What do you think?
Rate this book
The Theban Plays #1–3
Antigone - Edipo re - Edipo a Colono
Composte nella seconda metà del V secolo a.C., le tragedie del ciclo di Edipo mettono in scena, in forme di straordinaria suggestione, una delle più alte e dolenti rappresentazioni del destino umano. Edipo, assurto con Sofocle a simbolo universale, è il paradigma più famoso dell’eterno dissidio tra libertà e necessità, tra colpa e fato. Giunto al potere grazie alla propria intelligenza, Edipo è costretto, attraverso una forzata e convulsa indagine retrospettiva, a scoprire che il suo passato è una lunga sequenza di orrori e delitti, e a riconoscere la drammatica verità delle ultime, desolate parole del Coro: “Non dire felice uomo mortale, prima che abbia varcato il termine della vita senza aver patito dolore”. Franco Ferrari analizza nell’introduzione la strategia drammatica di Sofocle e il ruolo che ha in essa il rovesciamento della sorte umana, tema conduttore dei tre drammi.
400 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 451
About the author
Sophocles
2,193 books2,352 followersSophocles (497/496 BC-406/405 BC), (Greek:
Σοφοκλής
; German:
Sophokles
, Russian:
Софокл
, French:
Sophocle
) was an ancient Greek tragedian, known as one of three from whom at least one play has survived in full. His first plays were written later than, or contemporary with, those of Aeschylus; and earlier than, or contemporary with, those of Euripides. Sophocles wrote over 120 plays, but only seven have survived in a complete form: Ajax, Antigone, Women of Trachis, Oedipus Rex, Electra, Philoctetes, and Oedipus at Colonus. For almost fifty years, Sophocles was the most celebrated playwright in the dramatic competitions of the city-state of Athens which took place during the religious festivals of the Lenaea and the Dionysia. He competed in thirty competitions, won twenty-four, and was never judged lower than second place. Aeschylus won thirteen competitions, and was sometimes defeated by Sophocles; Euripides won four.
The most famous tragedies of Sophocles feature Oedipus and Antigone: they are generally known as the Theban plays, though each was part of a different tetralogy (the other members of which are now lost). Sophocles influenced the development of drama, most importantly by adding a third actor (attributed to Sophocles by Aristotle; to Aeschylus by Themistius), thereby reducing the importance of the chorus in the presentation of the plot. He also developed his characters to a greater extent than earlier playwrights.
The most famous tragedies of Sophocles feature Oedipus and Antigone: they are generally known as the Theban plays, though each was part of a different tetralogy (the other members of which are now lost). Sophocles influenced the development of drama, most importantly by adding a third actor (attributed to Sophocles by Aristotle; to Aeschylus by Themistius), thereby reducing the importance of the chorus in the presentation of the plot. He also developed his characters to a greater extent than earlier playwrights.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,566 reviews
February 1, 2022
Oidipous Epi Kolōnōi = Oedipus Tyrannus Coloneus and Antigone = The Theban Plays, Sophocles
Oedipus at Colonus is one of the three Theban plays of the Athenian tragedian Sophocles. It was written shortly before Sophocles' death in 406 BC.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز بیست و ششم آگوست سال1974میلادی
عنوان: سه نمایشنامه : اودیپوس شاه، اودیپوس در کولونوس، آنتیگون؛ اثر: سوفوکلس؛ مترجم: محمد سعیدی؛ زیرنظر احسان یارشاطر؛ تهران، بنگاه ترجمه و نشر کتاب، نخستین بار سال1334، در196ص؛ موضوع: داستانهای نویسندگان یونان - سده پنجم پیش از میلادی
عنوان: افسانه های تبای؛ اثر: سوفوکلس؛ ترجمه شاهرخ مسکوب؛ مشخصات نشر تهران، خوارزمی، سال1352، در376ص، شابک9644870328؛ چاپ دوم سال1356، چاپ چهارم سال1385، موضوع: ادیپ، نمایشنامه، اساطیر یونان، سده پنج پیش از میلاد
افسانه های «تبای»، آثار ماندگار نگارگر نامدار «یونانی (آتنی)»، «سوفوکلس» هستند؛ در یادداشتی کوتاه، در ابتدای کتاب، چنین آمده (نمایشنامه های: «ادیپوس شهریار»، «ادیپوس در کلنوس»، و «آنتیگونه»، پیش از این با عنوانهای: «ادیپ شهریار»، «ادیپ در کلنوس»، و «آنتیگون»، جداگانه به چاپ رسیده اند؛ این سه نمایشنامه، بر اساس اسطوره ی دودمان «لابداسید»ها نوشته شده، و دوره ای از سرگذشت افسانه ای خاندان شاهی شهر «تبای» را، می‌نمایانند؛ موضوع هر سه نمایشنامه، به هم پیوسته، و مراحلی از پایان سرنوشت یک خانواده است؛ از همین روی این‌بار، هر سه نمایشنامه در یک مجلد، و به نام «افسانه های تبای» به چاپ میرسد.)؛ پایان نقل
داستان نخست «اودیپ شهریار»: «اودیپ» از خاندان «لابداسید» است، که به نفرین خدایان گرفتارند، و همه به مرگی جانکاه میمیرند؛ هاتفان به «لائیوس»، پدر «اودیپ» میگویند، که بر فرزند وی، مقدّر شده است، که پدر خود را بکشد، و مادرش را، به زنی گیرد؛ آنگاه که «اودیپ» زاده میشود، از آنجا که پدر و مادر، نمیخواهند دست به خون پسرشان، بیالایند، وی را در دور دست، بر کوه «کیتاریون» رها میکنند، تا خود بمیرد؛ شبانی او را، از مرگ نجات میدهد، و به «کورنیتوس»، نزد «پولیبوس» شهریار میبرد؛ «اودیپ»، در آنجا بزرگ میشود، و از تقدیر خود آگاه میگرد��؛ وی چون پدرخوانده و مادرخوانده اش را، والدین واقعی خود، میپنداشتند، از «کورنیتوس» میگریزند، تا سرنوشت شوم خود را تغییر دهند؛ در راه شهر «تبای»، به «لائیوس»، پدر راستین و ناشناخته ی خود، میرسد، و در نبردی او را میکشد، و در برخورد با اژدهایی، به نام «ابوالهول»، به معمّای او را پاسخ میدهد، و مردمان را، از مصیبتی بزرگ میرهاند، و مردمان، به شکرانه ی آن، او را پادشاه میکنند، و شهبانو «مادر اودیپ» همسر او میشود؛ پس از سالها فرمانروایی عادلانه، طاعون، بر شهر «اودیپ» فرو میآید؛ مردمان شهر، برای رهایی از چنگال «طاعون»، در برابر کاخِ پادشاه گرد میآیند، و درمان میخواهند؛ هاتف معبد میگوید: «گناهکاری در شهر هست که خون بیگناهی را ریخته است، و تا او مجازات نشود، طاعون شهر را رها نخواهد کرد»؛ «اودیپ» به تدریج پی میبرد، که او چوپان زاده نیست، و فرزند «لائیوس» است، که به دست «اودیپ»، کشته شده است، و با ملکه ی او ازدواج کرده است؛ پس از این کشف دردناک، مادر خود را، به دار میآویزد، و «اودیپ» خود را نابینا میکند، و بر اثر این جنایت، از زادگاه خود دور میشود
داستان دوم: «اودیپ در کولونی»: پیرمرد نابینا، همراه دخترش «آنتیگون»، به یکی از حومه های شهر «آتن» پناه میبرد، و دیگر اعتمادی به خیر نیروی خدایان، و انسانها ندارد؛ «ایسمینه» دختر «اودیپ»، به آنجا میآید، و خبر میدهد، که بنا بر گفته ی هاتفِ معبد «دِلفی»، خدایان، «اودیپ» را بخشیده اند، و گفته اند: گور «اودیپ» هرجا باشد، آنجا از خشم خدایان در امان خواهد بود؛ از سوی دیگر، بین فرزندان «اودیپ»، بر سر پادشاهی ستیز درمیگیرد، و فرزند بزرگتر، مغلوب و تبعید میشود؛ او که پدر خود «اودیپ» را، از شهر بیرون رانده بود، اکنون برای طلبِ بخشش، نزد پدر میآید و تمنّای گذشت دارد؛ «اودیپ»، فرزند را نمیبخشد، و او را ناامید، باز میگرداند؛ «اودیپ» پیش از مرگ، از پادشاه «آتن» میخواهد، که جای گور او را، از همه پنهان بدارد، و جز به جانشینانش، به کسی نشان ندهد، و آرام میمیرد
داستان سوم: «آنتیگونه»: پس از مرگ «اودیپ»، فرزندانش «اته اکلس»، و «پولونیکس»، هر دو به دست هم کشته میشوند؛ «کرئون» فرزند کوچک «اته اکلس» را، به خاک میسپارد، ولی اجازه نمیدهد، جسد «پولونیکس» را، به خاک بسپارند؛ خواهران او «آنتیگونه» و «ایسمینه» تصمیم میگیرند، هرطور شده، جسد برادر را، به خاک بسپارند؛ اندکی بعد، «ایسمنه»، از ترس پادشاه، خواهرش را، تنها رها میکند، و «آنتیگونه» با پذیرش خطر، به تنهایی برادرش را، دفن میکند؛ «کرئون» دستور میدهد، مجازات مرگ، درباره ی «آنتیگونه»، اجرا شود؛ «هایمن»، فرزند «کرئون»، عاشق «آنتیگونه» است، و میکوشد، پدر را، از تصمیم خود، باز دارد؛ «کرئون» خواسته ی فرزند را، نمیپذیرد، و پیشگویی هاتف را نیز، به چیزی نمیخرد؛ «هایمن» نزد «آنتیگونه» میرود؛ «آنتیگونه» خود را، حلق آویز کرده است؛ «هایمن» نیز، دشنه ای در قلب خود، فرو میبرد؛ همسر «کرئون» نیز، خود را میکشد، و بدینگونه، دودمانی فدای استبداد، و خودسری «کرئون» میشود
این سه نمایشنامه، در واقع، صحنه های دیگرگونه ی یک ماجرا هستند؛ «اودیپ»، خواهان دانایی است، و عشق به دانایی در وی، چیزی برتر، و بیرون از اراده ی اوست؛ انگیزه ی جستجوی «اودیپ»، برای شناختن راستی، عشق به جماعت است، و آرزوی بهروزی آنان در آن خواسته است؛ نیز شناخت راستی، تقدیر اوست، و پیروزی او، در تسلیم نشدن است، نه در تسلیم کردن
نمایش «آنتیگونه»، تأکیدی بر اهمیت عشق، در زندگی جمعی است؛ عشق هرچند موضوعی انفرادیست، اما بدون آن، جامعه، شادابی و حرکت خود را، از دست میدهد؛ زیرا سرچشمه، و انگیزه ی بسیاری از اعمال ما در جامعه، عشق است؛ اخلاق، وامدار عشق است؛ فرمان خدایان، در پرتو عشق، اجرا میشود؛ حکومت، با نیروی عشق، پایدار و سالم میماند؛ تعادل جهان، با عشق تحقّق مییابد؛ «عشق فرزند» به پدر و مادر، «عشق خواهر» به برادر، «عشق زن» به مرد، و برعکس، همگی مضمون اصلی تراژدی (غمنامه)های «سوفوکل» است
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 15/11/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 11/11/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
Oedipus at Colonus is one of the three Theban plays of the Athenian tragedian Sophocles. It was written shortly before Sophocles' death in 406 BC.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز بیست و ششم آگوست سال1974میلادی
عنوان: سه نمایشنامه : اودیپوس شاه، اودیپوس در کولونوس، آنتیگون؛ اثر: سوفوکلس؛ مترجم: محمد سعیدی؛ زیرنظر احسان یارشاطر؛ تهران، بنگاه ترجمه و نشر کتاب، نخستین بار سال1334، در196ص؛ موضوع: داستانهای نویسندگان یونان - سده پنجم پیش از میلادی
عنوان: افسانه های تبای؛ اثر: سوفوکلس؛ ترجمه شاهرخ مسکوب؛ مشخصات نشر تهران، خوارزمی، سال1352، در376ص، شابک9644870328؛ چاپ دوم سال1356، چاپ چهارم سال1385، موضوع: ادیپ، نمایشنامه، اساطیر یونان، سده پنج پیش از میلاد
افسانه های «تبای»، آثار ماندگار نگارگر نامدار «یونانی (آتنی)»، «سوفوکلس» هستند؛ در یادداشتی کوتاه، در ابتدای کتاب، چنین آمده (نمایشنامه های: «ادیپوس شهریار»، «ادیپوس در کلنوس»، و «آنتیگونه»، پیش از این با عنوانهای: «ادیپ شهریار»، «ادیپ در کلنوس»، و «آنتیگون»، جداگانه به چاپ رسیده اند؛ این سه نمایشنامه، بر اساس اسطوره ی دودمان «لابداسید»ها نوشته شده، و دوره ای از سرگذشت افسانه ای خاندان شاهی شهر «تبای» را، می‌نمایانند؛ موضوع هر سه نمایشنامه، به هم پیوسته، و مراحلی از پایان سرنوشت یک خانواده است؛ از همین روی این‌بار، هر سه نمایشنامه در یک مجلد، و به نام «افسانه های تبای» به چاپ میرسد.)؛ پایان نقل
داستان نخست «اودیپ شهریار»: «اودیپ» از خاندان «لابداسید» است، که به نفرین خدایان گرفتارند، و همه به مرگی جانکاه میمیرند؛ هاتفان به «لائیوس»، پدر «اودیپ» میگویند، که بر فرزند وی، مقدّر شده است، که پدر خود را بکشد، و مادرش را، به زنی گیرد؛ آنگاه که «اودیپ» زاده میشود، از آنجا که پدر و مادر، نمیخواهند دست به خون پسرشان، بیالایند، وی را در دور دست، بر کوه «کیتاریون» رها میکنند، تا خود بمیرد؛ شبانی او را، از مرگ نجات میدهد، و به «کورنیتوس»، نزد «پولیبوس» شهریار میبرد؛ «اودیپ»، در آنجا بزرگ میشود، و از تقدیر خود آگاه میگرد��؛ وی چون پدرخوانده و مادرخوانده اش را، والدین واقعی خود، میپنداشتند، از «کورنیتوس» میگریزند، تا سرنوشت شوم خود را تغییر دهند؛ در راه شهر «تبای»، به «لائیوس»، پدر راستین و ناشناخته ی خود، میرسد، و در نبردی او را میکشد، و در برخورد با اژدهایی، به نام «ابوالهول»، به معمّای او را پاسخ میدهد، و مردمان را، از مصیبتی بزرگ میرهاند، و مردمان، به شکرانه ی آن، او را پادشاه میکنند، و شهبانو «مادر اودیپ» همسر او میشود؛ پس از سالها فرمانروایی عادلانه، طاعون، بر شهر «اودیپ» فرو میآید؛ مردمان شهر، برای رهایی از چنگال «طاعون»، در برابر کاخِ پادشاه گرد میآیند، و درمان میخواهند؛ هاتف معبد میگوید: «گناهکاری در شهر هست که خون بیگناهی را ریخته است، و تا او مجازات نشود، طاعون شهر را رها نخواهد کرد»؛ «اودیپ» به تدریج پی میبرد، که او چوپان زاده نیست، و فرزند «لائیوس» است، که به دست «اودیپ»، کشته شده است، و با ملکه ی او ازدواج کرده است؛ پس از این کشف دردناک، مادر خود را، به دار میآویزد، و «اودیپ» خود را نابینا میکند، و بر اثر این جنایت، از زادگاه خود دور میشود
داستان دوم: «اودیپ در کولونی»: پیرمرد نابینا، همراه دخترش «آنتیگون»، به یکی از حومه های شهر «آتن» پناه میبرد، و دیگر اعتمادی به خیر نیروی خدایان، و انسانها ندارد؛ «ایسمینه» دختر «اودیپ»، به آنجا میآید، و خبر میدهد، که بنا بر گفته ی هاتفِ معبد «دِلفی»، خدایان، «اودیپ» را بخشیده اند، و گفته اند: گور «اودیپ» هرجا باشد، آنجا از خشم خدایان در امان خواهد بود؛ از سوی دیگر، بین فرزندان «اودیپ»، بر سر پادشاهی ستیز درمیگیرد، و فرزند بزرگتر، مغلوب و تبعید میشود؛ او که پدر خود «اودیپ» را، از شهر بیرون رانده بود، اکنون برای طلبِ بخشش، نزد پدر میآید و تمنّای گذشت دارد؛ «اودیپ»، فرزند را نمیبخشد، و او را ناامید، باز میگرداند؛ «اودیپ» پیش از مرگ، از پادشاه «آتن» میخواهد، که جای گور او را، از همه پنهان بدارد، و جز به جانشینانش، به کسی نشان ندهد، و آرام میمیرد
داستان سوم: «آنتیگونه»: پس از مرگ «اودیپ»، فرزندانش «اته اکلس»، و «پولونیکس»، هر دو به دست هم کشته میشوند؛ «کرئون» فرزند کوچک «اته اکلس» را، به خاک میسپارد، ولی اجازه نمیدهد، جسد «پولونیکس» را، به خاک بسپارند؛ خواهران او «آنتیگونه» و «ایسمینه» تصمیم میگیرند، هرطور شده، جسد برادر را، به خاک بسپارند؛ اندکی بعد، «ایسمنه»، از ترس پادشاه، خواهرش را، تنها رها میکند، و «آنتیگونه» با پذیرش خطر، به تنهایی برادرش را، دفن میکند؛ «کرئون» دستور میدهد، مجازات مرگ، درباره ی «آنتیگونه»، اجرا شود؛ «هایمن»، فرزند «کرئون»، عاشق «آنتیگونه» است، و میکوشد، پدر را، از تصمیم خود، باز دارد؛ «کرئون» خواسته ی فرزند را، نمیپذیرد، و پیشگویی هاتف را نیز، به چیزی نمیخرد؛ «هایمن» نزد «آنتیگونه» میرود؛ «آنتیگونه» خود را، حلق آویز کرده است؛ «هایمن» نیز، دشنه ای در قلب خود، فرو میبرد؛ همسر «کرئون» نیز، خود را میکشد، و بدینگونه، دودمانی فدای استبداد، و خودسری «کرئون» میشود
این سه نمایشنامه، در واقع، صحنه های دیگرگونه ی یک ماجرا هستند؛ «اودیپ»، خواهان دانایی است، و عشق به دانایی در وی، چیزی برتر، و بیرون از اراده ی اوست؛ انگیزه ی جستجوی «اودیپ»، برای شناختن راستی، عشق به جماعت است، و آرزوی بهروزی آنان در آن خواسته است؛ نیز شناخت راستی، تقدیر اوست، و پیروزی او، در تسلیم نشدن است، نه در تسلیم کردن
نمایش «آنتیگونه»، تأکیدی بر اهمیت عشق، در زندگی جمعی است؛ عشق هرچند موضوعی انفرادیست، اما بدون آن، جامعه، شادابی و حرکت خود را، از دست میدهد؛ زیرا سرچشمه، و انگیزه ی بسیاری از اعمال ما در جامعه، عشق است؛ اخلاق، وامدار عشق است؛ فرمان خدایان، در پرتو عشق، اجرا میشود؛ حکومت، با نیروی عشق، پایدار و سالم میماند؛ تعادل جهان، با عشق تحقّق مییابد؛ «عشق فرزند» به پدر و مادر، «عشق خواهر» به برادر، «عشق زن» به مرد، و برعکس، همگی مضمون اصلی تراژدی (غمنامه)های «سوفوکل» است
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 15/11/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 11/11/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
June 12, 2017
The Three Theban Pays are the absolute pillar stone of ancient Greek drama, and in my opinion they contain two of the best plays ever written: Oedipus the King and Antigone.
