|
In Dionysus Writes, theater critic Jennifer Wise contends that most ancient Athenians were literate, and therefore could read plays and appreciate them for their textual value without seeing them performed in theater. However, Wise completely disregards the most important and exciting element of Greek drama: theater performance. Wise argues that in literate societies such as in classical Greece, "bookish activities quickly establish themselves as 'higher' than orally embedded ones" (Wise, 104). She states that in classical Greek society, "writing never appeared to be the prerogative of any elite, religious or governmental" (Wise, 104). Wise claims to have found evidence of this: "eighth-century inscriptions include personal messages and graffiti of ordinary people; and as writing became more widespread in the following centuries, 'the skill was certainly not confined to aristocrats or a class of specialists'" (Wise, 38). Most historical documents and texts available on the literacy of the classical Greeks show that Wise's argument is not true. Most Greeks could not read or write and the aristocracy was the main group of literate individuals. To say that the scribble and graffiti of the common Athenian represented Greek literacy is inadequate -- this is not strong enough evidence. Wise also argues that reading the text of drama is more liberating than watching it, for the performance becomes distorted by theatrical problems and limitations. "When writing allows composition to be separated from performance, poetry comes out from under the control of specific performative contexts" (Wise, 86). Wise states that even Socrates declared "oral performance cannot compete with the special kind of teaching that writing makes possible" (Wise, 80). Wise argues that theater performance distorted tragedies from their original textual states. She sites problems with performance, such as rebellious actors, partisan competitiveness at theater festivals, and directors portraying traditionally Godlike characters less magnificently on the theatrical stage. According to Wise, actors have changed the way plays were originally written because actors did not stay true to the text. "They appear to have added lines, cut speeches, altered stage directions, written their own prologues, changed sad endings to happy ones, transposed speeches from one character to another and even from one play or other written work to a separate piece" (Wise, 99). She also says that in theater festivals students had an "agonistic spirit" and only supported their own playwright. Wise argues that the theater festivals became a place of competition and "cock fights," and students were partisan and not supportive of the other playwrights whose work has merit. Wise also states that the "traditionally awe-inspiring" great heroes Homer created, such as Oedipus, become "demoted to the status of metics, the fifth century Athenian equivalent of green card holders" (Wise, 88). To further argue that theater has distorted the dignity of great writing, Wise states, "Homeric deities and heroes are no longer the extratemporal, godlike stuff of praise poetry but, essentially, contemporary Athenians subject to ridicule and abuse" (Wise, 88). In Greek Theater Performance, David Wiles declares that tragedy was not intended as an intellectual exercise of the literate. He argues that the Greek culture was one that "accorded low status to the written word" (Wiles, 167). In the classical period Greek culture was mainly oral. Public speaking, not writing, was important to the Greeks. "Many good writers do not know how to speak, but any good speaker can write" (Wiles 167). Being able to speak with eloquence, argue well, and to think one one's toes made a person a public success. In a society mainly dominated by oral speaking, there is no strong evidence that most of the Greeks read the plays instead of watched them in the theater. Also, "scripts were expensive to produce and clumsy to manipulate" (Wiles, 167). Since it was costly to circulate the text of plays throughout society, it is hard to imagine that reading plays was a standard of Greek society. For example, actors were taught music, movements, and intonation orally by the playwright. In fact, it was unusual for actors to ever receive a script. As mentioned earlier, one of Wise's arguments is that theater was a partisan arena of competitive "cock fights." However, Wiles argues that the poet's duty was to engage all of society, including new visitors to the community -- "it was imperative that the plays should not be seen as partisan" (Wiles, 35). According to Wise, the "tragic choregos was chosen, rather exceptionally, by the state and not by his tribe, because it would have been quite inappropriate if different parts of the audience had cheered on their own representatives" (Wiles, 35). This conflicting argument between Wise and Wiles lies within the roots of politics and Athenian democracy. Wise argues that there was no democracy in Greek theater, and she writes off the functions of theater as competitive and partisan. In contrast, Wiles argues that democracy was found throughout Greek theater. "Greek tragedy was necessarily 'political': its subject matter was the well being of the polis, and its performance was part of what turned a collection of men into a polis" (Wiles, 48). Tragedy was the source of democratic thought. It was "a device which allowed the Athenians to come together and collectively think through their problems" (Wiles, 48). Wise neglects to acknowledge the most important aspects of tragedy performance including acting, costuming, masks, and performance space. These significant visual and emotional elements make Greek performance tragedy not only entertaining but also sacred. "The sacredness of the performance space was emphasized by rituals in the same way as other public events: the blood of a young pig was sprinkled around the orchestra to ward off evil, and libations were poured into the earth" (Wiles, 115). One of the most important elements of physical character was the mask. It was "a defining convention of Greek theater performance" (Wiles, 147). In fact, masks were so sacred to the actors that they were "dedicated after the performance to Dionysus in his temple" (Wiles, 147). With the use of the mask, actors were able to invoke strong emotions within the audience. "Emotion is most powerful when it is created and placed on the mask by the spectator's imagination" (Wiles, 149). Costuming was also a very important visual element because it not only reflected the characters' persona and emotional intensity, but costumes also needed to be seen by spectators from far away. "The costumes of tragedy were long and bright to create strong tableaux" (Wiles, 110). They were extremely decorative and colorful, which was intended to emphasize "the status of the performance as a ceremony" (Wiles, 157). Greek theater was largely ceremonial and ritualistic