Can we call Aristophanes ' The Frogs a play in literary criticism? Illustrate.

Aristophanes ' The Frogs a play in literary criticism

Literary discussions are not the type of things one looks for in a comic play. However, Aristophanes' The Frogs is different from the usual trend. He seems here to deal with the things related to literature and theatre. He does this very skilfully, by integrating his views on literature in general and the two poets in particular into the main dramatic action. Dionysus journey to Hades in search of a poet who could 'save the City occupies the centre stage in the play. The patron-god of drama has no alternatives but to go to the nether world, as all the great poets of Athens are by now dead. He later returns with Aeschylus, who he considers is the right person with the right advice for the hapless Athenians. Before he is able to do so, the superiority of Aeschylus against his challenger Euripides has to be established in a keenly-fought contest. The contest between Aeschylus and Euripides over the seat of honour for the best dramatist in the nether world takes place in the agon (agon is the scene in which a debate between two poets takes place. The agon in The Frogs begins at line 895 and continues to 1094.) or the contest- scene, which contains the main bulk of the carefully-designed literary criticism/discussion.

In the agon, the two dramatists dispute on five issues in five rounds. Those are as follows:

In the first round, the stylistic aspects of the two dramatists are brought under scrutiny. Euripides, after his prayer to Ether, formally begins his attack and calls Aeschylus a mountebank and an impostor who 'cheated his audience' 'brought up on Phrymichus'. Referring to two lost tragedies of Aeschylus, the Phrygians and the Niobe, he criticises Aeschylus' use of a veiled and silent extra character:The play would begin with a seated figure, all muffled up- Niobe, for example, or Achilles: face veiled, very dramatic, not a word uttered.

 Encouraged by Dionysus, Euripides continues, Then the Chorus would rattle off a string of odes-four of them, one after the other: still not a syllable from the muffled figure."

He says that the veiled character remains silent till the play is half-way through, and only then

.....we get a speech. And what a speech! A dozen great galumphing phrases, fearsome things with crests and shaggy eyebrows. Magnificent! Nobody knew what they meant, of course."

Euripides contention here is that Aeschylus' plays are slow-  moving undramatic, turgid and obscure. The extra silent characterserves little dramatic purpose; its long silence is as boring as its words are incomprehensible.Notably, there is little reply to these charges of stylistic weakness an indignant Aeschylus rises to counter the criticism, but words fail him. However, he asks Euripides to speak about his own contributions to the dramatic art. Euripides answers with the claim that his plays are lucid and plausible, and have meaning for all. His plots and characters are realistic, and unlike Aeschylus, he has never portrayed in his plays "hippococks or goatstagsor....... or any other mythical monsters".  He has never indulged in high-sounding bombasts and never kept his audience confused as to the identity of a character. He claims that his openings are never difficult, since the very first character gives the background story at once. Aeschylus angrily accuses Euripides of abusing time-honoured dramatic conventions, and says that Euripides 'deserves to die' for this audacity'. But Euripides defends himself saying that he is a realist, bringing tragedy down to earth. He says that he has written for the people, has taught them to speak with fluency, and also to be inquisitive. Aeschylus, says Euripides, is a conservative artist and an ardent admirer of the heroic. Aeschylus retorts by saying that he has always maintained a high heroic standard and incited the citizens to virtue and selfless patriotism.The first round ends inconclusively. In the next two rounds, it is again Euripides who is the first to attack his rival. He alleges that Aeschylus  uses an obscure and repetitious style. He says that aeschylus has a habit of saying the same thing twice over-a thing he himself has never done. There is no irrelevant padding in his prologues. To this, Aeschylus replies by charging him of metrical monotony. He says

 "Even without splitting hairs over every word, I assure you I can demolish any prologue of yours with.. Just one little everyday bottle of oil. You see, the way your prologues are written, you can fit in anything: bottle of oil, pieces of wool, bag of old rag."

