A Scene Not Worth Seeing
The value of The Oresteia Trilogy, written by Aeschylus in the fifth century B.C., can be described as educational and informative. However, the entertainment value, by present day's standards, is extremely lacking. The lengthy speeches and lack of physical action are too restricting for today's drama. A performance of The Oresteia Trilogy, while well regarded in theater departments of universities, would not be well received by an audience looking for a night of entertainment. The tragedy set in ancient Greece in 1250 B.C. tells the background and story of Orestes, the son of a king. He vows to avenge his father's murder by his mother, Clytemnestra. The Oresteia Trilogy is missing the ability to provide the audience with entertainment and information at the same time, which is a key concept for an enjoyable experience.
In the Golden Age of Athens, the time and city of Aeschylus, drama and the idea of a pure democracy were two of many advances. In The Oresteia Trilogy as well as many of the other plays Aeschylus wrote, he introduced many innovations to go along with the progressing times. A reduced chorus, more dialogue, poetic diction, as well as elaborate staging and multiple actors are all a result of Aeschylus's influence. The idea of democracy is also introduced in the third play of the trilogy, "The Furies." A court is held with what is now known as a jury of peers, which now plays an important role in today's courtrooms. The importance of The Oresteia Trilogy in today's society is that it gave one of the first glimpses of justice working in the democratic court system.
In relation to many plays with tragic themes, it is fair to say Aeschylus's The Oresteia Trilogy is archaic, as far as relating to current society. Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, also a tragedy, can be related to the modern-day teen, such as myself, easily. It involves the story of two young adults, in love, with the problem of their families being at conflict for many years. They struggle to stay together only to both resolve to suicide. However, many adolescents can relate to their own families disapproval of the person they date. Conversely, in The Oresteia Trilogy I found it difficult to relate to any one character. The story involves the sacrifice of a daughter, Iphigenia; the murder of a husband and king, Agamemnon; and the murder of a mother, Clytemnestra, by her son, Orestes. Throughout this whole plot, it was challenging to align with any single event or character in the story. The adultery present can be related to the contemporary culture as well as the trial of Orestes, but as a whole the play resulted in little connection with the youth in today's world.
The predictability of the story line was also a disappointing part of the reading process. After the first play, "Agamemnon," the second two plays, "The Libation-Bearers" and "The Furies," seemed to be unsurprising and expected. The audience is able to predict the murder of Clytemnestra and the role of Orestes. One unknowledgeable fact in the beginning is the fate of Orestes. However, after the first several pages of "The Furies" that, as well, can be foreseen.
Finally, while the entertainment value of Aeschylus's trilogy is not adequate, the educational worth is ample. After reading the plays, one has a better understanding of the time period surrounding 1250 B.C. These works resulted in a greater comprehension of the religious beliefs of the time, which include a polytheistic view with the gods working directly with the common people. Also, mentioned was the government, in the form of kings and queens, as well a brief glimpse of the Trojan War. Knowledge of the fifth century drama presentation using a chorus and less direct dialogue between characters was also achieved when reading The Oresteia Trilogy.
As times have changed, so has the overall worthiness of Aeschylus's The Oresteia Trilogy. It is worthwhile for the reader to both attain knowledge and experience entertainment. Other representations of a tragedy are available that reach this goal. The Oresteia Trilogy does not accomplish both these goals, and therefore, cause the audience to lessen their purpose in reading. While the educational purposes of reading this particular trilogy are present and effective, if the fundamental reason to read is entertainment, it is worthwhile to look at different tragic plays available. The plot and the author's ability to relate the characters to the reader are downfalls for the audience and could lead to a great disappointment.
The Evil Sex?
I don't consider myself a women's rights activist my any means, but upon reading Aeschylus' tragedy The Oresteia Trilogy I was able to sympathize with them. I felt these play, written between 500-400B.C. in Greece, portrayed women as the lesser sex. They were presented as evil, worthless, conspiring creatures. I truly appreciate the poetic text of the play, for it was beautifully written. But I feel that Aeschylus' portrayal of the women was a little harsh.
The three plays that form the trilogy tell the story of the curse of the house of Atreus. In the first play, "Agamemnon," Agamemnon, king of the city of Mycene, is murdered by his wife Clytemnestra after he returns home from the ten year long Trojan War. In the second play, "The Libation-Bearers," Agamemnon's son Orestes avenges the death of his father by slaying his mother Clytemnestra. The third play entitled "The Furies" is about Orestes struggle with the furies, creatures from the underground that come to torment Orestes about his mother's death.
In the first play the chorus, which consists of the elders of the city, tells the story of the start of the Trojan War and its causes. They blame the whole war on a woman, Helen. Helen was the reason for the war, but it wasn't her fault, as the chorus says it to be. When one reads the play they begin to hate Helen because the chorus belittles her so much. They don't place any of the blame on Paris who actually stole her, simply because she was the most beautiful woman in the world. Is it right to fault someone because of a pretty face? It was said that Helen went willingly, without any struggle. The chorus constantly ridicules her saying that she is an adulteress and the cause of all the fighting and death; "Slain for a women's sin, a false wife's shame!"("Agamenon"pg.17). She might have went willingly, but could she have prevented Paris from taking her?