Oedipus the King- because sometimes life's a real bitch.
Fate is unavoidable in ancient Greek Tragedy. Trying to avoid it will only lead to it, and doing nothing will lead you there too. So if a God tells you that you will die at the hands of your son, and that he will then go on to steal your wife, you’d best do nothing because it’s going to happen anyway. Any preventative action you take will only lead to the same ending. So, you’re pretty much screwed. You might as well lie down and accept it. The God's are mean.
But, nope, if you’re like the King of Thebes you’ll leave your infant son for dead instead.
Poor Oedipus. He really didn’t have much chance in life. He could do nothing to intervene with his own destiny, mainly because his tragic flaw is his lack of awareness about his true origins. He hears a rumour of the prophecy told to his farther, so he endeavours to stay away from him. But, in doing so he is pushed ever closer to his real farther. That’s the problem with being abandoned at birth; you just don’t know who is who in the world! There’s some irony in this somewhere.
Indeed, it suggests that no free will exists at all because any exertions of the supposed free will lead to the predetermined fate. So every action has been accounted for already. The intended audience may have been aware of these powers but Oedipus and his farther were hapless in their wake. They had to both learn the hard way. Oedipus had to recognise it, and in the process he shattered his life: it made him tear out his very eyes. Now that’s real grief. There’s no wonder Aristotle made this his model for the perfect play because this is masterful.
Aristotle’s theory can be used to assist the reader in understanding how the plot contributes to the tragedy. I couldn’t have read tragedy without it. The tragedy is created, in part, by the complexity of its plot which leads towards the catharsis. According to Aristotle’s Poetics the complexity of the plot is established through reversal, recognition and suffering. A simple plot will only establish one of these; therefore, it will have a limited catharsis. The reversal (peritpeteia) is the change of a state of affairs to its opposite, such as the reversal of Oedipus’ identity. The recognition (anaghorsis) is achieved through the acquiring of knowledge, like the knowledge Oedipus gains of his birth. Aristotle argues that an effective plot has its anaghorisis bound up with the peritpeteia. This is because it, “carries with it pity or fear” such as these following lines:
"O god-
All come true, all busting to light!
O light- now let me look my last on you!
I stand revealed at last-” (Lines 1305-9)
I hope I didn’t lose anyone or bore them to death with my summary of Poetics. The structure is the key; it is everything in delivering the plot. If, in the cathartic moment, the action can evoke suffering through a combination of a reversal of circumstances during a brutally stark recognition, then the ultimate delivery of pity and fear will be achieved. Such is the case with Oedipus. Oedipus’s hamartia, his tragic flaw at the core of his being, is his ignorance, and when the veil is lifted he realises the tragedy of the situation; he realises all too late that fate is unshakable and unconquerable.
He has unknowingly committed incest with his mother and murdered his farther, so, like I said, life is a real bitch.
Oedipus at Colonus
Oedipus has been cursed by fate. After unwittingly killing his farther and marrying his own mother, he was cast out of his own land: he was banished by fate. He is now blind, old and has but only one wish: death.
His sister-daughters (children born of incest with his mother) wish to help in this but his son-brothers want him to return to the land of Thebes alive and well. They have heard a new prophecy concerning his fate, and they have grown to fear it. However, as readers of Oedipus the King learnt, trying to change fate only leads to destiny changing the path; ultimately, the destination will always remain the same: there is no escape. Oedipus is resigned to let the wind take him wherever it may go. He has learnt that he has no power. His past remerges, a dangerous past that the world considers criminal. It is one he tried to avoid, but, again, he could never escape from it. King Creon, Oedipus’ taciturn brother in law is especially angry at Oedipus for the death of Jocasta hurt him severely. It's very easy to judge others in such a situation, but as Oedipus retorts:
"One thing, answer me just one thing. If,
here and now, a man strode up to kill you,
you, you self-righteous --- what would you do?
investigate whether the murderer were your farther
or deal with him straight off? Well I know,
as you love your life, you’d pay the killer back,
not hunt around for justification. "
As a sequel to Oedipus the King and a prequel to Antigone this play is very much the middle of The Three Theban Plays. Oddly, it seems to be read far less than the other two plays, which I think is a bit of a shame. Granted, it lacks the autonomy of the others, but it is just as important in understanding the trilogy. And this is the crux of the play; it is Oedipus’ moment to defend himself, and give voice to his actions which he was not responsible for. At the same time, the plot foreshadows and leads straight into Antigone and explains much about King Creon's choices.
In terms of action- I speak of the technical connotations of the word as defined by Aristotle in Poetics- the play is lacking. There is very little in the way of tragic elements. It was only performed after Sophocles’ death when the glory days of Athens had set. The play was a reminder to its audiences of what had been lost, Oedipus served as a reminder of an age gone by, one that would never return. Reading the play today, I see the same sense of departure. This line for example as spoke by the Chorus:
“Then it’s the end of Athens, Athens is no more!"
I love reading Ancient Greek drama; it is so well crafted; it is straightforward yet complex; it is sophisticated yet bold and bloody. Sort of odd really when considering the fact that all deaths were off stage, but you still get the idea from it. I’d love see some modern reproductions of it live.
Antigone
Antigone is a real heroine; she stands up for what she believes in. She was faced with a strong dilemma. The law of man, the word of her uncle the king, demands that her brother's body remains unburied in the open with no funeral rights, to be savaged by animals. For King Creon, this is a symbolic justice for a traitor and a rebel, but the laws of the God’s, and the ruling of Antigone’s own mind, demands that she gives him libations (death rights) that all men deserve. She buries the body and faces the consequences of the crime.
Creon: And still you had the gall to break this law?
Antigone: Of course I did. It wasn't Zeus, not in the least,
who made this proclamation-not to me
Nor did that justice, dwelling with the gods
beneath the earth, ordain such laws for men.
Nor did I think your edict had such force
that you, a mere mortal, could override the gods.
So, like I said she’s a heroine, for standing up against tyranny, but she isn’t the play’s tragic hero: it’s clearly King Creon. Who has the right of this situation? It is easy to brand Creon a tyrant, though to do so overlooks the reasoning behind his actions. In punishing Antigone’s dead brother, her rebellious dead brother, he is sending a political message to those that threaten the peace of Thebes. In reality he is being an effective, albeit harsh, ruler. When his niece breaks his law, he has no choice but to punish her as he would any man. He couldn’t allow her to be an exception to the rule, to do so would be to undermine the law of the land and his politics: it would be to make him a hypocrite. But, to sentence her to death, that’s a little extreme.
Thus, Sophocles presents a beautifully conflicted situation. There is no longer a discernible sense of right or wrong, only a thin line of morality that separates a tyrant from a man of justice. And his conviction only gets worse; he refuses to hear what his son and the city (the chorus) think about the situation. He only sees his narrow-minded sense of justice, and ignores the effects it will have on his loved ones. He has no doubts about his actions, and demonstrates the questionable nature of a cold approach to kingship. The laws of man are not always right. Something Creon simply cannot perceive. To his mind, he is morally right, a man of good character and a king of honour. Is this not the most dangerous of leaders?
Creon: I will take her down some wild, desolate path
never trod by men, and wall her up alive
in a rocky vault, and set out short rations,
just the measure piety demands
to keep the entire city free of defilement.
There let her pray to the one god she worships:
Death—who knows?—may just reprieveher from death.
Or she may learn at last, better late than never,
what a waste of breath it is to worship Death.
And this is what makes him the play’s tragic hero. His hamartia, his tragic flaw in Aristotle terms, is his severe lack of judgement, and his inability to perceive the wrongness of his decree. The reversal, recognition and suffering come in the form of the priest Tiresias, an old wise man who speaks to the Gods. He tells Creon what will happen if he persists down his current path, and after much resistance, Creon finally relents his folly. But it is far too late. The blood has already been shed. Tragedy has already struck, death has already struck: Creon is left in tatters. It is the hardest of lessons to learn.
So what do we learn from this? Greek tragedy was didactical in purpose; it was used as a learning tool, a means of imparting wisdom to the audience. What is Sophocles message? For me it’s quite simple: open your eyes and your heart. Never presume that you are right and an absolute morale authority. For Creon, his realisation came too late. The result was a sacrifice he will never forget, Antigone's death, and the one most readers seem to sympathise with. But I implore you to look further into the play, and consider the full role of Creon. To overlook him is to overlook the point of the work:
“All men make mistakes, but a good man yields when he knows his course is wrong, and repairs the evil. The only crime is pride.”
This play is a spectacular piece of work, though I think reading the other two plays helps to elucidate its greatness. For me, this book is one everybody should read at least once in their lifetime.
Oedipus the King- because sometimes life's a real bitch.
Fate is unavoidable in ancient Greek Tragedy. Trying to avoid it will only lead to it, and doing nothing will lead you there too. So if a God tells you that you will die at the hands of your son, and that he will then go on to steal your wife, you’d best do nothing because it’s going to happen anyway. Any preventative action you take will only lead to the same ending. So, you’re pretty much screwed. You might as well lie down and accept it. The God's are mean.
But, nope, if you’re like the King of Thebes you’ll leave your infant son for dead instead.
Poor Oedipus. He really didn’t have much chance in life. He could do nothing to intervene with his own destiny, mainly because his tragic flaw is his lack of awareness about his true origins. He hears a rumour of the prophecy told to his farther, so he endeavours to stay away from him. But, in doing so he is pushed ever closer to his real farther. That’s the problem with being abandoned at birth; you just don’t know who is who in the world! There’s some irony in this somewhere.
Indeed, it suggests that no free will exists at all because any exertions of the supposed free will lead to the predetermined fate. So every action has been accounted for already. The intended audience may have been aware of these powers but Oedipus and his farther were hapless in their wake. They had to both learn the hard way. Oedipus had to recognise it, and in the process he shattered his life: it made him tear out his very eyes. Now that’s real grief. There’s no wonder Aristotle made this his model for the perfect play because this is masterful.
Aristotle’s theory can be used to assist the reader in understanding how the plot contributes to the tragedy. I couldn’t have read tragedy without it. The tragedy is created, in part, by the complexity of its plot which leads towards the catharsis. According to Aristotle’s Poetics the complexity of the plot is established through reversal, recognition and suffering. A simple plot will only establish one of these; therefore, it will have a limited catharsis. The reversal (peritpeteia) is the change of a state of affairs to its opposite, such as the reversal of Oedipus’ identity. The recognition (anaghorsis) is achieved through the acquiring of knowledge, like the knowledge Oedipus gains of his birth. Aristotle argues that an effective plot has its anaghorisis bound up with the peritpeteia. This is because it, “carries with it pity or fear” such as these following lines:
"O god-
All come true, all busting to light!
O light- now let me look my last on you!
I stand revealed at last-” (Lines 1305-9)
I hope I didn’t lose anyone or bore them to death with my summary of Poetics. The structure is the key; it is everything in delivering the plot. If, in the cathartic moment, the action can evoke suffering through a combination of a reversal of circumstances during a brutally stark recognition, then the ultimate delivery of pity and fear will be achieved. Such is the case with Oedipus. Oedipus’s hamartia, his tragic flaw at the core of his being, is his ignorance, and when the veil is lifted he realises the tragedy of the situation; he realises all too late that fate is unshakable and unconquerable.
He has unknowingly committed incest with his mother and murdered his farther, so, like I said, life is a real bitch.
Oedipus at Colonus
Oedipus has been cursed by fate. After unwittingly killing his farther and marrying his own mother, he was cast out of his own land: he was banished by fate. He is now blind, old and has but only one wish: death.
His sister-daughters (children born of incest with his mother) wish to help in this but his son-brothers want him to return to the land of Thebes alive and well. They have heard a new prophecy concerning his fate, and they have grown to fear it. However, as readers of Oedipus the King learnt, trying to change fate only leads to destiny changing the path; ultimately, the destination will always remain the same: there is no escape. Oedipus is resigned to let the wind take him wherever it may go. He has learnt that he has no power. His past remerges, a dangerous past that the world considers criminal. It is one he tried to avoid, but, again, he could never escape from it. King Creon, Oedipus’ taciturn brother in law is especially angry at Oedipus for the death of Jocasta hurt him severely. It's very easy to judge others in such a situation, but as Oedipus retorts:
"One thing, answer me just one thing. If,
here and now, a man strode up to kill you,
you, you self-righteous --- what would you do?
investigate whether the murderer were your farther
or deal with him straight off? Well I know,
as you love your life, you’d pay the killer back,
not hunt around for justification. "
As a sequel to Oedipus the King and a prequel to Antigone this play is very much the middle of The Three Theban Plays. Oddly, it seems to be read far less than the other two plays, which I think is a bit of a shame. Granted, it lacks the autonomy of the others, but it is just as important in understanding the trilogy. And this is the crux of the play; it is Oedipus’ moment to defend himself, and give voice to his actions which he was not responsible for. At the same time, the plot foreshadows and leads straight into Antigone and explains much about King Creon's choices.
In terms of action- I speak of the technical connotations of the word as defined by Aristotle in Poetics- the play is lacking. There is very little in the way of tragic elements. It was only performed after Sophocles’ death when the glory days of Athens had set. The play was a reminder to its audiences of what had been lost, Oedipus served as a reminder of an age gone by, one that would never return. Reading the play today, I see the same sense of departure. This line for example as spoke by the Chorus:
“Then it’s the end of Athens, Athens is no more!"
I love reading Ancient Greek drama; it is so well crafted; it is straightforward yet complex; it is sophisticated yet bold and bloody. Sort of odd really when considering the fact that all deaths were off stage, but you still get the idea from it. I’d love see some modern reproductions of it live.
Antigone
Antigone is a real heroine; she stands up for what she believes in. She was faced with a strong dilemma. The law of man, the word of her uncle the king, demands that her brother's body remains unburied in the open with no funeral rights, to be savaged by animals. For King Creon, this is a symbolic justice for a traitor and a rebel, but the laws of the God’s, and the ruling of Antigone’s own mind, demands that she gives him libations (death rights) that all men deserve. She buries the body and faces the consequences of the crime.
Creon: And still you had the gall to break this law?
Antigone: Of course I did. It wasn't Zeus, not in the least,
who made this proclamation-not to me
Nor did that justice, dwelling with the gods
beneath the earth, ordain such laws for men.
Nor did I think your edict had such force
that you, a mere mortal, could override the gods.
So, like I said she’s a heroine, for standing up against tyranny, but she isn’t the play’s tragic hero: it’s clearly King Creon. Who has the right of this situation? It is easy to brand Creon a tyrant, though to do so overlooks the reasoning behind his actions. In punishing Antigone’s dead brother, her rebellious dead brother, he is sending a political message to those that threaten the peace of Thebes. In reality he is being an effective, albeit harsh, ruler. When his niece breaks his law, he has no choice but to punish her as he would any man. He couldn’t allow her to be an exception to the rule, to do so would be to undermine the law of the land and his politics: it would be to make him a hypocrite. But, to sentence her to death, that’s a little extreme.
Thus, Sophocles presents a beautifully conflicted situation. There is no longer a discernible sense of right or wrong, only a thin line of morality that separates a tyrant from a man of justice. And his conviction only gets worse; he refuses to hear what his son and the city (the chorus) think about the situation. He only sees his narrow-minded sense of justice, and ignores the effects it will have on his loved ones. He has no doubts about his actions, and demonstrates the questionable nature of a cold approach to kingship. The laws of man are not always right. Something Creon simply cannot perceive. To his mind, he is morally right, a man of good character and a king of honour. Is this not the most dangerous of leaders?
Creon: I will take her down some wild, desolate path
never trod by men, and wall her up alive
in a rocky vault, and set out short rations,
just the measure piety demands
to keep the entire city free of defilement.
There let her pray to the one god she worships:
Death—who knows?—may just reprieveher from death.
Or she may learn at last, better late than never,
what a waste of breath it is to worship Death.
And this is what makes him the play’s tragic hero. His hamartia, his tragic flaw in Aristotle terms, is his severe lack of judgement, and his inability to perceive the wrongness of his decree. The reversal, recognition and suffering come in the form of the priest Tiresias, an old wise man who speaks to the Gods. He tells Creon what will happen if he persists down his current path, and after much resistance, Creon finally relents his folly. But it is far too late. The blood has already been shed. Tragedy has already struck, death has already struck: Creon is left in tatters. It is the hardest of lessons to learn.
So what do we learn from this? Greek tragedy was didactical in purpose; it was used as a learning tool, a means of imparting wisdom to the audience. What is Sophocles message? For me it’s quite simple: open your eyes and your heart. Never presume that you are right and an absolute morale authority. For Creon, his realisation came too late. The result was a sacrifice he will never forget, Antigone's death, and the one most readers seem to sympathise with. But I implore you to look further into the play, and consider the full role of Creon. To overlook him is to overlook the point of the work:
“All men make mistakes, but a good man yields when he knows his course is wrong, and repairs the evil. The only crime is pride.”
This play is a spectacular piece of work, though I think reading the other two plays helps to elucidate its greatness. For me, this book is one everybody should read at least once in their lifetime.
June 5, 2023
Există și lecturi obligatorii? Negreșit, Oedip rege este una dintre ele...