and had little room for literacy and logic. Tragedy was rooted in myths, and myths were "associated with every form of ceremony" (Wiles, 17). Greeks regarded theater as an essential reflection of their religion and culture. "The ritual environment of tragedy was part of its meaning. The spectators were able to look at situations from multiple points of view because they had ceremonially taken leave of immediate concerns. An affirmation of divine power prepared the city for recognition of human limits" (Wiles, 35). Theater was a place for Greeks to purify and rejuvenate their inner lives. "The whole of Athens was experienced as a sacred place. The procession led the audience on a journey to the ritual center of their community, and the actors performed on the earth of a city protected by Athene" (Wiles, 115). The Athenian theater "played to an audience of 15,000" (Wiles, 109) and manuscripts and records (didaskalia) were collected which contained "which play was performed by whom in which year, laying out the foundations for theater history" (Wiles, 168). Greek life revolved around major dramatic theatrical festivals, such as the City Dionysia and Lenaia. In fact, one year the plays were not ready for the City Dionysia so instead of canceling the festival or dishonoring Dionysus, the Athenians "simply stopped their calendar for five days" (Wiles, 31). According to Wiles, tragedy started with the chorus, and did not depend on the literacy of the Greeks to understand their visual displays of singing and dancing. In fact, the chorus' verses were originally written to be performed. "Officially, tragedies and comedies were contests between choruses, groups singing and dancing in unison" (Wiles, 34). Aeschylus wrote tragedies with a chorus of twelve, to signify "the complete cosmic circle" (Wiles, 133). Greek dramatists intended for the chorus to act, dance, and stand on stage in very distinct ways. The chorus' choreography was distinct from the rest of the actors in the production. Two of the most basic and important movements of the chorus are the strophe and antistrophe. "Greek odes are divided into pairs of verses called strophe and antistrophe ('turning' and 'turning back')" (Wiles, 139). Also, Greek playwrights created an "original dance" for the chorus, as "dramatists would not have gone to so much trouble if they had not wanted in each case to create an original dance that precisely mirrored, for the precise symmetry would otherwise have been lost on the spectator" (Wiles, 139). Some plays we will explore in the rest of this paper are The Bacchants and Agamemnon. The Bacchants portrays women (who had lower class positions in Greek society) as able to express themselves as liberated, uninhibited worshipers of Dionysus. Traditionally in Greek theater, men played the roles of this chorus of "crazed" women. But in modern times, women have the freedom to play roles of their own gender, and to celebrate their femininity -- whether powerful or subtle. The adaptation of The Bacchants that I saw performed was contemporary in the sense that the costuming and characters were similar to the flower children of the 1960's: hair styles were long, costuming was loose, and free love and wine were what drove the chorus to ecstasy. Many feminists would value the assertive attitudes of the powerful chorus of women to be interesting and empowering. However, contemporary viewers might find the uninhibited dancing and sexual gestures of the chorus to be excessive. Modern audiences approach issues of sexuality and self-expression much more conservatively than the Ancient Greeks did. To the Greeks, worshiping Dionysus was a religious rite and necessity. However most modern viewers do not associate religious rites with sexuality so directors in the 21st century most likely minimize the sexual connotations found in certain Greek plays. In Agamemnon, the house of Atreus is plagued with terrible murderers, and conniving backstabbers. The horrible yet powerful lead female character, Clytemnestra, plots to kill her husband and succeeds. Clytemnestra and her lover Aegishthus have abandoned Clytemnestra's daughter Electra, and they treat Electra like a second-class citizen. While the atrocities that occur in this play seem so horrible and gruesome, it portrays a dysfunctional family. It deals with emotional pain, separation, and betrayal. People interested in family dysfunction might view the plot of Agamemnon quite differently from the way the ancient Greeks would approach it. To the contemporary reader, Agamemnon can be viewed as a modern drama about a housewife who is neglected by her over-worked husband, and about children who suffer over the separation of their parents. The Greek justice system was "eye for an eye" and the Greeks were a vengeful society. However, in contemporary times we do not hold this belief as strongly. So we would view Agamemnon with less support of revenge and taking matters into our own hands. Most people who read Greek drama today are interested in seeing it performed. They want the spectacle, emotions, and ideas that surround it. The theater is not always rational but it is exciting and emotional, and it reflects the societies of the past and present. Greek tragedy performance in the 21st century allows room for experimentation. Since we are not completely aware of all of the precise types of movement, dance, and music of classical Greece and cannot imitate them exactly, we have room to adapt the tragedies more to our own era. And even if we did know what Greek theater was for the Greeks in every sense, we still have many cultural and religious differences with the Greeks. For example, contemporary spectators usually are not able to relate to much of the ritual and ceremony involved in traditional Greek drama performance. Greek tragedy has a lot to teach us in our time, and adapting it to our culture allows us the freedom to know and experience the philosophy, poetry, and wisdom of our ancestors while still exploring contemporary cultural and social issues. After evaluating the contrasting arguments of Wise
and Wiles, it is clear that there are many different approaches to the way
classical drama is studied, analyzed, performed, and read. Wise argues
that present day scholars should read the text of plays alone, and not see
them performed. She has sited problems with Greek tragedy performance, and
holds that readers of classical drama today are better off analyzing text
and removing themselves from theatrical influences all together. However,
Wiles views theater performance as a sacred place of ritual, ceremony,
culture, politics, and excitement. The whole aspect of performance is
destroyed when one only approaches Greek tragedy from an academic, textual
standpoint. Focusing on translations from Greek to English or
overanalyzing the alphabet takes away from what theater performance was
meant to do -- to emotionally stimulate and move audiences.  |