And he proves this, too. In each of the six prologues of Euripides that are brought to the test, the main verb is delayed and a subordinate clause completed in such a way that Aeschylus fits into them the half-line 'lost his bottle of oil, and with it completes both the metre and the grammar without much difficulty. The question of metrical monotony is now The question of metrical monotony is now taken up by Euripides. He says that the lyrics of Aeschylus are monotonous, For, in whatever way he begins, he makes them all monotonously alike: His lyries are all the same The fourth round comprises weighing of verses from the works of both the contenders. This round is as amusing, if not more, as Aeschylus' knocking dead one after another Euripidean prologue with the help of a single oil-bottle. Nonetheless, this scene forwards the opinion of Aristophanes or of Dionysus, so to say, that the verse of Aeschylus has more mass, heft and force than that of Euripides. However, this is the absurd way of judging the merits of a poet. Even the slave Xanthias is aware of the absurdity of the whole thing; he exclaims incredulously, "What! weigh out tragedy, like butcher's meat?" Dionysus, too, compares the verse-weighing with "weighing out...... of cheese." The Chorus roundly declares the whole idea as a bizarre one, that it would have never believed such a thing was ever really possible. This scene thus may also be read as a subtle attack on literary critics; they have regularly been made butts of ridicule by many creative authors and in the character of Dionysus we have one such critic, who passes judgements on literature while himself remains utterly ignorant. This may also be an indirect criticism of the judges presiding over the competitions. We may remember here that the judges appointed for the festivals were chosen from among the population through an intricate procedure, and the procedure for deciding the prize-winners was still a more intricate one. The judges were no experts, and the final result reflected only the popular verdict. Aristophanes was perhaps not quite happy with the system that awarded his The Clouds only a third prize among as many competitors. He spoke of this defeat with some bitterness in The Wasps and the rewritten version of The Clouds itself. This must have been one of the reasons for making Dionysus act so ridiculously as the judge. Whatever may be the real intent of the dramatist in this scene. the verse-weighing also cannot decide the winner. None of the two contenders emerges with credit and Dionysus fails to arrive at a conclusion. He does manage to reach a conclusion later, but only by using a new criterion, an extra-literary one: he will take back with him the poet who has the best advice to give for saving the city from the present state of chaos. So, now in the final round, he asks the two contenders about their political plans. Aeschylus impresses upon dionysus in this round, too, and he is declared to be going back to athens with the drama-god. The whole of this debate on literary merits and demerits brings out some of Aristophanes' beliefs and convictions. That he attached great significance to literary art is beyond any shade of doubt. becomes crystal-clear in The Frogs, too, that he considered drama to have a very important social aspect, that it could greatly influence the life of individuals and of a whole nation, that dramatists could   and guide, through their works, a nation to its overall well being. Aristophanes declares his notion of a poet's social and moral roles in no ambiguous terms. He held that a literary artist has a definite mission to fulfil. His Aeschylus says that from the very earliest times, poets have been inspired instructors; Orpheus, Musaios, Hesiod and Homer were all teachers whose works benefitted man. The function of the poet here is to teach, to make man better, and to improve the morals of the citizens.

So, how seriously can we take the literary criticism contained in he Frogs? While acknowledging the validity of certain observations and comments made by Aristophanes, we must bear in mind that what Aristophanes wrote was, and is, a comedy, not a literary critique. The political and literary satires in the play are, no doubt important in themselves, but we must not forget their part in the overall comic design. This is very strongly suggested in the nonsensical contents of the verse-weighing scene, in the manner in which the two contenders carry themselves, the way he holds euripides responsible for all decadence, and the way Dionysus presides over the whole affair With all these hints, the dramatist points to the fact that despite its carrying much truth, the litterary dedate should not be taken too seriously, that the literary discussion is   only a part of the comic design, and not intended to be taken as a very serious one. If we can appreciate it that way, we shall do justice to the great comic master.

Can we call Aristophanes ' The Frogs a play in literary criticism? Illustrate.

Green Land | July 26, 2018 | 1comments

Aristophanes ' The Frogs a play in literary criticism

Literary discussions are not the type of things one looks for in a comic play. However, Aristophanes' The Frogs is different from the usual trend. He seems here to deal with the things related to literature and theatre. He does this very skilfully, by integrating his views on literature in general and the two poets in particular into the main dramatic action. Dionysus journey to Hades in search of a poet who could 'save the City occupies the centre stage in the play. The patron-god of drama has no alternatives but to go to the nether world, as all the great poets of Athens are by now dead. He later returns with Aeschylus, who he considers is the right person with the right advice for the hapless Athenians. Before he is able to do so, the superiority of Aeschylus against his challenger Euripides has to be established in a keenly-fought contest. The contest between Aeschylus and Euripides over the seat of honour for the best dramatist in the nether world takes place in the agon (agon is the scene in which a debate between two poets takes place. The agon in The Frogs begins at line 895 and continues to 1094.) or the contest- scene, which contains the main bulk of the carefully-designed literary criticism/discussion.

In the agon, the two dramatists dispute on five issues in five rounds. Those are as follows:

In the first round, the stylistic aspects of the two dramatists are brought under scrutiny. Euripides, after his prayer to Ether, formally begins his attack and calls Aeschylus a mountebank and an impostor who 'cheated his audience' 'brought up on Phrymichus'. Referring to two lost tragedies of Aeschylus, the Phrygians and the Niobe, he criticises Aeschylus' use of a veiled and silent extra character:The play would begin with a seated figure, all muffled up- Niobe, for example, or Achilles: face veiled, very dramatic, not a word uttered.

 Encouraged by Dionysus, Euripides continues, Then the Chorus would rattle off a string of odes-four of them, one after the other: still not a syllable from the muffled figure."