Întreaga tragedie se sprijină pe un paradox. Oedip e chemat rege în Teba, fiindcă dezleagă enigma pusă de Sfinx. Dacă nu ar soluționa enigma, Oedip ar fi ucis. Găsește răspunsul și, prin asta, omoară, el, monstrul feminin. Așadar, faptul că învinge Sfinxul este pentru tebani un merit suficient pentru a-l desemna ca rege (= tiran). Oricum, alegerea nu va fi deloc fericită. Nici pentru locuitorii cetății, nici pentru Oedip. Se căsătorește fără să știe cu mama sa. E un sacrilegiu.
După această desemnare, Teba e lovită de nenorociri cumplite. În fața lui Oedip stă o nouă enigmă. Locuitorii vor să afle pricina năpastelor care au lovit cetatea. Oracolul din Delphi dezvăluie că printre tebani există un mare vinovat. Locuitorii îl solicită pe profetul Tiresias. Este bătrîn și orb. Ei vor un răspuns limpede. Tiresias se ferește să dezvăluie numele și identitatea vinovatului. Cînd însuși Oedip îi cere imperios răspunsul, primește acest avertisment:
„Vai, vai, cumplit e să cunoști, cînd a cunoaște / Nu-ți este de folos...”.
Oedip vrea, totuși, să afle adevărul. Cu orice preț. Pînă la urmă va înțelege că vinovatul este el însuși. El l-a ucis pe Laios, tatăl său, el s-a casătorit cu Iocasta, mama sa. Pentru acest motiv tebanii suferă. Problema este, așadar, următoarea. Dacă Oedip nu ar dezlega enigma Sfinxului, el nu ar mai ajunge rege în Teba (și soț al propriei mame). Și ar muri precum toți cei care nu au găsit răspunsul. Dar Teba ar rămîne sub amenințarea Sfinxului. Oedip dezleagă enigma, iar consecința este la fel de atroce. Are de răspuns la întrebarea cu privire la vinovatul din cetate. Iar răspunsul este unul singur: Oedip.
Dar este Oedip într-adevăr vinovat? Mai mult: există cazuri în care adevărul trebuie ascuns? Sfîntul Augustin ar fi spus (și chiar a spus) că nu...
Întreaga tragedie se sprijină pe un paradox. Oedip e chemat rege în Teba, fiindcă dezleagă enigma pusă de Sfinx. Dacă nu ar soluționa enigma, Oedip ar fi ucis. Găsește răspunsul și, prin asta, omoară, el, monstrul feminin. Așadar, faptul că învinge Sfinxul este pentru tebani un merit suficient pentru a-l desemna ca rege (= tiran). Oricum, alegerea nu va fi deloc fericită. Nici pentru locuitorii cetății, nici pentru Oedip. Se căsătorește fără să știe cu mama sa. E un sacrilegiu.
După această desemnare, Teba e lovită de nenorociri cumplite. În fața lui Oedip stă o nouă enigmă. Locuitorii vor să afle pricina năpastelor care au lovit cetatea. Oracolul din Delphi dezvăluie că printre tebani există un mare vinovat. Locuitorii îl solicită pe profetul Tiresias. Este bătrîn și orb. Ei vor un răspuns limpede. Tiresias se ferește să dezvăluie numele și identitatea vinovatului. Cînd însuși Oedip îi cere imperios răspunsul, primește acest avertisment:
„Vai, vai, cumplit e să cunoști, cînd a cunoaște / Nu-ți este de folos...”.
Oedip vrea, totuși, să afle adevărul. Cu orice preț. Pînă la urmă va înțelege că vinovatul este el însuși. El l-a ucis pe Laios, tatăl său, el s-a casătorit cu Iocasta, mama sa. Pentru acest motiv tebanii suferă. Problema este, așadar, următoarea. Dacă Oedip nu ar dezlega enigma Sfinxului, el nu ar mai ajunge rege în Teba (și soț al propriei mame). Și ar muri precum toți cei care nu au găsit răspunsul. Dar Teba ar rămîne sub amenințarea Sfinxului. Oedip dezleagă enigma, iar consecința este la fel de atroce. Are de răspuns la întrebarea cu privire la vinovatul din cetate. Iar răspunsul este unul singur: Oedip.
Dar este Oedip într-adevăr vinovat? Mai mult: există cazuri în care adevărul trebuie ascuns? Sfîntul Augustin ar fi spus (și chiar a spus) că nu...
March 31, 2020
This is how I feel about Antigone:
Translation Notes
I have read four versions of the Antigone, three versions of Oedipus Rex, and two versions of Oedipus at Colonus, over five years. I don't know why I'm like this either. (Comment your favorite Antigone translations and I'll read them.)
Oxford edition, trans. unk (2015): In ninth grade, I read the Theban plays in my English class. I liked them. Antigone, specifically, made a very very large impression on me. I promptly forgot every single thing I thought about them. [I have a terrible memory.] So when audible offered a free audio of the plays with a full-cast narration… I went for it. And of course loved it again. Will need to reread these translations to fully retranslate.
Audio edition, trans. unk (2018): This audio stars the excellent Jamie Glover as Oedipus and the always-talented Hayley Atwell as Antigone, but casting such as Samantha Bond as Jocasta, Michael Melone as Creon, and Lydia Leonard as Ismene stand out as well. This is the reading upon which I decided perhaps Oedipus the King was very good.
Antigonick trans. Anne Carson (2019): More an adaption than a translation, and certainly not my favorite, if only because I love Antigone's original words so much. Worth reading, but after reading Antigone proper. Reviewed here.
The Greek Plays edition trans. Frank Nisetich (2020): I loved the biting stychomythia of this translation.
Play Reviews for Everything
→Oedipus the King← ★★★★★
Oedipus means swollen foot, in reference to his broken feet as a child, but holds a double meaning: Oida means I know, and Eidon means I saw, so the term could also be 'seeing foot'. If only he could see where his feet were going. Seeing, indeed, is the primary tension of the play. One eyewitness has two key details to give: the story of exposing the baby for Laius, and the story of watching a stranger kill Laius on a dark road.
What I like about this play is that it is a tragedy where no character has purposefully fucked things up. Every single character — from the later-unsympathetic Creon to the excellently written Jocasta — is sympathetic. It is so upsetting to see it unfold, see these characters have their lives so completely ruined. Around halfway through the play, Jocasta figures it out, and begs Oedipus to stop the process; knowing, but thinking to take it to her grave: he does not take it. Oedipus receives the opportunity to blame it all on Creon and keep his leadership: he does not take it. He is finding the truth for altruism, and will take it to the end.
For Oedipus, his recognition and reversal are a nightmare come true, a dream he never thought could occur. I was near tears during Oedipus’ final speech.
→Oedipus at Colonus← ★★★★☆
I actually, in hindsight, am not sure I read this in ninth grade. [We were only actually required to read Antigone.] This is the Family Feelings play, as in… the relationship between Antigone and Ismene and Oedipus is upsetting and I don’t like it. Almost all the action of this one is offstage, which makes it far harder to follow; honestly, this feels like a joiner between Oedipus the King and Antigone. I did enjoy the sense of tragedy and the character development.
→Antigone← ★★★★★
What I like about Antigone is Antigone. No, that's not quite right. What I like about Antigone is its focus on very different characters as they try to undermine Creon in three very different ways. Acting from honor, from logic, from empathy, the three youth of the royal family protest his decisions: Antigone representing the god’s honor and the woman’s honor; Ismene representing the woman’s honor; Haemon representing the youth’s honor and the city’s honor. The actions of Antigone, Haemon, and Ismene break the heirarchy down, and though by the end of the play, two lie dead, they have taught Creon his lesson. When the tyrant does not listen to those around him, he has nothing, and leaves the dead in his wake.
Antigone loves her honor before the gods, and will break any heirarchy, woman or not, to get to it; yet the city is on her side, following her lead. Ismene and Antigone have a fascinating sisterly relationship. The stychomythia (certain kind of meter used for conversation) between Haemon and Creon is one of my favorite scenes in any play I’ve read ever.
The 'guard' witnesses two very key events in Antigone's life: he is almost more 'casual', and oddly comedic. He introduces two burials, one scattering of earth, one seemingly divine and done by Antigone. This is not notable on the first readthrough. On the second, the question of who actually does the first burial hits.
Notable in the sense of tragic convention is that the chorus is all-male; in this genre, the chorus is generally the same gender as the protagonists, generally of a lower social position, but sympathetic. Though the chorus here is at times kind to Antigone, they are never fully on her side. By the time she gives her death speech, about to walk into her tomb, we know she is truly alone. Antigone is a spectacle to the chorus, as Oedipus once was.
Notable Lines (Frank Nisetich translation):
ANTIGONE: No dread of what some man might think would ever make me… be guilty before the gods. (457-459)
ANTIGONE: And I can’t join in hate, but only in love. (528)
ANTIGONE: Your thoughts appealed to some, mine to others.
ISMENE: And yet we’re both found guilty, both alike. (558-559)
CREON: Rulers own their cities--isn’t that the saying?
HAEMON: A fine ruler you’d make, alone, in a desert.
CREON: This fellow, it seems, is on the woman’s side.
HAEMON: If you’re a woman: it’s you I care for. (738-741)
HAEMON: Do you want to talk and talk and never listen? (755)
These plays are an excellent look at the nature of humanity, the hypocrisy of us and the fact that we all have our good sides and our bad. I know I will not be ending my love affair with Antigone anytime soon.
Blog | Twitter | Instagram | Spotify | Youtube | About |
Translation Notes
I have read four versions of the Antigone, three versions of Oedipus Rex, and two versions of Oedipus at Colonus, over five years. I don't know why I'm like this either. (Comment your favorite Antigone translations and I'll read them.)
Oxford edition, trans. unk (2015): In ninth grade, I read the Theban plays in my English class. I liked them. Antigone, specifically, made a very very large impression on me. I promptly forgot every single thing I thought about them. [I have a terrible memory.] So when audible offered a free audio of the plays with a full-cast narration… I went for it. And of course loved it again. Will need to reread these translations to fully retranslate.
Audio edition, trans. unk (2018): This audio stars the excellent Jamie Glover as Oedipus and the always-talented Hayley Atwell as Antigone, but casting such as Samantha Bond as Jocasta, Michael Melone as Creon, and Lydia Leonard as Ismene stand out as well. This is the reading upon which I decided perhaps Oedipus the King was very good.
Antigonick trans. Anne Carson (2019): More an adaption than a translation, and certainly not my favorite, if only because I love Antigone's original words so much. Worth reading, but after reading Antigone proper. Reviewed here.
The Greek Plays edition trans. Frank Nisetich (2020): I loved the biting stychomythia of this translation.
Play Reviews for Everything
→Oedipus the King← ★★★★★
Oedipus means swollen foot, in reference to his broken feet as a child, but holds a double meaning: Oida means I know, and Eidon means I saw, so the term could also be 'seeing foot'. If only he could see where his feet were going. Seeing, indeed, is the primary tension of the play. One eyewitness has two key details to give: the story of exposing the baby for Laius, and the story of watching a stranger kill Laius on a dark road.
What I like about this play is that it is a tragedy where no character has purposefully fucked things up. Every single character — from the later-unsympathetic Creon to the excellently written Jocasta — is sympathetic. It is so upsetting to see it unfold, see these characters have their lives so completely ruined. Around halfway through the play, Jocasta figures it out, and begs Oedipus to stop the process; knowing, but thinking to take it to her grave: he does not take it. Oedipus receives the opportunity to blame it all on Creon and keep his leadership: he does not take it. He is finding the truth for altruism, and will take it to the end.
For Oedipus, his recognition and reversal are a nightmare come true, a dream he never thought could occur. I was near tears during Oedipus’ final speech.
→Oedipus at Colonus← ★★★★☆
I actually, in hindsight, am not sure I read this in ninth grade. [We were only actually required to read Antigone.] This is the Family Feelings play, as in… the relationship between Antigone and Ismene and Oedipus is upsetting and I don’t like it. Almost all the action of this one is offstage, which makes it far harder to follow; honestly, this feels like a joiner between Oedipus the King and Antigone. I did enjoy the sense of tragedy and the character development.
→Antigone← ★★★★★
What I like about Antigone is Antigone. No, that's not quite right. What I like about Antigone is its focus on very different characters as they try to undermine Creon in three very different ways. Acting from honor, from logic, from empathy, the three youth of the royal family protest his decisions: Antigone representing the god’s honor and the woman’s honor; Ismene representing the woman’s honor; Haemon representing the youth’s honor and the city’s honor. The actions of Antigone, Haemon, and Ismene break the heirarchy down, and though by the end of the play, two lie dead, they have taught Creon his lesson. When the tyrant does not listen to those around him, he has nothing, and leaves the dead in his wake.
Antigone loves her honor before the gods, and will break any heirarchy, woman or not, to get to it; yet the city is on her side, following her lead. Ismene and Antigone have a fascinating sisterly relationship. The stychomythia (certain kind of meter used for conversation) between Haemon and Creon is one of my favorite scenes in any play I’ve read ever.
The 'guard' witnesses two very key events in Antigone's life: he is almost more 'casual', and oddly comedic. He introduces two burials, one scattering of earth, one seemingly divine and done by Antigone. This is not notable on the first readthrough. On the second, the question of who actually does the first burial hits.
Notable in the sense of tragic convention is that the chorus is all-male; in this genre, the chorus is generally the same gender as the protagonists, generally of a lower social position, but sympathetic. Though the chorus here is at times kind to Antigone, they are never fully on her side. By the time she gives her death speech, about to walk into her tomb, we know she is truly alone. Antigone is a spectacle to the chorus, as Oedipus once was.
Notable Lines (Frank Nisetich translation):
ANTIGONE: No dread of what some man might think would ever make me… be guilty before the gods. (457-459)
ANTIGONE: And I can’t join in hate, but only in love. (528)
ANTIGONE: Your thoughts appealed to some, mine to others.
ISMENE: And yet we’re both found guilty, both alike. (558-559)
CREON: Rulers own their cities--isn’t that the saying?
HAEMON: A fine ruler you’d make, alone, in a desert.
CREON: This fellow, it seems, is on the woman’s side.
HAEMON: If you’re a woman: it’s you I care for. (738-741)
HAEMON: Do you want to talk and talk and never listen? (755)
These plays are an excellent look at the nature of humanity, the hypocrisy of us and the fact that we all have our good sides and our bad. I know I will not be ending my love affair with Antigone anytime soon.
Blog | Twitter | Instagram | Spotify | Youtube | About |
August 16, 2021
آنتیگونه! ای اول فمنیست جهان، ای زاده‌ی نفرین و شرم، ای کسیکه بر سنت‌ها شوریدی، ای میرنده در راه عشق، دوستت دارم.
تسلیم شدن یا تسلیم نشدن. مسأله این است.
و من همچنان معتقدم پیام این تراژدی همون جمله معروف بوکوفسکی عه
Don't try
.....
این کتاب رو باید هدیه داد.
تسلیم شدن یا تسلیم نشدن. مسأله این است.
و من همچنان معتقدم پیام این تراژدی همون جمله معروف بوکوفسکی عه
Don't try
.....
این کتاب رو باید هدیه داد.
November 17, 2016
اگر راست باشد که حقیقت زهرآگین است، آنتیگونه را باید یک شوکران تلخ نامید. تراژدی تقابل‌ها، همه چیز در برابر همه چیز، کششی به سوی مرگ...
June 4, 2018
Oedipus the King was the first Greek tragedy I read in my life, when I was still of a single-digit school age and not exactly because it was compulsory reading for my class (who wants to inflict uninentional incest on young children, anyhow?). I don't recall how old I was, besides too young, nor the exact circumstances that led me to pick up an "adult" book, but I do recall the copy belonged to an older cousin of mine who was definitely reading it for school, and that I also read Homer's two epics round the same time.
No, I wasn't traumatised. No, I don't recall being grossed out of my young wits by the amount of age-inappropriate content. No, I didn't find the story disturbing at all. No, I didn't have nightmares, and didn't remember the plot for long after.
Yes, it's probably behind my grown-up tolerance for the likes of House Lannister. Ahem!
More seriously, I never read the entire trilogy until now. Mostly because I already knew what was coming after the first play, and that more or less spoilt it for me. But currently I'm on a Big Three Tragedians reading binge, and it was Sophocles' turn. Looking in my shelves, turns out I've hoarded about seven different translations of his plays, from which I selected Robert Fagles as the best of the lot after sample-reading the others (Bagg and Kitto are next for the top three, by the way).
Did I like the two other plays that complete the Oedipan cycle, Oedipus at Colonus and Antigone? Yes! Definitely yes, it's the only trilogy that got 5 stars for all three in a row, despite not being my favourite drama plot. It's too good to rate lower, in my opinion. And seeing the quality, it made me wish Sophocles' complete take on the House of Atreus hadn't been lost.
As a curious observation, there's an interesting little detail here: Sophocles chose to have Oedipus get divine compensation for his tragic fate upon death, by an ending that looked similar to biblical tales of similar tone, and also reminded me somewhat of J. R. R. Tolkien's Túrin, another tragically cursed character also driven to unintentional incest by forces beyond his control. Very interesting! What it is, I won't be telling, just do read it.
No, I wasn't traumatised. No, I don't recall being grossed out of my young wits by the amount of age-inappropriate content. No, I didn't find the story disturbing at all. No, I didn't have nightmares, and didn't remember the plot for long after.
Yes, it's probably behind my grown-up tolerance for the likes of House Lannister. Ahem!
More seriously, I never read the entire trilogy until now. Mostly because I already knew what was coming after the first play, and that more or less spoilt it for me. But currently I'm on a Big Three Tragedians reading binge, and it was Sophocles' turn. Looking in my shelves, turns out I've hoarded about seven different translations of his plays, from which I selected Robert Fagles as the best of the lot after sample-reading the others (Bagg and Kitto are next for the top three, by the way).
Did I like the two other plays that complete the Oedipan cycle, Oedipus at Colonus and Antigone? Yes! Definitely yes, it's the only trilogy that got 5 stars for all three in a row, despite not being my favourite drama plot. It's too good to rate lower, in my opinion. And seeing the quality, it made me wish Sophocles' complete take on the House of Atreus hadn't been lost.
As a curious observation, there's an interesting little detail here: Sophocles chose to have Oedipus get divine compensation for his tragic fate upon death, by an ending that looked similar to biblical tales of similar tone, and also reminded me somewhat of J. R. R. Tolkien's Túrin, another tragically cursed character also driven to unintentional incest by forces beyond his control. Very interesting! What it is, I won't be telling, just do read it.
August 16, 2021
1. مهمترین مضمونِ سه نمایشنامه‌ی تبای را می‌توان «سرنوشت» مقدر و ناتوانیِ آدمی در فرارِ از آن دانست؛ حتی اودیپوسِ دانا نیز نتوانست خودش را از دام سرنوشتی که خواهرانِ «مویرای» برای وی ریسیده و بافته بودند، رهایی دهد و خود نیز به سرنوشتِ شوم خاندانش مبتلا شده و فرزندان/برادران و خواهرانش را نیز از آن بی‌نصیب کرد.