"Not the true parent is the mother's womb, she doth but nurse the seed new-sown: the male is the parent; she for him, as stranger for a stranger, hoards the gem."("The Furies" pg137). This is a quote from the god Apollo describing the role of women. He claims that the man is the only parent of a child. The only thing that the woman does is house the man's seed until the child is born. Apollo argues that a women has no role in the actual creation of a child, it is the man's seed that forms the child. He also claims that the killing of a husband is far worse than the killing of a mother. But is one truly worse than the other?
In the third play malevolent creatures from the underworld arise to torment Orestes about the murder of his mother. These monsters, known as furies, are despised by all. They are known as spiteful, revengeful, and evil. They are also all women. One could possible argue that they are women because they are avenging a matricide, but we can't be fully confident of the underlying meaning of the all women furies.
I understand that times have changed dramatically from the time that Aeschylus wrote, and that our perception of many things, especially the role and treatment of women, are different. But I feel that the women in this play really received a bad rap. Are women really the evil sex?
Two Thumbs Up
"The Eumenides" was a captivating play with a few minor flaws. To fully understand the play, one must first understand the history that went on before the play took place. "The Eumenides" was written by Aeschylus and is also known as "The Furies", the third play of The Oresteia Trilogy. This play is set around the time period of 1250 B.C., approximately the same time as the Trojan War. The main character of the play is Orestes from Argos. In the plays before "The Eumenides", Orestes killed his mom, Clytemnestra, who killed Orestes' dad, Agamemnon, after he returned home from war. Orestes was told by Apollo to kill his mom in order to avenge his father's death. Therefore, this is the reason "The Eumenides" began at Apollo's temple.
Aeschylus was an Athenian man who wrote thirteen first place plays. He wrote this tragedy around 458 B.C. This play had some new innovations for its time period, such as a second actor, elaborate staging, and poetic diction. Aeschylus was in the navy at Salamis and took part in the Persian Invasion in 480 B.C. He died in 456 B.C., when an eagle dropped a tortoise on his head, crushing his skull.
"The Eumenides" was a great play, as were the other two of the trilogy. The poetic words seemed to flow from the actors' mouths, maybe a little too much when the Furies spoke prior to the trial. The Furies were annoying throughout the play and had too many rambling speaking parts. However, the play contained a practical plot line that is still fit for today's society, even though it was written some 2,461 years ago. I enjoyed seeing how the people from long ago dealt with similar issues, which still haunt our society today.
The plot appeared to flow steadily throughout the play. All of the various scenes streamed together and gave an insight into what life was like for Orestes. However, there wasn't much action throughout the play, but the lack of action was made up with suspense provided during the trial. Overall, Aeschylus did an excellent job writing the play.
Throughout "The Eumenides" Aeschylus chose his words perfectly. The poetic words surged smoothly through the actors' mouths. Perhaps one of the most interesting parts was listening to how Aeschylus managed to make rhymes that lasted for a good five minutes, while still making sense. He also used excellent metaphors and similes to emphasize certain points being made during the trial. Although the words may have been offensive to some, they helped highlight the common thought most people had in that time period. The language was difficult to understand at first, but as the play went on, the language became easier to understand. Perhaps one of the best qualities about this play is how it relates to today's society. We are still forced to judge whether a person is innocent or guilty of murder. We still ask God for help and believe that God knows best for us. We also have a similar court system, such as the one the Athenians used. "The Eumenides" shows how we should always obey our God, just as the Athenians did because God will always be on our side, just like Apollo was towards Orestes. In addition, it was interesting to see how the gods interacted with the humans in the Greek times. The play made it clear that gods played a huge role in the decision making at the trial and all other life decisions of the citizens.
Most of "The Eumenides" was entertaining; however, there were a few dreadful parts. Before the trial, the Furies spoke way too much. The Furies points could have been made in a one or two minute speech, instead of an eight to ten minute speech. Moreover, the way the Furies talked was annoying. I couldn't stand to listen to one of them start a line, and another one finish it. It was hard to tell who was talking because they wore masks. Furthermore, the Furies continual swaying movement drove me crazy.
The actors and costumes were a perfect match for the play. The actors appeared very natural at their roles. They weren't too dramatic, but they weren't stoic either. The costumes were great as well. They had just enough clues to be able to tell who was who.
Overall, the "perfectly cast" actors speak their words poetically throughout the play. In addition, it is refreshing to watch a play in which the old-fashioned props and costumes are used. Plus, I like the idea of religion playing a prominent part in the characters' lives, since most modern plays try to avoid religion. "The Eumenides" isn't just the greatest play of The Oresteia Trilogy, but one of the greatest plays of all time.
The Verdict, "Two Thumbs Up"
...