He says that the veiled character remains silent till the play is half-way through, and only then

.....we get a speech. And what a speech! A dozen great galumphing phrases, fearsome things with crests and shaggy eyebrows. Magnificent! Nobody knew what they meant, of course."

Euripides contention here is that Aeschylus' plays are slow-  moving undramatic, turgid and obscure. The extra silent characterserves little dramatic purpose; its long silence is as boring as its words are incomprehensible.Notably, there is little reply to these charges of stylistic weakness an indignant Aeschylus rises to counter the criticism, but words fail him. However, he asks Euripides to speak about his own contributions to the dramatic art. Euripides answers with the claim that his plays are lucid and plausible, and have meaning for all. His plots and characters are realistic, and unlike Aeschylus, he has never portrayed in his plays "hippococks or goatstagsor....... or any other mythical monsters".  He has never indulged in high-sounding bombasts and never kept his audience confused as to the identity of a character. He claims that his openings are never difficult, since the very first character gives the background story at once. Aeschylus angrily accuses Euripides of abusing time-honoured dramatic conventions, and says that Euripides 'deserves to die' for this audacity'. But Euripides defends himself saying that he is a realist, bringing tragedy down to earth. He says that he has written for the people, has taught them to speak with fluency, and also to be inquisitive. Aeschylus, says Euripides, is a conservative artist and an ardent admirer of the heroic. Aeschylus retorts by saying that he has always maintained a high heroic standard and incited the citizens to virtue and selfless patriotism.The first round ends inconclusively. In the next two rounds, it is again Euripides who is the first to attack his rival. He alleges that Aeschylus  uses an obscure and repetitious style. He says that aeschylus has a habit of saying the same thing twice over-a thing he himself has never done. There is no irrelevant padding in his prologues. To this, Aeschylus replies by charging him of metrical monotony. He says

 "Even without splitting hairs over every word, I assure you I can demolish any prologue of yours with.. Just one little everyday bottle of oil. You see, the way your prologues are written, you can fit in anything: bottle of oil, pieces of wool, bag of old rag."

And he proves this, too. In each of the six prologues of Euripides that are brought to the test, the main verb is delayed and a subordinate clause completed in such a way that Aeschylus fits into them the half-line 'lost his bottle of oil, and with it completes both the metre and the grammar without much difficulty. The question of metrical monotony is now The question of metrical monotony is now taken up by Euripides. He says that the lyrics of Aeschylus are monotonous, For, in whatever way he begins, he makes them all monotonously alike: His lyries are all the same The fourth round comprises weighing of verses from the works of both the contenders. This round is as amusing, if not more, as Aeschylus' knocking dead one after another Euripidean prologue with the help of a single oil-bottle. Nonetheless, this scene forwards the opinion of Aristophanes or of Dionysus, so to say, that the verse of Aeschylus has more mass, heft and force than that of Euripides. However, this is the absurd way of judging the merits of a poet. Even the slave Xanthias is aware of the absurdity of the whole thing; he exclaims incredulously, "What! weigh out tragedy, like butcher's meat?" Dionysus, too, compares the verse-weighing with "weighing out...... of cheese." The Chorus roundly declares the whole idea as a bizarre one, that it would have never believed such a thing was ever really possible. This scene thus may also be read as a subtle attack on literary critics; they have regularly been made butts of ridicule by many creative authors and in the character of Dionysus we have one such critic, who passes judgements on literature while himself remains utterly ignorant. This may also be an indirect criticism of the judges presiding over the competitions. We may remember here that the judges appointed for the festivals were chosen from among the population through an intricate procedure, and the procedure for deciding the prize-winners was still a more intricate one. The judges were no experts, and the final result reflected only the popular verdict. Aristophanes was perhaps not quite happy with the system that awarded his The Clouds only a third prize among as many competitors. He spoke of this defeat with some bitterness in The Wasps and the rewritten version of The Clouds itself. This must have been one of the reasons for making Dionysus act so ridiculously as the judge. Whatever may be the real intent of the dramatist in this scene. the verse-weighing also cannot decide the winner. None of the two contenders emerges with credit and Dionysus fails to arrive at a conclusion. He does manage to reach a conclusion later, but only by using a new criterion, an extra-literary one: he will take back with him the poet who has the best advice to give for saving the city from the present state of chaos. So, now in the final round, he asks the two contenders about their political plans. Aeschylus impresses upon dionysus in this round, too, and he is declared to be going back to athens with the drama-god. The whole of this debate on literary merits and demerits brings out some of Aristophanes' beliefs and convictions. That he attached great significance to literary art is beyond any shade of doubt. becomes crystal-clear in The Frogs, too, that he considered drama to have a very important social aspect, that it could greatly influence the life of individuals and of a whole nation, that dramatists could   and guide, through their works, a nation to its overall well being. Aristophanes declares his notion of a poet's social and moral roles in no ambiguous terms. He held that a literary artist has a definite mission to fulfil. His Aeschylus says that from the very earliest times, poets have been inspired instructors; Orpheus, Musaios, Hesiod and Homer were all teachers whose works benefitted man. The function of the poet here is to teach, to make man better, and to improve the morals of the citizens.