اما آنچه که فکر مرا به خود مشغول داشت، شباهتِ اودیپوس و گیلگمش بود؛ هر دوی آن‌ها کاخ پادشاهی و زادگاه‌شان را ترک میکنند تا شاید راهی برای فرار از سرنوشت‌شان پیدا کنند. و جالب اینکه هر دو از داناترین و بزرگترین مردمان خود بودند؛ هم گیلگمش و هم اودیپوس شهرشان را به ترتیب از شرِ گاو آسمان و ابوالهول می‌رهانند و ناجیِ شهر خود میشوند. اما مواجهه‌شان با مرگ، یکی مرگ دوستش و دیگری مرگ مردمانش، آن‌ها را با سرنوشتِ محتوم‌شان روبرو میکند.
اما چه میشود که یک نمایشنامه‌نویسِ آتنی (این دولت‌شهر سعادت‌مند و تمدن‌ساز) بر آن می‌گردد تا این‌گونه تیره و تار به سرنوشتِ گریزناپذیر آدمی و دست و پا زدن‌های بیهوده‌ی وی، زیر نگاه خیره‌ی خدایان بنگرد.
2. اما یکی از قدرتمندترین و یگانه‌ترین شخصیت‌های این سه نمایشنامه، «آنتیگونه» است؛ این شهدختی که شجاعانه پدر پیر و نابینای خود را رهنما و چشم میشود و گویی که بار سنگینِ سرنوشتِ او را شریک میشود. آنتیگونه به وضوح و با قدرت، سرنوشتِ خانوادگی‌شان را می‌پذیرد و بی هیچ هراسی به استقبال او و به استقبال مرگ میرود.
انگار که آنتیگونه‌ی نمایشنامه «اودیپوس در کلونوس»، روش و منشِ مواجهه با سرنوشت و مرگ را از اودیپوسِ نابینا، پدر/برادرش آموخته است، و اکنون در نمایشنامه «آنتیگونه»، یک تنه و کاملاً آگاه از و پذیرای سرنوشتی که برایش رقم خورده، به جنگِ با دژخیمِ زمانه‌اش می رود.
3. مسکوب در ترجمه‌ی خود، نه تنها به خوبی توانسته است که حال و هوای آرکائیکِ نمایشنامهها را ترسیم کند، بلکه متنی یک‌دست و دلنشین ارائه داده است. و البته فکر میکنم که چنین نثر و ادبیتی، بر کار دشوارِ به روی صحنه بردن این نمایشنامه ها را دو چندان می افزاید.
و دیگر اینکه مقدمه‌ی مسکوب بر نمایشنامه‌ی اودیپوس شهریار را نپسندیدم و فکر میکنم که راه تفسیرِ اسطوره، این نباشد؛ اینکه منِ مخاطب/مقدمه‌نویس/مترجم افکار و تراوشات ذهنیِ خود را حولِ یکی از شخصیت‌ها شکل بدهم و سپس از هر کجا که ذهن‌ام یاری نمود، داستان‌ها و اساطیرِ مختلفِ دیگر را به عنوان شاهد یا هر چیز دیگری به آن الصاق کنم، تا متنی پنجاه صفحه‌ای از آن در آورم که می‌شد تمامی آن را در ده صفحه‌ام خلاصه کرد.
پ نوشت 1: خوانشِ این کتاب در این مقطع، جز به همتِ دوستانِ پیشنهاددهنده و البته همراهی‌کننده‌ی جمع‌خوانی مستطاب حاصل نمی‌شد؛ از همگان‌شان سپاسگزارم.
پ نوشت 2: امتیاز من به نمایشنامه ها، به ترتیب، 5 و 4 و 4.5 می‌باشد.
اما آنچه که فکر مرا به خود مشغول داشت، شباهتِ اودیپوس و گیلگمش بود؛ هر دوی آن‌ها کاخ پادشاهی و زادگاه‌شان را ترک میکنند تا شاید راهی برای فرار از سرنوشت‌شان پیدا کنند. و جالب اینکه هر دو از داناترین و بزرگترین مردمان خود بودند؛ هم گیلگمش و هم اودیپوس شهرشان را به ترتیب از شرِ گاو آسمان و ابوالهول می‌رهانند و ناجیِ شهر خود میشوند. اما مواجهه‌شان با مرگ، یکی مرگ دوستش و دیگری مرگ مردمانش، آن‌ها را با سرنوشتِ محتوم‌شان روبرو میکند.
اما چه میشود که یک نمایشنامه‌نویسِ آتنی (این دولت‌شهر سعادت‌مند و تمدن‌ساز) بر آن می‌گردد تا این‌گونه تیره و تار به سرنوشتِ گریزناپذیر آدمی و دست و پا زدن‌های بیهوده‌ی وی، زیر نگاه خیره‌ی خدایان بنگرد.
2. اما یکی از قدرتمندترین و یگانه‌ترین شخصیت‌های این سه نمایشنامه، «آنتیگونه» است؛ این شهدختی که شجاعانه پدر پیر و نابینای خود را رهنما و چشم میشود و گویی که بار سنگینِ سرنوشتِ او را شریک میشود. آنتیگونه به وضوح و با قدرت، سرنوشتِ خانوادگی‌شان را می‌پذیرد و بی هیچ هراسی به استقبال او و به استقبال مرگ میرود.
انگار که آنتیگونه‌ی نمایشنامه «اودیپوس در کلونوس»، روش و منشِ مواجهه با سرنوشت و مرگ را از اودیپوسِ نابینا، پدر/برادرش آموخته است، و اکنون در نمایشنامه «آنتیگونه»، یک تنه و کاملاً آگاه از و پذیرای سرنوشتی که برایش رقم خورده، به جنگِ با دژخیمِ زمانه‌اش می رود.
3. مسکوب در ترجمه‌ی خود، نه تنها به خوبی توانسته است که حال و هوای آرکائیکِ نمایشنامهها را ترسیم کند، بلکه متنی یک‌دست و دلنشین ارائه داده است. و البته فکر میکنم که چنین نثر و ادبیتی، بر کار دشوارِ به روی صحنه بردن این نمایشنامه ها را دو چندان می افزاید.
و دیگر اینکه مقدمه‌ی مسکوب بر نمایشنامه‌ی اودیپوس شهریار را نپسندیدم و فکر میکنم که راه تفسیرِ اسطوره، این نباشد؛ اینکه منِ مخاطب/مقدمه‌نویس/مترجم افکار و تراوشات ذهنیِ خود را حولِ یکی از شخصیت‌ها شکل بدهم و سپس از هر کجا که ذهن‌ام یاری نمود، داستان‌ها و اساطیرِ مختلفِ دیگر را به عنوان شاهد یا هر چیز دیگری به آن الصاق کنم، تا متنی پنجاه صفحه‌ای از آن در آورم که می‌شد تمامی آن را در ده صفحه‌ام خلاصه کرد.
پ نوشت 1: خوانشِ این کتاب در این مقطع، جز به همتِ دوستانِ پیشنهاددهنده و البته همراهی‌کننده‌ی جمع‌خوانی مستطاب حاصل نمی‌شد؛ از همگان‌شان سپاسگزارم.
پ نوشت 2: امتیاز من به نمایشنامه ها، به ترتیب، 5 و 4 و 4.5 می‌باشد.
May 19, 2016
'Take these things to heart, my son, I warn you.
All men make mistakes, it is only human.
But once the wrong is done, a man
can turn his back on folly, misfortune too,
if he tries to make amends, however low he’s fallen,
and stops his bullnecked ways. Stubbornness
brands you for stupidity – pride is a crime.
No, yield to the dead!
Never stab the fighter when he’s down.
Where’s the glory, killing the dead twice over?”
(Tiresias, the blind prophet, to Creon, king of Thebes, uncle of Antigone in ‘Antigone’ )
Three very good decisions led me to finally read the Penguin Classic Edition of Sophocles’ three Theban plays: First and foremost, I have eventually decided a few month ago to take a course in Classical Mythology. This has always been my wish, but as with so many things in life it had been postponed for years. The course did not open Pandora’s box, it has instead enhanced my understanding of literature and art in general and given me new insights of how Classical mythology is part of our cultural legacy. Amongst others we had to read Sophocles’ ‘Oedipus the King’. I knew, somewhere in my house I would find a battered, yellow Reclam edition in German: This work by Sophocles is a set book for almost every high school student here in Zurich. On the spur of a moment I decided, however, to read not only this well-known play, but to add the two other Theban Plays: ‘Antigone’ and ‘Oedipus at Colonus’. This was my second good decision. My third brave decision was to read these plays in an English translation instead of a German one, mostly because I could not find any decent new translation into German. This is how I came into the possession of a brand new copy of the Penguin Classic Edition, translated by Robert Fagles (Professor of Comparative Literature, Emeritus, at Princeton University) with introductions and notes by Bernard Knox (Director Emeritus of Harvard’s Center for Hellenic Studies in Washington). As so often with Penguin Classics editions, I fell instantly in love with the cover, depicting Gustave Doré’s ‘The Enigma’ (Musée d’Orsay, Paris):
I cannot praise highly enough this edition and its translation. The beautiful and simple language is easy to understand even for non-native English speakers; the accompanying notes are clear and require only a basic knowledge of Greek mythology. They help to enjoy even more the compelling writing and subtle irony of the plays.
If you have read ‘Oedipus the King’ years ago and are now ready to revisit this work, give it a try and read all three Theban plays by Sophocles. They consist of ‘Antigone’ (written ca. 442 B.C.), ‘Oedipus the King’ (ca. 430 B.C.) and ‘Oedipus at Colonus’ (produced after Sophocles death in 401 B.C.). Besides the beautifully structured ‘Oedipus the King’ the two other Theban plays about the idealistic Antigone and Oedipus in exile are no less captivating and have not lost their attractiveness. As all Greek dramas, Sophocles’ tragedies are based on myths that have been passed on orally. Bernard Knox explains:
“The stuff from which the tragic poet made his plays was not contemporary reality but myth. And yet it did reflect contemporary reality, did so perhaps in terms more authoritative because they were not colored by the partisan emotions of the time, terms which were in fact so authorative that they remain meaningful even for us today.”(p.22)
One of the best examples that these stories have the same powerful meaning as 2400 years ago is the quote mentioned at the beginning of this review by Tiresias to Creon.
Nevertheless, I am aware that the modern reader of today has another approach to these works than the Athenian male viewer had (women apparently were rarely admitted to the spectacles). During my course I read several plays not only by Sophocles but also by Aeschylus and Euripides. Even though I love Greek Mythology and I am very much attracted to the Classical Antiquity, it has often been difficult for me to digest the misogyny of Classical cultures. Greek men do not seem to have been very comfortable around women. In several myths women are depicted as malicious, monstrous or even eerie. Monsters are often female. It seems that Antigone is a rare exception. Her integrity and humanity, which Sophocles describes so masterfully, makes her sympathetic to the modern reader. Oedipus might have been the hero of the male Athenian viewer (*), but I think Oedipus’ daughter Antigone is my personal hero of the stories. Let me thus conclude with a quote by Bernard Knox about my favourite character in the plays:
“…her courage and steadfastness are a gleam of light; she is the embodiment of the only consolation tragedy can offer – that in certain heroic natures unmerited suffering and death can be met with a greatness of soul which, because it is purely human, brings honor to us all.” (p.53)
(*)Heroes in Greek mythology were not basically good or moral persons; they could be quite the opposite. A hero could have a divine parent or being extraordinary in some other ways, he did not have to be a good man.
All men make mistakes, it is only human.
But once the wrong is done, a man
can turn his back on folly, misfortune too,
if he tries to make amends, however low he’s fallen,
and stops his bullnecked ways. Stubbornness
brands you for stupidity – pride is a crime.
No, yield to the dead!
Never stab the fighter when he’s down.
Where’s the glory, killing the dead twice over?”
(Tiresias, the blind prophet, to Creon, king of Thebes, uncle of Antigone in ‘Antigone’ )
Three very good decisions led me to finally read the Penguin Classic Edition of Sophocles’ three Theban plays: First and foremost, I have eventually decided a few month ago to take a course in Classical Mythology. This has always been my wish, but as with so many things in life it had been postponed for years. The course did not open Pandora’s box, it has instead enhanced my understanding of literature and art in general and given me new insights of how Classical mythology is part of our cultural legacy. Amongst others we had to read Sophocles’ ‘Oedipus the King’. I knew, somewhere in my house I would find a battered, yellow Reclam edition in German: This work by Sophocles is a set book for almost every high school student here in Zurich. On the spur of a moment I decided, however, to read not only this well-known play, but to add the two other Theban Plays: ‘Antigone’ and ‘Oedipus at Colonus’. This was my second good decision. My third brave decision was to read these plays in an English translation instead of a German one, mostly because I could not find any decent new translation into German. This is how I came into the possession of a brand new copy of the Penguin Classic Edition, translated by Robert Fagles (Professor of Comparative Literature, Emeritus, at Princeton University) with introductions and notes by Bernard Knox (Director Emeritus of Harvard’s Center for Hellenic Studies in Washington). As so often with Penguin Classics editions, I fell instantly in love with the cover, depicting Gustave Doré’s ‘The Enigma’ (Musée d’Orsay, Paris):
I cannot praise highly enough this edition and its translation. The beautiful and simple language is easy to understand even for non-native English speakers; the accompanying notes are clear and require only a basic knowledge of Greek mythology. They help to enjoy even more the compelling writing and subtle irony of the plays.
If you have read ‘Oedipus the King’ years ago and are now ready to revisit this work, give it a try and read all three Theban plays by Sophocles. They consist of ‘Antigone’ (written ca. 442 B.C.), ‘Oedipus the King’ (ca. 430 B.C.) and ‘Oedipus at Colonus’ (produced after Sophocles death in 401 B.C.). Besides the beautifully structured ‘Oedipus the King’ the two other Theban plays about the idealistic Antigone and Oedipus in exile are no less captivating and have not lost their attractiveness. As all Greek dramas, Sophocles’ tragedies are based on myths that have been passed on orally. Bernard Knox explains:
“The stuff from which the tragic poet made his plays was not contemporary reality but myth. And yet it did reflect contemporary reality, did so perhaps in terms more authoritative because they were not colored by the partisan emotions of the time, terms which were in fact so authorative that they remain meaningful even for us today.”(p.22)
One of the best examples that these stories have the same powerful meaning as 2400 years ago is the quote mentioned at the beginning of this review by Tiresias to Creon.
Nevertheless, I am aware that the modern reader of today has another approach to these works than the Athenian male viewer had (women apparently were rarely admitted to the spectacles). During my course I read several plays not only by Sophocles but also by Aeschylus and Euripides. Even though I love Greek Mythology and I am very much attracted to the Classical Antiquity, it has often been difficult for me to digest the misogyny of Classical cultures. Greek men do not seem to have been very comfortable around women. In several myths women are depicted as malicious, monstrous or even eerie. Monsters are often female. It seems that Antigone is a rare exception. Her integrity and humanity, which Sophocles describes so masterfully, makes her sympathetic to the modern reader. Oedipus might have been the hero of the male Athenian viewer (*), but I think Oedipus’ daughter Antigone is my personal hero of the stories. Let me thus conclude with a quote by Bernard Knox about my favourite character in the plays:
“…her courage and steadfastness are a gleam of light; she is the embodiment of the only consolation tragedy can offer – that in certain heroic natures unmerited suffering and death can be met with a greatness of soul which, because it is purely human, brings honor to us all.” (p.53)
(*)Heroes in Greek mythology were not basically good or moral persons; they could be quite the opposite. A hero could have a divine parent or being extraordinary in some other ways, he did not have to be a good man.
August 20, 2023
در باب معرفی نویسنده:
سوفوکل شاید بزرگترین درام‌نویس ادبیات قدیم هست که هیچکس را جز شکسپیر یارای مقابله با او نیست. او در طی ۹۰ سال عمر خود یکی از خوشبخت‌ترین مردمان آن دوره و روزگار بود، عمر دراز، سلامت مزاج و زیبایی اندام و قدرت و تمول و شهرت و ذوق و قریحه بی‌همتا، همه را با هم داشت، با این وجود، وی، یکی از بدبین‌ترین و ناراضی‌ترین افراد روی کره‌ی زمین بود؛ بدبینی‌ای که می‌توانید تاثیر آن را در تمام آثار او ببینید. آثاری که گویا ۱۱۳ نمایشنامه بوده‌اند و الان هیچ اثری از آنان به غیر از هفت نمایشنامه خاص نیست، هفت نمایشنامه‌ای که تاریخ نوشتن آنان نیز مشخص نیست. عزت و احترامی که یونانیان برای سوفوکل قائل بوده‌اند برای هیچکس دیگر قائل نبودند، به‌گونه‌ای که ارسطوی بزرگوار آثار او را همیشه همراه خود داشت و حتی به‌هنگام خواب نیز آن‌ها را مطالعه می‌نموده است. معروف است که روزی سوفوکل از طرف دادگاه احضار میشود، و برای صورت‌حساب مسئله‌ای به آنجا میرود، بعد از شنیدن اتهامات خود با خواندن فقط و تنها یک بیت شعر مسیر دادگاه را به نفع خود تغییر میدهد و بر دستان مردم به خانه خود بازمی‌گردد.
در باب سبک نگارش:
درام به شکلی که ما امروزه از آن استفاده میکنیم، از اختراعات سوفوکل می‌باشد، او بود که درام‌های اولیه یونایی را که پاره‌ای از اشعار غنائی یا حماسی از طرف دسته خوانندگان بودند را با حضور بازیگران ترکیب کرد و اعمال و حرکاتی متناسب با دیالوگ‌ها اضافه کرد و درام را به شکلی نوین پدید آورد.
اشعار سوفوکل بسیار شیوا و روان است، او از استعارات شفاف و واضح استفاده میکند، خود را درگیر صنایع ادبی نمی‌کند و منظور خود را واضح ادا میکند، ما در فارسی به چنین سبک ساده و روانی سهل ممتنع می‌گوییم، سبکی که با کمترین جملات، بسیار دقیق و عمیق داستان‌سرایی میکند.