"The Eumenides" was a captivating play with a few minor flaws. To fully understand the play, one must first understand the history that went on before the play took place. "The Eumenides" was written by Aeschylus and is also known as "The Furies", the third play of The Oresteia Trilogy. This play is set around the time period of 1250 B.C., approximately the same time as the Trojan War. The main character of the play is Orestes from Argos. In the plays before "The Eumenides", Orestes killed his mom, Clytemnestra, who killed Orestes' dad, Agamemnon, after he returned home from war. Orestes was told by Apollo to kill his mom in order to avenge his father's death. Therefore, this is the reason "The Eumenides" began at Apollo's temple.
Aeschylus was an Athenian man who wrote thirteen first place plays. He wrote this tragedy around 458 B.C. This play had some new innovations for its time period, such as a second actor, elaborate staging, and poetic diction. Aeschylus was in the navy at Salamis and
...
Page 2took part in the Persian Invasion in 480 B.C. He died in 456 B.C., when an eagle dropped a tortoise on his head, crushing his skull.
"The Eumenides" was a great play, as were the other two of the trilogy. The poetic words seemed to flow from the actors' mouths, maybe a little too much when the Furies spoke prior to the trial. The Furies were annoying throughout the play and had too many rambling speaking parts. However, the play contained a practical plot line that is still fit for today's society, even though it was written some 2,461 years ago. I enjoyed seeing how the people from long ago dealt with similar issues, which still haunt our society today.
The plot appeared to flow steadily throughout the play. All of the various scenes streamed together and gave an insight into what life was like for Orestes. However, there wasn't much action throughout the play, but the lack of action was made up with suspense provided during the trial. Overall, Aeschylus did an excellent job writing the play.
Throughout "The Eumenides" Aeschylus chose his words perfectly. The poetic words surged smoothly through the actors' mouths. Perhaps one of the most interesting parts was listening to how Aeschylus managed to make rhymes that lasted for a good five minutes, while still making sense. He also used excellent metaphors and similes to emphasize certain points being made during the trial. Although the words may have been offensive to some, they helped highlight the common thought most people had in that time period. The language was difficult to understand at first, but as the play went on, the language became easier to understand.
...
Page 3
Perhaps one of the best qualities about this play is how it relates to today's society. We are still forced to judge whether a person is innocent or guilty of murder. We still ask God for help and believe that God knows best for us. We also have a similar court system, such as the one the Athenians used. "The Eumenides" shows how we should always obey our God, just as the Athenians did because God will always be on our side, just like Apollo was towards Orestes. In addition, it was interesting to see how the gods interacted with the humans in the Greek times. The play made it clear that gods played a huge role in the decision making at the trial and all other life decisions of the citizens.
Most of "The Eumenides" was entertaining; however, there were a few dreadful parts. Before the trial, the Furies spoke way too much. The Furies points could have been made in a one or two minute speech, instead of an eight to ten minute speech. Moreover, the way the Furies talked was annoying. I couldn't stand to listen to one of them start a line, and another one finish it. It was hard to tell who was talking because they wore masks. Furthermore, the Furies continual swaying movement drove me crazy.
The actors and costumes were a perfect match for the play. The actors appeared very natural at their roles. They weren't too dramatic, but they weren't stoic either. The costumes were great as well. They had just enough clues to be able to tell who was who.
Overall, the "perfectly cast" actors speak their words poetically throughout the play. In addition, it is refreshing to watch a play in which the old-fashioned props and costumes are used. Plus, I like the idea of religion playing a prominent part in the characters' lives, since most modern plays try to avoid religion. "The Eumenides" isn't just the greatest play of The Oresteia Trilogy, but one of the greatest plays of all time.
Ordinary People, Extraordinary Times, gods and Murder
The Oresteia Trilogy, written by Aeschylus, consisted of three well written plays; Agamemnon, The Libation-Bearers, and The Furies. Even though Aeschylus lived in Athens from 525 until 456 B.C., he wrote the play to take place around 1250 B.C. Even though I struggled with the language, the characters had such strong feelings they made the play easier to understand. Aeschylus always gave his characters great emotional range, their feelings moved from one extreme to the other. For example, when Clytemnestra found out that Agamemnon had killed their daughter Iphigenia, she knew the only way to avenge him would be to kill him.
Orestes plan to avenge his mother was complicated. The god Apollo, as well as Electra, thought Clytemnestra deserved to die because she killed her husband. Apollo thought it might help
end the curse on the house of Atreus. Regardless, the Chorus thought Orestes' murder was much worse than the murder Clytemnestra committed. Orestes committed matricide, the murdering of one's mother. I liked this passage. I could relate what Orestes was going through, but on a different level. I know what it's like to be indifferent and have everybody expect you to do something, regardless of how you actually feel. Peer pressure is hard enough to deal with and worse if your beliefs aren't set in stone. Being confused and pressured made Orestes' character seem real to me.
I would definitely recommend The Oresteia Trilogy to anyone as a spectacular play to read. The way the characters' emotions were portrayed and toyed with made the play come to life. I thought Aeschylus did a great job of bringing all of his characters, especially Orestes, to life. The plot was really well developed and made the play much more captivating to read. Overall, this is one of the best plays I have read in an extremely long time. Aeschylus definitely deserved all of his awards for being a playwright.
