In
an email dated 7th
March 2019 I commented to my uncle: 'I
still struggle sometimes with the Choruses in Greek drama. I like
them; I like them not. In Phoenician
Women,
they're a distraction from the action of the two sons/brothers of
Oedipus coming to blows.'
Basically,
what frustrated me in relation to that particular Euripidean tragedy
was the delay and interruption to the dramatic action; my uncle
however (and to be fair I could have expressed myself in clearer
terms) interpreted the above remark literally, and via a different
mouthpiece - my mother - said to tell me: they were essential to,
something, something, time and setting. This is what happens when
messages are passed on. But then it could be I closed my ears, if,
for my example, my mother chose to communicate this when my thoughts
were otherwise engaged.
Their
essentialness was not what I was disputing, if it was, as it now
seemed, I was disputing it at all. No, I didn't think I was. What I
was attempting to understand was why sometimes I enjoyed their
collective voice and at others I didn't. And then I realised this
Shakespearean-like refrain: I like them; I like them not, occurred
mostly with Euripides, though not with all his tragedies, just some,
and I didn't think the blame could be laid at the translator's door,
for if that was the case then surely this dislike would arise with
all the plays contained in one volume, or whenever I read those
translated by the same translator. And it hadn't. It didn't. It
doesn't still. Therefore, I reasoned it must be something peculiar to
Euripides.
In
this supposition at least, I was right.
For
I found an opinion which supported that conjecture (though whether
it's widely held I couldn't say for I know very few who share my
fever for Greek plays), in which it was claimed Sophocles' choral
writing (as compared to Euripides) was superior. My only misgiving
was that the author of this article might have based this solely on
Sophocles winning more competitions, which, on its own, is not a
sound base for any argument – the winning of or the losing of, for
victors of such contests are determined by the favour of the public
and the judging panel. It's all a little too whimsy; Sophocles was
just more successful on more occasions than Euripides (if I am to
believe the article) which could be for any number of reasons.
Perhaps, as a person, he was better liked? Or courted the right
people? Or maybe the spectators also grew tired of and frustrated
with Euripides' choruses. Would they have heckled? I haven't found
any accounts of any such displays.
Grecians
were civilised peoples, weren't they? With lofty ideals? Anyway, this
wasn't exactly cabaret and 'bring on the dancing girls', though the
chorus did, in its own manner, dance and, in unison, spoke or sang
its lines.
H'm,
lamenting 'dancing girls' then, although sometimes they weren't women
but men, who would comment in a collective voice on the unfolding
drama: expressing what couldn't be said, providing insight where it
was needed, or giving a hist-myth lesson to the uninitiated or to
refresh the memory of the initiates. It's the latter that causes me
the most vexation, because there are instances – in Euripides –
where it doesn't seem very relevant to the plot and is an unnecessary
interlude. I never skip pages, but I'm tempted to, for it usually
comes at a moment when the action has reached a peak or a crucial
point, and then goes on and on.
Yet
in spite of that, I love Euripides' 'meaty' monologues and the voice
he gave to political themes. As well as to women, particularly that
of Medea,
although there's a view that this monologue was made in defence of
himself and put in the mouth of his heroine. Even if that's true, his
Medea has a potency that's hard to forget or equal.
His
choruses just fall short of the mark, a little flat, that's all (as
do at times his too-neat conclusions), when they could have been more
built-in into his plays, but I'm sure he would have been aware of
this weakness. How could he not be if on occasion Sophocles beat him?
A
chorus was expected but could their essentialness have strangled
Euripides' creativity? With the result being that Sophocles (and dare
I say Aeschylus too?) was the better choral master.
Picture credit: Their Master's Voice, Michael Sowa (source: WikiArt).
This post was penned in 2019.