سوفوکل عقیده راسخی به مفهوم تقدیر داشت و آدمی را بازیچه دست آن می‌دانست، به‌گونه‌ای که در یکجا میگوید:
ای پسران و دختران ولایت تبس، بنگرید: این است اودیپوس که روزگاری از ه��ه مردم بزرگتر بود ومفتاح معماها و اسرار خفیه را در دست داشت، شوکت و جلال او به پایه‌ای رسیده بود که همه‌کس در این عصر و زمان بدو رشک می‌بردند. اما حال بنگرید دست تقدیر چگونه یوغ حادثات را بر سر او گذارده است. پس از کار او عبرت بگیرید و بدانید که فرزند آدمی باید پیوسته به عاقبت کار خود بنگرد و از این رو تا آدمی به آسودگی در گور خود نخسبد، نمی‌تواند خود را نیکبخت بداند.
شاید همین گفتار ساده با عمیق‌ترین اندیشه‌های شکسپیر در هملت و ریچارد سوم برابری کند.
دقت کنید که فقط هفت نمایشنامه از سوفوکل باقی‌مانده است، تصور اینکه می‌توانست بیشتر از صد نمایشنامه دیگر از او داشته باشیم اشک را در چشمان من جاری میکند.
سوفوکل با آنکه عقیده کاملی به تقدیر دارد، و گردش امور عالم را به عهده قضا و قدر می‌داند از قوه‌ی اختیار برای انسانها غافل نمی‌شود، او معتقد است انسان در تمیز خوب و بد و پیدا کردن راه حقیقت مختار است.
تراژدی‌های سوفوکل بیش از هرچیز آثاری دراماتیک هستند، او به‌گونه‌ای بستر جریاناتی را که در شرایط گوناگون با قهرمان تراژیک می‌ستیزد را از کسان دیگر دوست و دشمن جدا میکند، زندگی وی را در بندی پیوسته تنگ‌تر می‌فشارد، گاه در زیروبم‌ها که نهانگاه دلهره‌های ماست رهایش میکند ولی وقتی که بندهایش را می‌گشاید او را بی‌کس و بی‌سلاح در برابر تردیدی که تلاش وی را به هیچ می‌گیرد، رها میکند.
در افسانه‌های تبای به قلم شاهرخ مسکوب شما سه نمایشنامه اودیپوس شاه و اودیپوس در کولونوس و آنتیگونه را می‌خوانید. از گفتن خلاصه نمایشنامهها پرهیز میکنم، راهی وجود ندارد که بتوانم بدون افشاسازی نکات حیاتی خلاصه‌ای از سه نمایشنامه که به یقین از بهترین آثار کلاسیک تاریخ ادبیات هستند بنویسم و خواندن نمایشنامهها و آگاهی از جزییات آنان را به عهده خودتان می‌گذارم.
صرفاً بدانید افسانه‌های تبای و نمایشنامههای سوفوکل تنها در دنیای ادبیات معروف و تاثیرگذار نیستند، شاید باورتان نشود، نمایشنامه اودیپ در عالم طبابت نیز معروف است، به‌شکلی که ناخوشی عصبی معروف به «کمپلکس»، که ظاهراً در هنگام طفولیت در آدمی پدیدار میشود، منسوب به همین داستان است و فروید آن را کشف نموده است.
در باب نمایشنامه آنتیگونه که سرتاپای زندگی من را تحت‌تاثیر قرار داده است باید بگویم که جرقه نوشتن مجموعه علمی‌تخیلی قیام سرخ یکی از مجموعه‌های علمی‌تخیلی مورد علاقه‌ام هنگامی در ذهن پیرس براون زده شد که داشت در گاراژی که زندگی می‌کرد نمایشنامه آنتیگونه را می‌خواند؛ اینجا بود که با خود گفت چه می‌شد روایت تراژدی‌وار آنتیگونه در سیاره‌ای که جاذبه کمتری می‌داشت اتفاق می‌افتاد. از تمام این مسائل که بگذریم، باید ذکر کنم که نمایشنامه آنتیگونه از حیث تنظیم صحنه‌ها و روانی داستان، سادگی مطالب و محتوا، بلندی افکار و اندیشه‌ها از شاهکارهای جاویدان دنیای ادبیات است، شاهکاری که نظیر ندارد و به مانند آن به تعداد انگشتان دست یافت نمی‌شود، شاهکاری که می‌تواند دروازه‌ای برای شناخت و آگاهی از چگونگی زندگی در ۲۵ قرن پیش باشد، شما می‌توانید همین الان شروع به خواندن «افسانه‌های تبای» کنید و چشمان خود را ببستید و خود را در کنار مردمان آن زمان تصور کنید.
ترجمه شاهرخ مسکوب آهنگین بود و احتمالاً تا حدی به شیوه نگارش باستانی افسانه‌های تبای وفادار است، یک مقدمه و یک موخره درجه یک دارد، منتهای عمل تباهیت آن به اشکالات حروف‌چینی و ویرایشی که تعداد آن‌ها به اندازه موهای سرتان است برمی‌گردد، حالا اینکه تقصیر را به گردن انتشارات خوارزمی یا شاهرخ مسکوب که چنان متن خامی را تحویل ناشر داده است بیندازیم از قضاوت بنده با توجه به اطلاعات ناقصی که در زمینه موردنظر دارم خارج است.
امتیاز کتاب:
با شایستگی پنج ستاره را از من می‌گیرد.
سوفوکل شاید بزرگترین درام‌نویس ادبیات قدیم هست که هیچکس را جز شکسپیر یارای مقابله با او نیست. او در طی ۹۰ سال عمر خود یکی از خوشبخت‌ترین مردمان آن دوره و روزگار بود، عمر دراز، سلامت مزاج و زیبایی اندام و قدرت و تمول و شهرت و ذوق و قریحه بی‌همتا، همه را با هم داشت، با این وجود، وی، یکی از بدبین‌ترین و ناراضی‌ترین افراد روی کره‌ی زمین بود؛ بدبینی‌ای که می‌توانید تاثیر آن را در تمام آثار او ببینید. آثاری که گویا ۱۱۳ نمایشنامه بوده‌اند و الان هیچ اثری از آنان به غیر از هفت نمایشنامه خاص نیست، هفت نمایشنامه‌ای که تاریخ نوشتن آنان نیز مشخص نیست. عزت و احترامی که یونانیان برای سوفوکل قائل بوده‌اند برای هیچکس دیگر قائل نبودند، به‌گونه‌ای که ارسطوی بزرگوار آثار او را همیشه همراه خود داشت و حتی به‌هنگام خواب نیز آن‌ها را مطالعه می‌نموده است. معروف است که روزی سوفوکل از طرف دادگاه احضار میشود، و برای صورت‌حساب مسئله‌ای به آنجا میرود، بعد از شنیدن اتهامات خود با خواندن فقط و تنها یک بیت شعر مسیر دادگاه را به نفع خود تغییر میدهد و بر دستان مردم به خانه خود بازمی‌گردد.
در باب سبک نگارش:
درام به شکلی که ما امروزه از آن استفاده میکنیم، از اختراعات سوفوکل می‌باشد، او بود که درام‌های اولیه یونایی را که پاره‌ای از اشعار غنائی یا حماسی از طرف دسته خوانندگان بودند را با حضور بازیگران ترکیب کرد و اعمال و حرکاتی متناسب با دیالوگ‌ها اضافه کرد و درام را به شکلی نوین پدید آورد.
اشعار سوفوکل بسیار شیوا و روان است، او از استعارات شفاف و واضح استفاده میکند، خود را درگیر صنایع ادبی نمی‌کند و منظور خود را واضح ادا میکند، ما در فارسی به چنین سبک ساده و روانی سهل ممتنع می‌گوییم، سبکی که با کمترین جملات، بسیار دقیق و عمیق داستان‌سرایی میکند.
سوفوکل عقیده راسخی به مفهوم تقدیر داشت و آدمی را بازیچه دست آن می‌دانست، به‌گونه‌ای که در یکجا میگوید:
ای پسران و دختران ولایت تبس، بنگرید: این است اودیپوس که روزگاری از ه��ه مردم بزرگتر بود ومفتاح معماها و اسرار خفیه را در دست داشت، شوکت و جلال او به پایه‌ای رسیده بود که همه‌کس در این عصر و زمان بدو رشک می‌بردند. اما حال بنگرید دست تقدیر چگونه یوغ حادثات را بر سر او گذارده است. پس از کار او عبرت بگیرید و بدانید که فرزند آدمی باید پیوسته به عاقبت کار خود بنگرد و از این رو تا آدمی به آسودگی در گور خود نخسبد، نمی‌تواند خود را نیکبخت بداند.
شاید همین گفتار ساده با عمیق‌ترین اندیشه‌های شکسپیر در هملت و ریچارد سوم برابری کند.
دقت کنید که فقط هفت نمایشنامه از سوفوکل باقی‌مانده است، تصور اینکه می‌توانست بیشتر از صد نمایشنامه دیگر از او داشته باشیم اشک را در چشمان من جاری میکند.
سوفوکل با آنکه عقیده کاملی به تقدیر دارد، و گردش امور عالم را به عهده قضا و قدر می‌داند از قوه‌ی اختیار برای انسانها غافل نمی‌شود، او معتقد است انسان در تمیز خوب و بد و پیدا کردن راه حقیقت مختار است.
تراژدی‌های سوفوکل بیش از هرچیز آثاری دراماتیک هستند، او به‌گونه‌ای بستر جریاناتی را که در شرایط گوناگون با قهرمان تراژیک می‌ستیزد را از کسان دیگر دوست و دشمن جدا میکند، زندگی وی را در بندی پیوسته تنگ‌تر می‌فشارد، گاه در زیروبم‌ها که نهانگاه دلهره‌های ماست رهایش میکند ولی وقتی که بندهایش را می‌گشاید او را بی‌کس و بی‌سلاح در برابر تردیدی که تلاش وی را به هیچ می‌گیرد، رها میکند.
در افسانه‌های تبای به قلم شاهرخ مسکوب شما سه نمایشنامه اودیپوس شاه و اودیپوس در کولونوس و آنتیگونه را می‌خوانید. از گفتن خلاصه نمایشنامهها پرهیز میکنم، راهی وجود ندارد که بتوانم بدون افشاسازی نکات حیاتی خلاصه‌ای از سه نمایشنامه که به یقین از بهترین آثار کلاسیک تاریخ ادبیات هستند بنویسم و خواندن نمایشنامهها و آگاهی از جزییات آنان را به عهده خودتان می‌گذارم.
صرفاً بدانید افسانه‌های تبای و نمایشنامههای سوفوکل تنها در دنیای ادبیات معروف و تاثیرگذار نیستند، شاید باورتان نشود، نمایشنامه اودیپ در عالم طبابت نیز معروف است، به‌شکلی که ناخوشی عصبی معروف به «کمپلکس»، که ظاهراً در هنگام طفولیت در آدمی پدیدار میشود، منسوب به همین داستان است و فروید آن را کشف نموده است.
در باب نمایشنامه آنتیگونه که سرتاپای زندگی من را تحت‌تاثیر قرار داده است باید بگویم که جرقه نوشتن مجموعه علمی‌تخیلی قیام سرخ یکی از مجموعه‌های علمی‌تخیلی مورد علاقه‌ام هنگامی در ذهن پیرس براون زده شد که داشت در گاراژی که زندگی می‌کرد نمایشنامه آنتیگونه را می‌خواند؛ اینجا بود که با خود گفت چه می‌شد روایت تراژدی‌وار آنتیگونه در سیاره‌ای که جاذبه کمتری می‌داشت اتفاق می‌افتاد. از تمام این مسائل که بگذریم، باید ذکر کنم که نمایشنامه آنتیگونه از حیث تنظیم صحنه‌ها و روانی داستان، سادگی مطالب و محتوا، بلندی افکار و اندیشه‌ها از شاهکارهای جاویدان دنیای ادبیات است، شاهکاری که نظیر ندارد و به مانند آن به تعداد انگشتان دست یافت نمی‌شود، شاهکاری که می‌تواند دروازه‌ای برای شناخت و آگاهی از چگونگی زندگی در ۲۵ قرن پیش باشد، شما می‌توانید همین الان شروع به خواندن «افسانه‌های تبای» کنید و چشمان خود را ببستید و خود را در کنار مردمان آن زمان تصور کنید.
ترجمه شاهرخ مسکوب آهنگین بود و احتمالاً تا حدی به شیوه نگارش باستانی افسانه‌های تبای وفادار است، یک مقدمه و یک موخره درجه یک دارد، منتهای عمل تباهیت آن به اشکالات حروف‌چینی و ویرایشی که تعداد آن‌ها به اندازه موهای سرتان است برمی‌گردد، حالا اینکه تقصیر را به گردن انتشارات خوارزمی یا شاهرخ مسکوب که چنان متن خامی را تحویل ناشر داده است بیندازیم از قضاوت بنده با توجه به اطلاعات ناقصی که در زمینه موردنظر دارم خارج است.
امتیاز کتاب:
با شایستگی پنج ستاره را از من می‌گیرد.
June 24, 2019
چه لذتی بردم از خوندن این سه تراژدی یونان باستان.
اصلا باورم نمی‌شد ۲۰۰۰ سال پیش یا همچین حدودی نوشته شده باشن و هنوز انقدر جذاب و گیرا برای من مخاطب قرن بیست و یکمی باشن.
سه نمایشنامه «ادیپوس شهریار»، «ادیپوس در کلونس» و «آنتیگنه».
ادیپوس فرزند کایدوس نفرین شده که تقدیرش کشتن پدر و به همسری گرفتن مادر خودش هست. قطعا میدونید که فروید نظریه «عقده ادیپ» رو از این نمایشنامه برداشت کرده.
داستان ادیپوس در مواجهه با تقدیرش و داستان فرزندانش که یکی از اونها آنتیگنه باشه در ادامه نفرین ابدی که خاندانشون بهش گرفتاره توی این سه نمایشنامه نقل میشه.
یک نکته جالب این بود که خب چون نمیتونستن جنگ‌ها رو اون زمان روی صحنه اجرا کنن، یک گروه همسرایان داستان جنگ‌ها رو با آب و تاب نقل میکنه، یعنی رویدادها هم دیالوگ‌طور روایت میشن.
نمایشنامه منظوم با ترجمه بی‌نظیر شاهرخ مسکوب که منتج شده به یک نثر کهن فاخر آهنگین که لذت خوندن رو صدچندان میکنه.
علاوه بر همه این نکات من عاشق خدایان یونانی و قص��هاشون هستم و چه نقش پررنگی داشتن توی این کتاب. و من از تلفظ اسمهاشون و نیرنگ‌هاشون و بازی‌هایی که با انسان فانی میکنن چقدر کیف کردم.
یک مقدمه مترجم نوشته بر این اثر که شاهکار مسلمه. یک موخره بسیار جذاب هم اضافه کرده راجع به تراژدی آنتیگنه.
اصلا در خوندن این اثر شک نکنید که از هر لحاظ باارزشه.
اصلا باورم نمی‌شد ۲۰۰۰ سال پیش یا همچین حدودی نوشته شده باشن و هنوز انقدر جذاب و گیرا برای من مخاطب قرن بیست و یکمی باشن.
سه نمایشنامه «ادیپوس شهریار»، «ادیپوس در کلونس» و «آنتیگنه».
ادیپوس فرزند کایدوس نفرین شده که تقدیرش کشتن پدر و به همسری گرفتن مادر خودش هست. قطعا میدونید که فروید نظریه «عقده ادیپ» رو از این نمایشنامه برداشت کرده.
داستان ادیپوس در مواجهه با تقدیرش و داستان فرزندانش که یکی از اونها آنتیگنه باشه در ادامه نفرین ابدی که خاندانشون بهش گرفتاره توی این سه نمایشنامه نقل میشه.
یک نکته جالب این بود که خب چون نمیتونستن جنگ‌ها رو اون زمان روی صحنه اجرا کنن، یک گروه همسرایان داستان جنگ‌ها رو با آب و تاب نقل میکنه، یعنی رویدادها هم دیالوگ‌طور روایت میشن.
نمایشنامه منظوم با ترجمه بی‌نظیر شاهرخ مسکوب که منتج شده به یک نثر کهن فاخر آهنگین که لذت خوندن رو صدچندان میکنه.
علاوه بر همه این نکات من عاشق خدایان یونانی و قص��هاشون هستم و چه نقش پررنگی داشتن توی این کتاب. و من از تلفظ اسمهاشون و نیرنگ‌هاشون و بازی‌هایی که با انسان فانی میکنن چقدر کیف کردم.
یک مقدمه مترجم نوشته بر این اثر که شاهکار مسلمه. یک موخره بسیار جذاب هم اضافه کرده راجع به تراژدی آنتیگنه.
اصلا در خوندن این اثر شک نکنید که از هر لحاظ باارزشه.
August 1, 2020
I was rather flippant about Greek drama throughout my time at university (much to the chagrin of every single professor teaching the unit), but even I had to concede to the immense talent of Sophocles: to cast a myth like Oedipus' on stage with such eloquence, and without leaning on its sensationalism, is inconceivable elsewhere in the theatrical tradition—unsurprising, then, that his Theban Plays have today become authoritative sources, rather than mere tellings, of the fate of the House of Cadmus.
In his acclaimed and unerringly beautiful translation, Robert Fagles reclaims for the three plays—Antigone, Oedipus the King, and Oedipus at Colonus, arranged in order of composition rather than narrative chronology—a sense of crisp, lucid triumph, revealing their timelessness while also honouring the relevance of their politics for the Athenian audiences they were originally intended for. Despite being about a hundred generations too late a witness, I found myself completely immersed within the pages of these ancient tragedies.
Antigone (c. 441 BCE)
Antigone au chevet de Polynices by Jean-Joseph Benjamin-Constant (1868)
My favourite of the three, Antigone is a work of astounding depth— masterful tragedy dealing with familial love, treachery, and morality in the face of despotic rule. Rebellion, too, is an important theme, be it Antigone's breaking the ruler's decree or Haemon opposing his own father. The protagonist's heroic temper, her defiance of authority, and her willingness to give up life and love in order to fulfill her moral duty has led to many interpreting this as a feminist play.
But beyond that, Antigone is also a complex exploration of our notions of 'right' and 'wrong'. Sophocles does not see his characters' actions as purely black and white: we get a glimpse of the true motivations governing Creon's degree as well as Antigone's transgression, and while we are explicitly told that Creon was wrong and see him suffer, it is only for his proud renunciation of divine power and familial ties—neither the Chorus nor Sophocles himself seem to find fault with his statecraft. Meanwhile, no affirmation of Antigone's rightness is ever made. However, unlike Creon, she does not betray the loyalties she spoke for, and dies believing in the rightness of her actions even if others do not seem to.
