, namely a definition of the tragic subject as seeking subjectivity via an idiosyncratic ‘I’ rather than collective identity.
The second set of papers deal with Euripides’ plays. The first is written by J. Gibert, ‘Tragic Overliving and Deferred Funerary Ritual in Euripides’ Hecuba’, who elaborates on E. Wilson's model of tragic ‘overliving’ (i.e. survival with tragic connotations) and applies this insight to Hecuba. Giving a fresh interpretation to the play, Gibert distinguishes survival from paradoxical existence and maintains that in Euripides’ play all the instances of closure denied can be taken as symptoms of Hecuba's state of ‘overliving’. F. Dunn, in the next chapter, ‘Affective Suspense in Euripides’ Electra’, offers a plot analysis of Electra in order to claim that the power of the play and especially the emotional power of its ending derive from ‘affective suspense’, a notion that elaborates on discussions about suspense theory and the role of suspense in Euripides, adding an interesting aspect to this deliberation. Arguing against historicist interpretations of the Trojan Women, R. Lionetti, in ‘The Fall of Troy, the Glory of Athens: Chorus and Community in Euripides’ Trojan Women’, supports a more radical but very well-argued thesis. He claims that within the choral interventions of the play, Euripides projects Athens into Troy, blurring the borders between civic identities and ensuring a more involving theatrical experience for the audience members, prevalently Attic.
The third set of papers also deals with Euripides, but focuses on fragmentary plays. The first discussion is on Phaethon, ‘Choral Mirroring in Euripides’ Phaethon’. In this paper R. Andújar examines the wedding song sung by a secondary chorus both within the frame of secondary choruses in Greek tragedy in general and of the play itself. She persuasively argues for a ‘mirroring effect’, which invites the audience to consider contrasting realities and competing song genres. Wishing to present a more complex picture of erôs in tragedy, rather than following the scholarly trend that focuses on the negative aspects of tragic love, in Chapter 9, ‘Erôs in Pieces (?): Tragic Erôs in Euripides’ Andromeda and Antigone’, A.-S. Valtadorou gives an analysis of erôs in two fragmentary plays, Euripides’ Andromeda and Antigone. Even though the evidence discussed is rather scant, Valtadorou suggests that these plays seem to give a more multifaceted view of tragic erôs than sometimes thought. In the last chapter of this section, ‘The Case against Domestic Seclusion in (Euripides) fr. 1063’, E. Scharffenberger examines the admittedly highly speculative, albeit plausible, possibility of a fragment preserved by Stobaeus belonging to a tragedy composed by Euripides (or an emulator) as well as appropriating material from Aristophanes’ Thesmophoriazusae. Providing an alternative to the stereotypical domestic seclusion of the female, this is indeed a very interesting fragment that urges in favour of a noteworthy female agency.
Moving to the next set of papers dedicated to Aeschylus, we read three viewpoints about the reception of his Oresteia. In the first paper, ‘Aeschylus and the Iconography of the Erinyes’, A. Simas participates in the well-known dispute about the relationship between vase-painting and drama scenery, arguing in favour of Aeschylus’ description of the Erinyes being indebted to visual art and to specific configurations of the Erinyes theme in vase-painting. In the next paper, ‘The Women of Thebes as Aeschylean Erinyes: the First Messenger Speech of Euripides’ Bacchae’, P.G. Johnston proposes an intertextual connection between Euripides’ Bacchae and Aeschylus’ Eumenides in the first messenger's speech of the former play that has interesting and multivalent effects, both in terms of its effect on the play's action but, even more importantly, in terms of its metatheatrical function. In its originality and contemporary perception, this seems to be one of the most influential additions to this volume. The last paper of this section, ‘Electra-style: Reception(s) of Aeschylus’ Oresteia in Aristophanes’ Clouds’, by B.M. Rogers, continues the same line of thought, exploring the intertextuality between Aeschylus’ canon trilogy and Aristophanes’ Clouds. With a well-structured argument, Rogers continues the discussion about the reception of Oresteia in Aristophanes’ play, arguing, however, for a more thorough re-envisioning than has been previously understood by scholars.
The volume concludes with three papers dedicated to comedy, focusing on the plays of Aristophanes and Menander. Chapter 14, ‘Making Terminology: on the Use of Generic Vocabulary in Old Attic Comedy’, is a fairly original study of the formation of genre terminology as reflected in old comedy, represented mainly by Aristophanes but also by other comic playwrights. A. Novokhatko analyses four generic terms connected to the Dionysiac festival (‘tragedy’, ‘comedy’, ‘trygedy’ and ‘drama’) to argue that most of the dramatic terms and concepts that were to become standard in later critical thought were created in comedy. In the next chapter, ‘Stratophanes the Ephebe? The Hero's Journeys in Menander's Sikyonioi’, N.W. Slater analyses the plot of Menander's fragmentary play Sikyonioi with a view to suggesting that the audience in the Athenian theatre would have perceived strong resonances between Stratophanes’ route within the plot of the play and the Athenian institution of the ephebeia. Slater also identifies elements that suggest an interaction with the tragic genre. Despite the fragmentary nature of the text, there is enough and well-analysed evidence to render these suggestions plausible. In the last chapter, ‘The Pre-History of the Miles Gloriosus in Greek Drama’, W.E. Major offers a fresh investigation of the fragments of Greek New Comedy in order to challenge the established idea that the stock character of the braggard soldier was established in Greek Comedy prior to Plautus. Instead, Major argues persuasively, this stock character of the miles gloriosus seems to be a post-Menander development since the examination of the fragments suggests that the soldiers appearing onstage are not simply expected to be braggarts but allow for a more complex and diverse interpretation.
Reaching a brief and overall conclusion, as is naturally expected for a conference with such a broad theme, the volume brings together rather unrelated essays that fail to offer a thematically specialised and consistent edition. It offers a small window into where the academic field of Greek drama is now, although refraining (with a few exceptions) from important discussions on the research areas of Greek drama such as gender identities, modern receptions and current trends in general. Nevertheless, without a doubt the overall academic quality of the papers is high.