While her death is part of the curse against the House of Cadmus—the same prophecy that led to the ruin of her father, Oedipus, and drove her brothers Etiocles and Polynices to kill each other—it is also an act of heroism, of upholding the laws of divinity and nature and standing up against the barbaric. Thus, Antigone explores the ideas of predestination and agency in tandem with each other, a concern dominant in Greek drama in general and the Theban plays in particular.
Oedipus the King (c. 430-426 BCE)
Blind Oedipus Commending his Children by Bénigne Gagneraux (1784)
Perhaps the most prominent exploration of fate and free will in Sophoclean tragedy takes place in Oedipus the King: while he is destined to commit the acts of patricide and incest that we know him for, it is through his own determined, willful pursuit that this terrible truth comes to light and becomes known. Most importantly, however, the play illustrates divine indictment against the hubris of Oedipus and Jocasta, who believe that they can subvert the prophecy through their actions. That this play is focused on the discovery of Oedipus's sins rather than the sins themselves serves to highlight this latter aspect of the story (this, according to Bernard Knox, is rooted in contemporary politics; Sophocles wrote this play asserting the superiority of divine will at a time when the institution of the Oracle—and thereby the validity of the gods themselves—was under public fire).
While this notion of predestination in the original myth was transformed and appropriated by the Freudian lens in the early 20th century; Oedipus the King transformed modern drama by presenting an existential model for stories dealing with our own terror of the unknown, uncontrollable future and the idea that our progress; Like Oedipus' success; will unwittingly bring us to our doom. All of this, moreover, allows Sophocles to master the art of dramatic irony, which is in many ways the lifeblood of this play.
It is no wonder that Oedipus the King has long been considered the most distinguished of all Greek tragedy—enough can never be said about a play like this, one so deeply rooted in our exploration of the complexities of art, society, and the human condition.
Oedipus at Colonus (c. 406 BCE)
Oedipus at Colonus by Jean-Antoine-Théodore Giroust (1788)
Written at the age of 90, Oedipus at Colonus was Sophocles' last play, hyperaware of the spectre of impending war and destruction loomed over Athens at the time. It has the least mythical precedent of all Theban plays, and is the tragedian's valedictory reminder of the glory, benevolence, and fame of Athens. This is also the play where Oedipus, whose terrible ruin is part of a divine curse on his bloodline, is finally redeemed, by yet another prophecy: in his death, Oedipus is raised from mortal to hero, he is also able to avenge the wrongs committed unto him by his sons Etiocles and Polynices and his other kinsmen in Thebes.
Here, Oedipus expresses his helplessness as an instrument of fate, and thereby achieves glory: although he is still polluted, he is extricated of blame and dies a painless death. His grave, as per the redemptive prophecy, becomes the site of a war bringing doom to Thebes; that has wronged him; and Victory to Athens, whose ruler, the noble Theseus, saves him (it is through Theseus that Sophocles affirms the spirit of Athens at its peak). This is also a far more mystical play than its predecessors, dealing with furies and rituals, but this only enhances the effect of the hero being lifted to a position that is more than human—reverential, and almost holy.
While Oedipus at Colonus is only the second play concerning the House of Cadmus in Thebes if a narrative chronology is considered, its thematic concerns render it the perfect end to Sophocles' Theban triad. While fate has mark Oedipus with tragedy, and the end of his bloodline is known, this play manages to inject in this sagas a communion with the gods, and thus, a note of hope.
In his acclaimed and unerringly beautiful translation, Robert Fagles reclaims for the three plays—Antigone, Oedipus the King, and Oedipus at Colonus, arranged in order of composition rather than narrative chronology—a sense of crisp, lucid triumph, revealing their timelessness while also honouring the relevance of their politics for the Athenian audiences they were originally intended for. Despite being about a hundred generations too late a witness, I found myself completely immersed within the pages of these ancient tragedies.
Antigone (c. 441 BCE)
Antigone au chevet de Polynices by Jean-Joseph Benjamin-Constant (1868)
My favourite of the three, Antigone is a work of astounding depth— masterful tragedy dealing with familial love, treachery, and morality in the face of despotic rule. Rebellion, too, is an important theme, be it Antigone's breaking the ruler's decree or Haemon opposing his own father. The protagonist's heroic temper, her defiance of authority, and her willingness to give up life and love in order to fulfill her moral duty has led to many interpreting this as a feminist play.
But beyond that, Antigone is also a complex exploration of our notions of 'right' and 'wrong'. Sophocles does not see his characters' actions as purely black and white: we get a glimpse of the true motivations governing Creon's degree as well as Antigone's transgression, and while we are explicitly told that Creon was wrong and see him suffer, it is only for his proud renunciation of divine power and familial ties—neither the Chorus nor Sophocles himself seem to find fault with his statecraft. Meanwhile, no affirmation of Antigone's rightness is ever made. However, unlike Creon, she does not betray the loyalties she spoke for, and dies believing in the rightness of her actions even if others do not seem to.
While her death is part of the curse against the House of Cadmus—the same prophecy that led to the ruin of her father, Oedipus, and drove her brothers Etiocles and Polynices to kill each other—it is also an act of heroism, of upholding the laws of divinity and nature and standing up against the barbaric. Thus, Antigone explores the ideas of predestination and agency in tandem with each other, a concern dominant in Greek drama in general and the Theban plays in particular.
Oedipus the King (c. 430-426 BCE)
Blind Oedipus Commending his Children by Bénigne Gagneraux (1784)
Perhaps the most prominent exploration of fate and free will in Sophoclean tragedy takes place in Oedipus the King: while he is destined to commit the acts of patricide and incest that we know him for, it is through his own determined, willful pursuit that this terrible truth comes to light and becomes known. Most importantly, however, the play illustrates divine indictment against the hubris of Oedipus and Jocasta, who believe that they can subvert the prophecy through their actions. That this play is focused on the discovery of Oedipus's sins rather than the sins themselves serves to highlight this latter aspect of the story (this, according to Bernard Knox, is rooted in contemporary politics; Sophocles wrote this play asserting the superiority of divine will at a time when the institution of the Oracle—and thereby the validity of the gods themselves—was under public fire).
While this notion of predestination in the original myth was transformed and appropriated by the Freudian lens in the early 20th century; Oedipus the King transformed modern drama by presenting an existential model for stories dealing with our own terror of the unknown, uncontrollable future and the idea that our progress; Like Oedipus' success; will unwittingly bring us to our doom. All of this, moreover, allows Sophocles to master the art of dramatic irony, which is in many ways the lifeblood of this play.
It is no wonder that Oedipus the King has long been considered the most distinguished of all Greek tragedy—enough can never be said about a play like this, one so deeply rooted in our exploration of the complexities of art, society, and the human condition.
Oedipus at Colonus (c. 406 BCE)
Oedipus at Colonus by Jean-Antoine-Théodore Giroust (1788)
Written at the age of 90, Oedipus at Colonus was Sophocles' last play, hyperaware of the spectre of impending war and destruction loomed over Athens at the time. It has the least mythical precedent of all Theban plays, and is the tragedian's valedictory reminder of the glory, benevolence, and fame of Athens. This is also the play where Oedipus, whose terrible ruin is part of a divine curse on his bloodline, is finally redeemed, by yet another prophecy: in his death, Oedipus is raised from mortal to hero, he is also able to avenge the wrongs committed unto him by his sons Etiocles and Polynices and his other kinsmen in Thebes.
Here, Oedipus expresses his helplessness as an instrument of fate, and thereby achieves glory: although he is still polluted, he is extricated of blame and dies a painless death. His grave, as per the redemptive prophecy, becomes the site of a war bringing doom to Thebes; that has wronged him; and Victory to Athens, whose ruler, the noble Theseus, saves him (it is through Theseus that Sophocles affirms the spirit of Athens at its peak). This is also a far more mystical play than its predecessors, dealing with furies and rituals, but this only enhances the effect of the hero being lifted to a position that is more than human—reverential, and almost holy.
While Oedipus at Colonus is only the second play concerning the House of Cadmus in Thebes if a narrative chronology is considered, its thematic concerns render it the perfect end to Sophocles' Theban triad. While fate has mark Oedipus with tragedy, and the end of his bloodline is known, this play manages to inject in this sagas a communion with the gods, and thus, a note of hope.
December 22, 2022
این چه کاری‌ست نمی‌دانم. باید اول هر ریویویی نوشت که این را برای کدام ترجمه‌ی کتاب می‌نویسید. هفت هشت سال پای کتابی از تراژدی‌های باستانی ترجمه‌ی شاهرخ مسکوب به نام «افسانه‌های تبای» من هیچ‌کاره‌ی عالم این سه جمله را نوشته‌ام: «کتاب را در تنهایی بدی خواندم وقتی هیچ نور امیدی نبود. در تلخی و ملال تنهایی این تراژدی‌ها زیباترند. ارسطو میگوید شفقت و ترس از ملزومات تراژدی‌ست. من ترسم ریخته بود ان روز��ا و شده بودم شفقت و شفقت» الان یکهو چشمم می‌خورد به کتابی از نشر علمی فرهنگی با ترجمه‌ی مترجمی که اصلاً نشنیدم و طرح جلدی که اصلاً به چشم ندیده‌ام و زیرش این ریویو بنده که حال آدم را بد میکند یکلحظه حس کردم یا فراموشی گرفته‌ام یا دروغگو بوده‌ام.
February 16, 2024
"Cuán terrible puede ser el conocimiento de la verdad cuando no hay ayuda en la verdad".
Aristóteles, el primer crítico y teórico literario de la historia, nos asegura sin nombrarlo explícitamente en su eterna “Poética” que “Edipo Rey” de Sófoles es la tragedia perfecta.
Cuando estudié la carrera de Licenciatura en Letras tuve el placer de conocer el perfecto análisis que Aristóteles hace de la tragedia y descubrí esos términos maravillosos como "eleos", "phobos", "hamarthia" y por su puesto "catarsis", entre otros.
Este desdichado rey que debe acarrear el sufrimiento y el oprobio de haber matado a su padre y haber engendrado sus hijos con su propia madre no tendrá paz ni descanso y al final de todo, cuando el desenlace y el destino que los dioses le propinan es inevitable, se condena al exilio y esa tragedia es la que continuará en "Edipo en Colono" donde sufrirá por demás los males que le aquejan y que lo llevarán a la muerte.
Mi edición también incluye "Antígona", ahora en Tebas, que también es una trágica secuela de la hija que lega el sufrimiento de su padre, ante el conocimiento de la mutua muerte que se han propinado sus propio hermanos y al que se agregará también a sufrir su condición de mujer.
En estas tragedias de Sófocles, no hay paz para nadie.
Solo dolor, desgracia y muerte.
Aristóteles, el primer crítico y teórico literario de la historia, nos asegura sin nombrarlo explícitamente en su eterna “Poética” que “Edipo Rey” de Sófoles es la tragedia perfecta.
Cuando estudié la carrera de Licenciatura en Letras tuve el placer de conocer el perfecto análisis que Aristóteles hace de la tragedia y descubrí esos términos maravillosos como "eleos", "phobos", "hamarthia" y por su puesto "catarsis", entre otros.
Este desdichado rey que debe acarrear el sufrimiento y el oprobio de haber matado a su padre y haber engendrado sus hijos con su propia madre no tendrá paz ni descanso y al final de todo, cuando el desenlace y el destino que los dioses le propinan es inevitable, se condena al exilio y esa tragedia es la que continuará en "Edipo en Colono" donde sufrirá por demás los males que le aquejan y que lo llevarán a la muerte.
Mi edición también incluye "Antígona", ahora en Tebas, que también es una trágica secuela de la hija que lega el sufrimiento de su padre, ante el conocimiento de la mutua muerte que se han propinado sus propio hermanos y al que se agregará también a sufrir su condición de mujer.
En estas tragedias de Sófocles, no hay paz para nadie.
Solo dolor, desgracia y muerte.
October 23, 2023
عجب شاهکاری!
هر چیز را زکاتی است و زکات عقل اندوهی است طویل (تذکره‌الاولیا)
سه گانه فوق‌العاده سوفوکلس (سوفوکل)، ماجرای جنگ آدمی با تقدیر است. ماجرای مردان و زنانی که تاوان دانستن‌شان را می‌دهند. ادیپوس که بنا بر پیشگویی شومی فرسنگ‌ها در کودکی از والدینش جدا شده؛ بر طریق شوم سرنوشت نزد آنان و به تبای باز می‌گردد. اما چگونه و به چه نحو؟ این مرد دانا، این پاسخگوی معمای ابوالهول، شهر آبا و اجدادی را نجات میدهد. پله پله بیشتر می‌داند و با هر دانستن، رولی که خدایان برایش در نمایش عالم نوشته‌اند را بهتر بازی میکند. دریغ که نمی‌داند چه سرنوشت شومی در انتظار اوست. هر بار که دری از حقایق به روی وی باز میشود؛ او را محنتی عظیم‌تر فرا می‌گیرد.
ادیپوس (ادیپ) مرد خردمندی است که پنجه در چنگال سرنوشت برده است. آدمیزادگانی که بازیچه جنگ‌های خدایان گشته‌اند. این سه گانه روایت عاقبت شوم یک خاندان است. خاندان‌شاهی که سنگینی گناه را از اولین‌شان یعنی کادموس، بر گردن دارند. جنگ ما بین نیرویی از پیش مقهور و دعوا بر ظفری از پیش معین است. آدمی بازیچه اختلافات خدایان است. همچون که جد ادیپوس، به فرمان خدایگانی گوش داد و این غضب خدای دیگری را جلب کرد و برای همیشه او را نفرین نمود.
ادیپوس ملغمه ای از نیروی خرد و تاریکی است. در نمایشنامه اول این ترکیب به خوبی نمایان است...
سه گانه افسانه های تبای، شامل سه نمایشنامه ادیپوس شهریار، ادیپوس در کلنوس و آنتیگونه است. رخدادهایی که در پی هم رخ می‌دهند. گرچه سوفوکلس به این ترتیب نمایشنامه ها را ننوشته است اما به خاطر رعایت ترتیب داستانی، به این شکل در کتاب چیده شده اند. (گفتنی است که سوفوکلس ابتدا آنتیگونه سپس ادیپوس شهریار و در آخر ادیپوس در کلنوس را نوشت)
نمایشنامه اول و سوم هر دو شاهکار هستند و نمایشنامه دوم از این جهت مهم است که این دو را به یکدیگر متصل میکند.
در مورد آنتیگونه ترجیح می‌دهم به طور مستقل در مجلد جدایی که به ترجمه آقای دریابندری هست بنویسم.
این کتاب را از دست ندهید. گرچه شاید ترجمه گاهی ثقیل بنماید و کلمات دور از ذهن. اما خواندن نثر آقای مسکوب فوق‌العاده است. هم‌چنین مقدمه شاهرخ مسکوب در ابتدای کتاب و متن بومار، با عنوان آنتیگونه و لذت تراژیک، راهنمای خوبی برای فهم و تعمق در این اثر جاودانه است.
هر چیز را زکاتی است و زکات عقل اندوهی است طویل (تذکره‌الاولیا)
سه گانه فوق‌العاده سوفوکلس (سوفوکل)، ماجرای جنگ آدمی با تقدیر است. ماجرای مردان و زنانی که تاوان دانستن‌شان را می‌دهند. ادیپوس که بنا بر پیشگویی شومی فرسنگ‌ها در کودکی از والدینش جدا شده؛ بر طریق شوم سرنوشت نزد آنان و به تبای باز می‌گردد. اما چگونه و به چه نحو؟ این مرد دانا، این پاسخگوی معمای ابوالهول، شهر آبا و اجدادی را نجات میدهد. پله پله بیشتر می‌داند و با هر دانستن، رولی که خدایان برایش در نمایش عالم نوشته‌اند را بهتر بازی میکند. دریغ که نمی‌داند چه سرنوشت شومی در انتظار اوست. هر بار که دری از حقایق به روی وی باز میشود؛ او را محنتی عظیم‌تر فرا می‌گیرد.
ادیپوس (ادیپ) مرد خردمندی است که پنجه در چنگال سرنوشت برده است. آدمیزادگانی که بازیچه جنگ‌های خدایان گشته‌اند. این سه گانه روایت عاقبت شوم یک خاندان است. خاندان‌شاهی که سنگینی گناه را از اولین‌شان یعنی کادموس، بر گردن دارند. جنگ ما بین نیرویی از پیش مقهور و دعوا بر ظفری از پیش معین است. آدمی بازیچه اختلافات خدایان است. همچون که جد ادیپوس، به فرمان خدایگانی گوش داد و این غضب خدای دیگری را جلب کرد و برای همیشه او را نفرین نمود.
ادیپوس ملغمه ای از نیروی خرد و تاریکی است. در نمایشنامه اول این ترکیب به خوبی نمایان است...
سه گانه افسانه های تبای، شامل سه نمایشنامه ادیپوس شهریار، ادیپوس در کلنوس و آنتیگونه است. رخدادهایی که در پی هم رخ می‌دهند. گرچه سوفوکلس به این ترتیب نمایشنامه ها را ننوشته است اما به خاطر رعایت ترتیب داستانی، به این شکل در کتاب چیده شده اند. (گفتنی است که سوفوکلس ابتدا آنتیگونه سپس ادیپوس شهریار و در آخر ادیپوس در کلنوس را نوشت)
نمایشنامه اول و سوم هر دو شاهکار هستند و نمایشنامه دوم از این جهت مهم است که این دو را به یکدیگر متصل میکند.
در مورد آنتیگونه ترجیح می‌دهم به طور مستقل در مجلد جدایی که به ترجمه آقای دریابندری هست بنویسم.
این کتاب را از دست ندهید. گرچه شاید ترجمه گاهی ثقیل بنماید و کلمات دور از ذهن. اما خواندن نثر آقای مسکوب فوق‌العاده است. هم‌چنین مقدمه شاهرخ مسکوب در ابتدای کتاب و متن بومار، با عنوان آنتیگونه و لذت تراژیک، راهنمای خوبی برای فهم و تعمق در این اثر جاودانه است.
February 11, 2022
کارتاسیس
اگر میخواهید به تجویزِ پیرِ عالمِ فلسفه ارسطوی کبیر عناصر چهار گانه طبعتون( بلغم ، سودا ، صفرا و خون ) همیشه میزان باشه ، شبا قبل خواب مغزتون تراژدی میل کنه ؛ ترجیحا با شربت آبلیمو و بهمن کوچیک .
دوهزار و پونصد سال از عمر روایت کتبی این تراژدی میگذره چه بسا روایت شفاهی عمر دراز تری هم داشته باشه. اما چه جاذبه و جادویی باعث مصون موندن و از چشم نیفتادن پیکار تکراری خدایان و انسان میشه ؟ پیکاری که ماحصلش برای ما ساخت قهرمان تراژیکه.
به نظرم انسان بودن مهمترین رکن این جاودانگی باشه.
اینکه ما تو تیم انسانهاییم و با اینکه آگاه از تسلیم و شکست قهرمان تراژیک در برابر خواست و اراده تقدیر خدایانیم ولی این تلاش و به نوعی شکست قهرمانانه رو تحسین میکنیم . حسی شبیه هوادارای یک تیم دسته سومی که از شکست قطعی تیمش برابر حریف قدرتمند آگاهه ولی فارغ از نتیجه از ۹۰ دقیقه تلاش تیم نهایت لذت رو خواهد برد و موهبت کاتارسیس رو تجربه میکنه.
این سه گانه با شکوه علاوه بر انبوهی از فضایل نیک که از شمارش خارجه دو ویژگی منحصر بفرد نسبت به بقیه افسانه‌ها داره از نظر من ؛
اولیش اینکه توجهش به بُعد انسانی افسانه خیلی بیشتر از خدایانه . به نوعی سوفوکل یک قدم جلوتر رفته و به جای تمرکز روی نزاع و کشمکش بین انسان و خدایان ؛ بیشتر به عواقب و ماحصل این کشمکش بر سرشت قهرمان افسانه خودش پرداخته . به همین دلیل خواننده و یا شنونده بیشتر از اینکه شاهد یک پیکار باشه به عنوان شخص سوم ؛ مدام در حال همزاد پنداری عاطفی با چندین کاراکتر داستانه و یک چرخه مداوم از تقابلهای بدون قضاوت جلوش شکل میگیره که به تفکر راجع بهشون تشویقش میکنه .
تیرزیاس
در روایتی اومده یک روز که آتنا با یکی از پریان جنگل در رودخانه ای به شنا مشغول بود چوپان زیبا و جوانی به نام تیرزیاس برحسب تصادف از اونجا میگذشته و چشمش به اندام برهنه الهه میفته و تو این نگاه تعمد و تقصیری نداشته اما الهه چنان به خشم اومده که بلافاصله بنده خدارو از هر دو چشم کور میکنه . با اینکه یکی از پریان جنگل به نام کاریکلو که شاید فریفته زیبائی تیرزیاس شده بود شفاعتشو کرد و آتنا هم اعتراف کرد که طفل معصوم تقصیر نداشته اما آتنا حاضر نشد چشم هائی را که تونسته بود اندام برهنشو ببینه دوباره بینا کنه ؛ فقط تیرزیاس رو به جای بینایی از دست رفته از قدرت غیب گویی و پیش بینی برخوردار میکنه .
جایگاه شخصیت تیرزیاس بسیار بسیار تو کتاب حائز اهمیته و حس میکنم سوفوکل هر بار که اسمشو مینوشته به احترامش می‌ایستاده .
یک دانای کل که هیچ شک و تردیدی در کلامش روا نبود و سوفوکل به دو شکل متفاوت از تیرزیاس دانا بهره میبره .
اولین بار تقابلش با ادیپوس و دومیش با کرئون .
تقابل بین ادیپوس و تیرزیاس تبدیل به تقابل بین بینایی و نابینایی میشه. در یک سو ادیپوس بینا و اون طرف تیرزیاس نابینا. تقابل بینایی و نابینایی اون چیزیه که به وضوح تو نمایشنامه دیده میشه اما تفاوت‌هایی وجود داره .
تیرزیاس در مواجه با ادیپوس به صورت غیر مستقیم ادیپوس رو دارای خرد میدونه. با اینکه ادیپوس قادر به دیدن و شناخت این خرد نیست اما با بیان واقعیت های و تقدیری که بر ادیپ گذشته راه رو برای دستیابیش به حقیقت و خرد فراهم میسازه .
اما در مواجه با کرئون به طور اون رو بی خرد ، ابله و پوچ میدونه که هیچ امیدی بهش نیست .
به طور کل یکی از جذابیتهای اصلی کتاب دیالوگهاییه که از زبان تیرزیاس بیان میشه
آنتیگونه
دومین ویژگی منحصر به فرد کتاب از دید من شخصیت و کاراکتر آنتیگونست .
کاراکتری که قدم به قدم شکل گرفت ، رشد پیدا کرد و به عروج غنایی خودش رسید .
تصویری که سوفوکل ۲۵۰۰ سال قبل از آنتیگونه ارائه کرد مصداق بارز و بدون ذره ای ناخالصی ازناب ترین تفکر فمنیست عصر حاضره که الان از ذات اصلی خودش دور شده .
شخصیتی که به جد در خور تحسین و قهرمان اصلی اقبال تو این کتابه .
آنتیگونه به نظرم بزرگترین قربانی این گناه و خشم و غصب خدایان بود که شجاعت رو معنا کرد .
اقا اصلا هر چی بگم کم گفتم .
راجع به خیلی از مسائل از جمله ترجمه بی نقص مسکوب یا خود مسئله افسانه تو ریویوهای دوستان صحبت شده که تکرار مکررات نمی‌کنم.
بخوانید و لذت ببرید که از خشم خدایان به دور باشید .
اگر میخواهید به تجویزِ پیرِ عالمِ فلسفه ارسطوی کبیر عناصر چهار گانه طبعتون( بلغم ، سودا ، صفرا و خون ) همیشه میزان باشه ، شبا قبل خواب مغزتون تراژدی میل کنه ؛ ترجیحا با شربت آبلیمو و بهمن کوچیک .
دوهزار و پونصد سال از عمر روایت کتبی این تراژدی میگذره چه بسا روایت شفاهی عمر دراز تری هم داشته باشه. اما چه جاذبه و جادویی باعث مصون موندن و از چشم نیفتادن پیکار تکراری خدایان و انسان میشه ؟ پیکاری که ماحصلش برای ما ساخت قهرمان تراژیکه.
به نظرم انسان بودن مهمترین رکن این جاودانگی باشه.
اینکه ما تو تیم انسانهاییم و با اینکه آگاه از تسلیم و شکست قهرمان تراژیک در برابر خواست و اراده تقدیر خدایانیم ولی این تلاش و به نوعی شکست قهرمانانه رو تحسین میکنیم . حسی شبیه هوادارای یک تیم دسته سومی که از شکست قطعی تیمش برابر حریف قدرتمند آگاهه ولی فارغ از نتیجه از ۹۰ دقیقه تلاش تیم نهایت لذت رو خواهد برد و موهبت کاتارسیس رو تجربه میکنه.
این سه گانه با شکوه علاوه بر انبوهی از فضایل نیک که از شمارش خارجه دو ویژگی منحصر بفرد نسبت به بقیه افسانه‌ها داره از نظر من ؛
اولیش اینکه توجهش به بُعد انسانی افسانه خیلی بیشتر از خدایانه . به نوعی سوفوکل یک قدم جلوتر رفته و به جای تمرکز روی نزاع و کشمکش بین انسان و خدایان ؛ بیشتر به عواقب و ماحصل این کشمکش بر سرشت قهرمان افسانه خودش پرداخته . به همین دلیل خواننده و یا شنونده بیشتر از اینکه شاهد یک پیکار باشه به عنوان شخص سوم ؛ مدام در حال همزاد پنداری عاطفی با چندین کاراکتر داستانه و یک چرخه مداوم از تقابلهای بدون قضاوت جلوش شکل میگیره که به تفکر راجع بهشون تشویقش میکنه .
تیرزیاس
در روایتی اومده یک روز که آتنا با یکی از پریان جنگل در رودخانه ای به شنا مشغول بود چوپان زیبا و جوانی به نام تیرزیاس برحسب تصادف از اونجا میگذشته و چشمش به اندام برهنه الهه میفته و تو این نگاه تعمد و تقصیری نداشته اما الهه چنان به خشم اومده که بلافاصله بنده خدارو از هر دو چشم کور میکنه . با اینکه یکی از پریان جنگل به نام کاریکلو که شاید فریفته زیبائی تیرزیاس شده بود شفاعتشو کرد و آتنا هم اعتراف کرد که طفل معصوم تقصیر نداشته اما آتنا حاضر نشد چشم هائی را که تونسته بود اندام برهنشو ببینه دوباره بینا کنه ؛ فقط تیرزیاس رو به جای بینایی از دست رفته از قدرت غیب گویی و پیش بینی برخوردار میکنه .
جایگاه شخصیت تیرزیاس بسیار بسیار تو کتاب حائز اهمیته و حس میکنم سوفوکل هر بار که اسمشو مینوشته به احترامش می‌ایستاده .
یک دانای کل که هیچ شک و تردیدی در کلامش روا نبود و سوفوکل به دو شکل متفاوت از تیرزیاس دانا بهره میبره .
اولین بار تقابلش با ادیپوس و دومیش با کرئون .
تقابل بین ادیپوس و تیرزیاس تبدیل به تقابل بین بینایی و نابینایی میشه. در یک سو ادیپوس بینا و اون طرف تیرزیاس نابینا. تقابل بینایی و نابینایی اون چیزیه که به وضوح تو نمایشنامه دیده میشه اما تفاوت‌هایی وجود داره .
تیرزیاس در مواجه با ادیپوس به صورت غیر مستقیم ادیپوس رو دارای خرد میدونه. با اینکه ادیپوس قادر به دیدن و شناخت این خرد نیست اما با بیان واقعیت های و تقدیری که بر ادیپ گذشته راه رو برای دستیابیش به حقیقت و خرد فراهم میسازه .
اما در مواجه با کرئون به طور اون رو بی خرد ، ابله و پوچ میدونه که هیچ امیدی بهش نیست .
به طور کل یکی از جذابیتهای اصلی کتاب دیالوگهاییه که از زبان تیرزیاس بیان میشه
آنتیگونه
دومین ویژگی منحصر به فرد کتاب از دید من شخصیت و کاراکتر آنتیگونست .
کاراکتری که قدم به قدم شکل گرفت ، رشد پیدا کرد و به عروج غنایی خودش رسید .
تصویری که سوفوکل ۲۵۰۰ سال قبل از آنتیگونه ارائه کرد مصداق بارز و بدون ذره ای ناخالصی ازناب ترین تفکر فمنیست عصر حاضره که الان از ذات اصلی خودش دور شده .
شخصیتی که به جد در خور تحسین و قهرمان اصلی اقبال تو این کتابه .
آنتیگونه به نظرم بزرگترین قربانی این گناه و خشم و غصب خدایان بود که شجاعت رو معنا کرد .
اقا اصلا هر چی بگم کم گفتم .
راجع به خیلی از مسائل از جمله ترجمه بی نقص مسکوب یا خود مسئله افسانه تو ریویوهای دوستان صحبت شده که تکرار مکررات نمی‌کنم.
بخوانید و لذت ببرید که از خشم خدایان به دور باشید .
March 31, 2022
عالی بود... سه نمایشنامه‌ی پشت‌سر هم از ادیپ. یکی از بهترین تراژدی‌های یونانی
May 2, 2021
I enjoyed rereading this set of plays. This edition sets the stage by giving an introduction before each play. The plays dive into the themes of fate, guilt, civil disobedience and family ties, and other historical Greek motifs.
There were text notes after the plays and a Greek persons/mythological/geographical glossary to help with the who/what/where questions. I enjoyed rediscovering this trilogy for a second time. I originally read them when I was in high school and remember them being interesting. I would recommend it for anyone to read. Thanks!
There were text notes after the plays and a Greek persons/mythological/geographical glossary to help with the who/what/where questions. I enjoyed rediscovering this trilogy for a second time. I originally read them when I was in high school and remember them being interesting. I would recommend it for anyone to read. Thanks!
December 26, 2023
The plays and messages were excellent (I mean how can one go wrong with Sophocles?), but this translation took a nosedive with the last play Antigone. The slang and too modern language (i.e. "blockhead", "I won't take the rap") sounded like dissonant music to my ear. I had to pull out my 1967 Penguin Classic edition from H.S. days to finish this last play. In HS we only read Oedipus Rex, so the Oedipus at Colonus and Antigone were fresh reads for me. If you are looking for a review that discusses the story or a scholarly treatise, you'll have to look elsewhere; there are plenty by better writers than I.
I did have one niggle, as the plays presented in the trilogy are not presented in their chronologically written order, so do I assume the story of Oedipus was already well known to the citizens before Antigone was staged as a play as it already refers to the curse of the house of Oedipus as a few other actions from the other plays.
I also seemed to have missed why Oedipus after unknowingly fulfilling the tragic prophecy from his birth, exiling and blinding himself, yet still showed the same hubris from Oedipus Rex in Oedipus at Colonus, was allowed a death that was near divine.
Antigone was definitely my favorite character and my hats off to Sophocles for developing a strong female character in a male dominated mortal world.
I did have one niggle, as the plays presented in the trilogy are not presented in their chronologically written order, so do I assume the story of Oedipus was already well known to the citizens before Antigone was staged as a play as it already refers to the curse of the house of Oedipus as a few other actions from the other plays.
I also seemed to have missed why Oedipus after unknowingly fulfilling the tragic prophecy from his birth, exiling and blinding himself, yet still showed the same hubris from Oedipus Rex in Oedipus at Colonus, was allowed a death that was near divine.
Antigone was definitely my favorite character and my hats off to Sophocles for developing a strong female character in a male dominated mortal world.
July 30, 2021
نثر زیبا و وزین شاهرخ مسکوب، لذت خوندنش رو چندین برابر کرد.
August 13, 2019
Alas, alas, what misery to be wise when wisdom profits nothing!
Great books do not reveal themselves all at once. Old classics must be revisited from time to time, at different stages of life, in order to experience the many resonant frequencies of the work. This time around I chose to listen to these Theban plays as an audiobook, with a full cast; and it was far preferable to the mute page.
Reading, listening to, or watching the Greek plays may be the nearest we get to time travel. The works immerse us in a foreign world. What struck me most was the Greek attitude towards freedom and fate. Shakespearean tragedy is reliant on human choice. As A.C. Bradley notes, the tragedy is always specific to the individual, to the extent that the tragedy of one play would be impossible for the protagonist of another. Put Hamlet in Othello’s place, or vice versa, and he would make short work of the play’s problem. The tragedy in a Greek play is, by contrast, inevitable and universal. By the time that the curtain is raised in Oedipus Rex, the Theban king has long ago sealed his doom.
There is nothing special about Oedipus that marks him for a tragic fate. His tragedy could have befallen a Hamlet or an Othello just as readily as an Oedipus. This changes the entire emotional atmosphere. Whereas in a Shakespearean tragedy we feel a certain amount of dramatic tension as the protagonists attempt to avert crisis, in Greek tragedy there is instead a feeling of being swept along by an invisible, inexorable force—divine and mysterious. It is animated by a far more pessimistic philosophy: that honest, noble, and wise people who do nothing wrong can be dragged into the pit of misery by an inscrutable destiny.
As a result, the plays can sometimes engender a feeling of mystery or even of vague mysticism, as we consider ourselves to be the mere playthings of forces beyond all control and understanding. Characters rise to power in such a way that we credit their virtues for their success; and yet their precipitate fall shows that there are other forces at play. Life can certainly feel this way at times, as we are buffeted about, lifted up, and cast down in a way that seems little connected to our own actions. For this reason, I think that the fatalistic pessimism of these plays is both moving and, at times, even consoling.
Of the three, the most artistically perfect is Oedipus Rex, which Sophocles wrote at the height of his career. Antigone, the last play, was actually written first; and Oedipus at Colonus was written over thirty years, at the very end of Sophocles’ life.
Though arguably the worst of the three, Antigone is the most thematically interesting. It pits two ethical concepts against one another with intense force, specifically different sorts of loyalty. Is it better to be loyal to one’s family, to the gods, to the state, or to the ruler? Creon’s interdiction, though vengeful and petty, is understandable when one remembers that Polynices is a traitor responsible for an attack on his homeland that doubtless cost many citizens’ lives. Creon could have justified his decree as a discouragement of future disloyalty. Antigone believes that duty to family transcends the duty of a citizen, and the events justify this belief.
It must be admitted, however, that this ethical question is muddled by the religious nature of central issue. Few people nowadays can believe that burial rites are important enough to merit self-sacrifice and civil disobedience. When the superstitious element is removed, Antigone’s ethical superiority seems questionable at best. Certainly there are many cases when loyalty to the family can be distinctly unethical. If a sister sheltered a brother who just escaped imprisonment for murder, I think this would be an unequivocally immoral act. But since burial does not involve help or harm to anyone, the ethical question becomes largely symbolic—if no less interesting.
Even if the emotional import of these plays has been somewhat dulled by the passing years, they remain amazingly alive and direct. The power of these plays is such that, even now, when the Greek gods have passed into harmless myth, here we can still feel the sense of awe and terror in the face of a divine order that passes beyond understanding. It would take a long time for theater to again reach such heights.
April 29, 2020
دنیای تراژدی اُدیپوس، دنیای دوگانه ی ناهمساز خدایان و آدمیان است که هر یک قوانین خاص خود را دارند.از هم جدا و بیگانه اند و آنگاه که به هم برخورند، آدمیانند که باید به اراده ی خدایان سر فرود آورند. انسان سلاحی است که با آن ، خدایانِ دشمن خوی ، جان یکدیگر را زخمگین می کنند.
جهانی که ما در آن به سر میبریم، سرشار از خدایانِ ناسازگار است که با هم سر آشتی ندارند.چنین انسانی در چنین دنیای ناسازگاری نه تنها نمی تواند دور و مبرا از گناه به سر بَرد، بلکه با گناه همزاد است....
اُدیپوس چون از اراده ی شوم خدایان درمورد خودش آگاه میشود، به آن گردن نمی نهد و می کوشد تا خواست خود را به انجام رساند.اما تقدیر او جاندار، متحرک و آرام ناپذیر است و علیرغم تلاش ادیپوس برای فرار از آن، سرانجام تقدیر ضربه ی کاری خود را بر او وارد میکند...
بر درِ شهر تبای ، ابولهولِ بالداری است که خونخوار مردم تبای است ؛ بر سنگی نشسته و پرسشی سه گانه دارد.می پرسد: آن چیست که در بامداد چهارپای، در نیمروز دوپای و شامگاهان با سه پای میرود؟
این چیستانِ تقدیر است و جز ادیپوسِ رازگشا کسی از عهده ی حل آن برنمی آید.او پاسخ میدهد: جواب، انسان است در خُردی و جوانی و پیری... و ابولهول چون رازش گشوده می شود جان میسپارد و مردم شهر توسط ادیپوس از مصیبتی بزرگ میرهند...
افسانه ی ادیپوس به ما یادآور میشود که کسی را از پرسش ابوالهول گریز نیست.باید پاسخ را یافت. تقدیر آدمی در همین پرسش و پاسخ، در اندیشیدن به خویش، و شناخت خود است.ادیپوس نگاهِ آسمان کاوِ ما را با رمز و کنایه، از دنیای خدایان، به جهان باطن خودمان باز میگرداند و میگوید تقدیرتان را در اینجا بجویید...در وجود خود...هیچ کس چون او ما را به جنگ با تقدیر برنمی انگیزد و از این نظرگاه، پیروز ادیپوس است و مغلوب، تقدیر... چون او دست به نبردی زده که جرأتِ گیرو دار در آن، خود بزرگترین پیروزی است...
جهانی که ما در آن به سر میبریم، سرشار از خدایانِ ناسازگار است که با هم سر آشتی ندارند.چنین انسانی در چنین دنیای ناسازگاری نه تنها نمی تواند دور و مبرا از گناه به سر بَرد، بلکه با گناه همزاد است....
اُدیپوس چون از اراده ی شوم خدایان درمورد خودش آگاه میشود، به آن گردن نمی نهد و می کوشد تا خواست خود را به انجام رساند.اما تقدیر او جاندار، متحرک و آرام ناپذیر است و علیرغم تلاش ادیپوس برای فرار از آن، سرانجام تقدیر ضربه ی کاری خود را بر او وارد میکند...
بر درِ شهر تبای ، ابولهولِ بالداری است که خونخوار مردم تبای است ؛ بر سنگی نشسته و پرسشی سه گانه دارد.می پرسد: آن چیست که در بامداد چهارپای، در نیمروز دوپای و شامگاهان با سه پای میرود؟
این چیستانِ تقدیر است و جز ادیپوسِ رازگشا کسی از عهده ی حل آن برنمی آید.او پاسخ میدهد: جواب، انسان است در خُردی و جوانی و پیری... و ابولهول چون رازش گشوده می شود جان میسپارد و مردم شهر توسط ادیپوس از مصیبتی بزرگ میرهند...
افسانه ی ادیپوس به ما یادآور میشود که کسی را از پرسش ابوالهول گریز نیست.باید پاسخ را یافت. تقدیر آدمی در همین پرسش و پاسخ، در اندیشیدن به خویش، و شناخت خود است.ادیپوس نگاهِ آسمان کاوِ ما را با رمز و کنایه، از دنیای خدایان، به جهان باطن خودمان باز میگرداند و میگوید تقدیرتان را در اینجا بجویید...در وجود خود...هیچ کس چون او ما را به جنگ با تقدیر برنمی انگیزد و از این نظرگاه، پیروز ادیپوس است و مغلوب، تقدیر... چون او دست به نبردی زده که جرأتِ گیرو دار در آن، خود بزرگترین پیروزی است...
July 8, 2017
این کتاب را سالها پیش خواندم، زمانی که به روانکاوی فروید-لکانی بسیار علاقه داشتم و به خاطر نظریۀ «عقده اُدیپ» فروید سراغ این کتاب رفتم و از خواندن آن به شدت لذت بردم، به گونه‌ای که در طول یکی دو هفته هر کدام از سه نمایشنامه را چندین بار خواندم! بعدها که با نیچه آشنا شدم و ستایش او از یونان باستان و فرهنگ تراژیک یونان باستان و به ویژه نمایشنامه نویس‌های بزرگ آن دوران را دیدم و با تحلیل‌های نیچه از تراژدی و فرهنگ تراژیک یونان بایتان آشنا شدم بیش از پیش به ارزش واقعی این نمایشنامهها پی بردم و دوست داشتم که بار دیگر این کتاب و البته دیگر نمایشنامههای تراژیک یونان باستان را بخوانم، باشد که این آرزو برآورده شود
November 16, 2017
Wonderful. I know we need to read these in modern translations, but how amazing is it that we still have works from ancient Greece? These stories are not at all boring, or dated, or difficult to read. Pick the translation that suits you, whether poetry or prose or somewhere in-between and dive into some incredible drama.
December 15, 2023
انقدر زیبا بود که به سختی می شد باور کرد متعلق به 2500 سال قبله! یعنی قرن پنجم پیش از میلاد!
چقدر دغدغه و مسائل انسان دیروز با امروز یکسان بوده. هر سه نمایشنامه رو دوست داشتم خصوصا آنتیگونه و ادیپ.
بنای ظلم پایدار نمی مونه. انسان های خودرای و خودکامه می توانند سرنوشت خود را از پیش اینجا بخوانند.
چقدر دغدغه و مسائل انسان دیروز با امروز یکسان بوده. هر سه نمایشنامه رو دوست داشتم خصوصا آنتیگونه و ادیپ.
بنای ظلم پایدار نمی مونه. انسان های خودرای و خودکامه می توانند سرنوشت خود را از پیش اینجا بخوانند.
November 20, 2016
Of happiness the crown and chiefest part
Is wisdom, to hold the gods in awe.
This is the law
That, seeing the stricken heart
Of pride brought down,
We learn when we are old.
I felt an urge to return to the stories that set my mind on fire, way down the tunnels of time, and I chose blindly, or so I thought. Enjoying them even more today than I did the first two dozen times I read them, I nonetheless wondered why these plays ... and why now? In the middle of reading half a dozen other books, I still felt restless, and kept circling the bookcases, looking for something more satisfying. If ever there was a time to read, and understand Greek tragedy, it is now, given how the latest political events are shaping our world.
In a time fraught with willing blindness, much as Oedipus himself adopts an unwillingness to see the truth before him, these plays are a reminder of the dangers that can ensue when we choose not to see what is so plainly before us.
The three plays combined seem to ask the same question: what is the duty of the citizen in the state: to uphold those laws imposed upon them by one man's invention, in The State, be that man ever so stubborn, or so wrong; or to listen to the heart and uphold the greater laws of Nature, and inherently, Humanity.
It is a push-pull of the heart and mind and not so easily resolved as it would seem; and, because we are not gods, the right answer, The Truth, often comes too late, as it did with Creon.
Is there a time, ever, in humanity, when the prophecies were heeded in time? Or are we doomed to repeat this process, to the very end of time itself.
Not even Sophocles can offer an answer on that one.
Is wisdom, to hold the gods in awe.
This is the law
That, seeing the stricken heart
Of pride brought down,
We learn when we are old.
I felt an urge to return to the stories that set my mind on fire, way down the tunnels of time, and I chose blindly, or so I thought. Enjoying them even more today than I did the first two dozen times I read them, I nonetheless wondered why these plays ... and why now? In the middle of reading half a dozen other books, I still felt restless, and kept circling the bookcases, looking for something more satisfying. If ever there was a time to read, and understand Greek tragedy, it is now, given how the latest political events are shaping our world.
In a time fraught with willing blindness, much as Oedipus himself adopts an unwillingness to see the truth before him, these plays are a reminder of the dangers that can ensue when we choose not to see what is so plainly before us.
The three plays combined seem to ask the same question: what is the duty of the citizen in the state: to uphold those laws imposed upon them by one man's invention, in The State, be that man ever so stubborn, or so wrong; or to listen to the heart and uphold the greater laws of Nature, and inherently, Humanity.
It is a push-pull of the heart and mind and not so easily resolved as it would seem; and, because we are not gods, the right answer, The Truth, often comes too late, as it did with Creon.
Is there a time, ever, in humanity, when the prophecies were heeded in time? Or are we doomed to repeat this process, to the very end of time itself.
Not even Sophocles can offer an answer on that one.
April 30, 2019
When we face such things the less we say, the better
So my review will be brief. Picking this up I was quite a bit intimidated: 3 ancient Greek plays in English translation? I nearly expected not to understand anything at all or barely managing to follow the story. I worried in vain.
The whole time Sophocles made me go like this:
October 1, 2021
This is an edition of the Theban plays with lengthy introductions on both Greek theatre in general and each one of the plays in particular. They are presented in their chronological order, starting with Antigone, then Oedipus the king and finally the lesser known Oedipus at Colonus. Almost every line from Sophocles is quotable in an everyday situation. He has a hold on essential questions humans have faced throughout ages, which explains why for 24 centuries every reader found a deep meaning and a great wisdom in his words.
Greek theatre is first of all a religious phenomenon. It is really hard to imagine how the Greeks transitioned from a ceremony honoring their Gods to a sophisticated reflection on human condition. It is true that Gods occupy an important place in the plays, but the events and the feelings are always approached from the point of view of the humans. This makes the humans more central than the Gods. We follow characters, victims of an arbitrary and cruel divine will, who demonstrate great ingenuity and determination, to escape their fate only to discover by the end that there was no way out from the very start.
The modern reader might not be convinced of how these dark forces control our existence. We don’t believe in arbitrary Gods anymore. We live after all, in an age of meritocracy and egalitarianism, a king is no longer seen as more fortunate than everybody else and there is possibility for social ascension for everybody and fortunes can be made by individual hard work. But this is exactly the case for Oedipus, his status in Thebes and even his kingship was achieved through his own talent, and also the luck which put him, the right man, in the right spot at the right time. He keeps repeating this throughout the play. Only to discover that those exact events for which he was considered the most fortunate of men were also the causes of his ultimate doom. His skill and determination to save his people from the plague will only uncover the calamities he thought he could escape. This is where the limits of man are dawned. Limits in terms of knowledge, after all we do not know where our own good lies. We strive for or regret what we consider can bring us happiness, assure us a good life, make us the envy of everyone, but we do not know if these promises are real or completely the opposite of what we hoped for. Man constantly fights the wrong battles, misses the point and errs when it comes to the nature of his own Good.
The plays also have a heavy political dimension to them. Not any political theory developments but raw and fundamental matters about life in community. In Antigone, we witness the struggle between bonds of kinship, in the form of the natural rights of the individual to honor his diseased kin, and on the other side, the bonds of citizenship, in the form of the public order which ought to be respected by man made laws. In a context of a war waging society in which individuals are constantly called to sacrifice their lives for the state, the conflict of interests between the individual and the state is taken to astronomical proportions.
In Oedipus at Colonus, Oedipus is promised refuge and protection in Athens by its king Theseus. The chorus dwells at length on this act of accepting a new citizen regardless of the extremely profane nature of his past. We have a demonstration of the cohesion of the Atheniens and their desire to collectively respect laws of hospitality and obligation to protect the less fortunate. What makes the life in community one of the most fragile creations of man is that it relies heavily on mutual trust between individuals, a trust without any guarantees. Oedipus keeps asking for reassurances from Thesseus, but the king keeps repeating that it is of no need to renew his promises. Doing so will only make them vulnerable, he keeps strengthening his words with actions, without which this whole edifice of trust which binds him to his citizens will fall apart.
By the end, we go back to the theme of fate to have a glimpse at the views of Oedipus at the end of his life. He reflects on all those events, not rebellious or angry at the Gods, but a man much sure of himself. Although blind, old and destitute, he knows more, more than he ever had. Suffering bears fruits of knowledge. He rejects his individual responsibility, having committed both parricide and incest not knowing what he was doing. He emphasized on his innocence, but without anger, regret or frustration. He came to a total acceptance of what the Gods have decided for him. And so do we, as readers, even if the worst nightmares come to life, after the fear, the rage then the pity, comes a sense of release, after all it is all okay.
Greek theatre is first of all a religious phenomenon. It is really hard to imagine how the Greeks transitioned from a ceremony honoring their Gods to a sophisticated reflection on human condition. It is true that Gods occupy an important place in the plays, but the events and the feelings are always approached from the point of view of the humans. This makes the humans more central than the Gods. We follow characters, victims of an arbitrary and cruel divine will, who demonstrate great ingenuity and determination, to escape their fate only to discover by the end that there was no way out from the very start.
The modern reader might not be convinced of how these dark forces control our existence. We don’t believe in arbitrary Gods anymore. We live after all, in an age of meritocracy and egalitarianism, a king is no longer seen as more fortunate than everybody else and there is possibility for social ascension for everybody and fortunes can be made by individual hard work. But this is exactly the case for Oedipus, his status in Thebes and even his kingship was achieved through his own talent, and also the luck which put him, the right man, in the right spot at the right time. He keeps repeating this throughout the play. Only to discover that those exact events for which he was considered the most fortunate of men were also the causes of his ultimate doom. His skill and determination to save his people from the plague will only uncover the calamities he thought he could escape. This is where the limits of man are dawned. Limits in terms of knowledge, after all we do not know where our own good lies. We strive for or regret what we consider can bring us happiness, assure us a good life, make us the envy of everyone, but we do not know if these promises are real or completely the opposite of what we hoped for. Man constantly fights the wrong battles, misses the point and errs when it comes to the nature of his own Good.
The plays also have a heavy political dimension to them. Not any political theory developments but raw and fundamental matters about life in community. In Antigone, we witness the struggle between bonds of kinship, in the form of the natural rights of the individual to honor his diseased kin, and on the other side, the bonds of citizenship, in the form of the public order which ought to be respected by man made laws. In a context of a war waging society in which individuals are constantly called to sacrifice their lives for the state, the conflict of interests between the individual and the state is taken to astronomical proportions.
In Oedipus at Colonus, Oedipus is promised refuge and protection in Athens by its king Theseus. The chorus dwells at length on this act of accepting a new citizen regardless of the extremely profane nature of his past. We have a demonstration of the cohesion of the Atheniens and their desire to collectively respect laws of hospitality and obligation to protect the less fortunate. What makes the life in community one of the most fragile creations of man is that it relies heavily on mutual trust between individuals, a trust without any guarantees. Oedipus keeps asking for reassurances from Thesseus, but the king keeps repeating that it is of no need to renew his promises. Doing so will only make them vulnerable, he keeps strengthening his words with actions, without which this whole edifice of trust which binds him to his citizens will fall apart.
By the end, we go back to the theme of fate to have a glimpse at the views of Oedipus at the end of his life. He reflects on all those events, not rebellious or angry at the Gods, but a man much sure of himself. Although blind, old and destitute, he knows more, more than he ever had. Suffering bears fruits of knowledge. He rejects his individual responsibility, having committed both parricide and incest not knowing what he was doing. He emphasized on his innocence, but without anger, regret or frustration. He came to a total acceptance of what the Gods have decided for him. And so do we, as readers, even if the worst nightmares come to life, after the fear, the rage then the pity, comes a sense of release, after all it is all okay.
August 7, 2024
Existence plays tricks on all of us. We think, we weigh, we try to understand. Sometimes, we look at those around us and then understand certain things. Sometimes, we construct reasoning that reassures us and explains—but linking the two? It is a work worthy of the Titans.
In Philoctetes, Sophocles links honor, friendship, trust, and the opposing characters to each other. However, no judgment is found in the actions that Sophocles attributes to the different protagonists. This judgment is already the sign of a great work: each character is animated by an existence that seems natural.
Sophocles delves into the philosophical discourse on collective interest versus individual good in a few pages. He does so without favoring one, a testament to his work's impartiality and depth.
The interweaving of the two allows us to perceive the human in all its brilliance and the emptiness of a judgment that would like to be universal and definitive.
Philoctetes is a timeless masterpiece waiting to be discovered and rediscovered by readers of all ages. Its profound themes and complex characters make it a work worth revisiting and reflecting on.
In Philoctetes, Sophocles links honor, friendship, trust, and the opposing characters to each other. However, no judgment is found in the actions that Sophocles attributes to the different protagonists. This judgment is already the sign of a great work: each character is animated by an existence that seems natural.
Sophocles delves into the philosophical discourse on collective interest versus individual good in a few pages. He does so without favoring one, a testament to his work's impartiality and depth.
The interweaving of the two allows us to perceive the human in all its brilliance and the emptiness of a judgment that would like to be universal and definitive.
Philoctetes is a timeless masterpiece waiting to be discovered and rediscovered by readers of all ages. Its profound themes and complex characters make it a work worth revisiting and reflecting on.
February 18, 2021
افسانه‌های تبای٬ نام کتابی‌ست نوشته‌ی سوفوکلس که از ۳ تراژدی به نام‌های: ادیپوس شهریار٬ ادیپوس در کلنوس و آنتیگنه تشکیل شده که هر کدام از آن‌ها بصورت جداگانه نیز چاپ و منتشر گردیده‌اند اما موضوع هر ۳ تراژدی بر اساسِ اسطوره‌ی دودمانِ لابداسیدها نوشته شده و دوره‌ای از سرگذشتِ افسانه‌ایِ خاندانِ شاهیِ شهرِ تبای را می‌نمایانند. کتاب توسط آقای شاهرخ مسکوب ترجمه و توسط انتشارات خوارزمی چاپ و منتشر گردیده است٬ از ترجمه‌ی بسیار دقیق و روان ایشون که بگذریم باید به مقدمه و مؤخره بسیار زیبای نویسنده اشاره کنم که من تا به امروز در کتابی نخوانده‌ام که یک مترجم انقدر دقیق و مسلط در مورد داستان مطلب بنویسد.
در مورد داستان سعی کردم به جزئیات ورود نکنم که خواننده خودش جهت خواندنِ آن اقدام کند اما چون یک مقدار کامل در مورد داستان نوشته‌ام و ممکنه برای بعضی از دوستان اسپویل محسوب گردد این قسمت را از دید عموم پنهان میکنم که تنها اگر دوست داشتید آن را مطالعه و با مختصری از این ۳ تراژدی آشنا شوید و سپس به خواندن آن اقدام کنید.
سطر سطر این کتاب خواندنی‌ست٬ بی نهایت زیبا و دوست داشتنی٬ خواندن این کتابِ بی‌نظیر را که پر از پند و عبرت است و با لذتِ آشنایی با برخی از خدایانِ یونان (خدای مرگ٬ خدای دریا٬ خدای جنگ و ...) همراه است به همه‌ی دوستانم پیشنهاد میکنم.
در مورد داستان سعی کردم به جزئیات ورود نکنم که خواننده خودش جهت خواندنِ آن اقدام کند اما چون یک مقدار کامل در مورد داستان نوشته‌ام و ممکنه برای بعضی از دوستان اسپویل محسوب گردد این قسمت را از دید عموم پنهان میکنم که تنها اگر دوست داشتید آن را مطالعه و با مختصری از این ۳ تراژدی آشنا شوید و سپس به خواندن آن اقدام کنید.
سطر سطر این کتاب خواندنی‌ست٬ بی نهایت زیبا و دوست داشتنی٬ خواندن این کتابِ بی‌نظیر را که پر از پند و عبرت است و با لذتِ آشنایی با برخی از خدایانِ یونان (خدای مرگ٬ خدای دریا٬ خدای جنگ و ...) همراه است به همه‌ی دوستانم پیشنهاد میکنم.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,566 reviews