So, how seriously can we take the literary criticism contained in he Frogs? While acknowledging the validity of certain observations and comments made by Aristophanes, we must bear in mind that what Aristophanes wrote was, and is, a comedy, not a literary critique. The political and literary satires in the play are, no doubt important in themselves, but we must not forget their part in the overall comic design. This is very strongly suggested in the nonsensical contents of the verse-weighing scene, in the manner in which the two contenders carry themselves, the way he holds euripides responsible for all decadence, and the way Dionysus presides over the whole affair With all these hints, the dramatist points to the fact that despite its carrying much truth, the litterary dedate should not be taken too seriously, that the literary discussion is   only a part of the comic design, and not intended to be taken as a very serious one. If we can appreciate it that way, we shall do justice to the great comic master.

Aristophanes , The Frogs

Give an account of the journey of Dionysus to Hades

The journey of Dionysus to Hades

In all the serious epics, the hero undertakes a journey to the underworld to bring back a friend, a relation, or a poet. On the way he encounters numerous hazards before reaching his destination. In The Odyssey, the protagonist Odysseus is given a bag of wind by the underworld deities. In Virgil's Aeneid, the journey is undertaken by the hero Aeneas who carries a golden bough for his protection. Aristophanes parodied this epic convention in The Frogs. Where he makes the god Dionysus go on a journey to the kingdom of Pluto to bring back to Athens one of her great tragic poets, preferably Euripides though finally, he settles on Aeschylus.

Dionysus, the patron god of poetry and drama, feels miserably down-heartened because of all three great tragic playwrights of Athens being dead by now - Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. In the mean time, some new poets have taken over their places by contesting for prizes like their predecessors at Dionysid. However, Dionysus is dissatisfied with their substandard performances and poor dramatic skills. This also makes him greatly worried about the future of Athenian theatre. For this reason, he decides to go to Hades to bring back Euripides to earth. Heracles was the only living being who had been to Hades. So, Dionysus wishes to take his help. He goes to Heracles with his slave Xanthias. Heracles warmly greets him and suggests how he should negotiate the journey to Hades.  Heracles provides Dionysus with necessary information about the passage to Hell and its general condition. Dressed in the lion-skin uniform of Heracles, Dionysus takes his arduous journey to Hades accompanied by his slave Xanthias. As the god and his slave cross the Stys in Charon's boat, they hear the Chorus of the frogs singing lyrics of the rain and marshes, welcoming them with their protracted croaking:

 Brekeke-kex, ko-ax,ko-ax ko-ax,ko-ax,ko-ax!"

After a series of adventures, Dionysus and xanthias arrive at Pluto's dwelling. Approching Pluto's palace in fear, he knocks at the gate. Aeacus, a judge of the dead, accuses Dionysus of pretending to be Heracles and funny scenes follow when the tosrified god aske his slave Xanthias to change clothing with him. When Dionysus finally reveals that he is a god, a son of Zeus, Aeacus refuses to believe him. They all go out, Aeacus determined to end the confusion and find out the truth, and finally he comes to know who the real Dionysus is. Soon after this incident, Aeacus and Xanthias hear off-stage shouts and sounds of quarrelling. We learn that the two dead dramatists, Aeschylus and Euripides, are arguing over the right to eat at the table of Pluto. It is thus that Aristophanes introduces the famous contest scene between Aeschylus and Euripides in the play. Aeschylus and Euripides engage themselves in a heated debate about the relative merits of their plays. Sophocles is also present there. But he has the least intention to come back to earth. Dionysus must choose between Aeschylus and Euripides Both of the playwrights present strong arguments in their favour. The two tragedians compare their talents in almost every department of dramatic art. Dionysus, as the judge, finds it very difficult to choose one between the two. The contest is extremely close and Dionysus cannot reach a decision. To resolve the dispute, Aeschylus verses are weighed against Euripides' in a large cheese-scale. Aeschylus wins three rounds of competitions to the great dismay of Euripides. in the mean time, Dionysus forgets that he came to Hades to take Euripides back to earth with him .With Dionysus being confused about his verdict, Pluto insists on his making choice about the playwright whom he would take back to earth with him. Dionysus then decides to take decision in the favour of that dramatist who will give the best advice on public policy, the dramatist who can help save Athens from destruction in the Peloponnesian war. Aeschylus sound counsel makes him the winner in the contest and Dionysus decides to take him back to earth with him. Here comes Dionysus journey to the underworld to an end. Dionysus' journey to the underworld is very significant in terms of the end result that it brings forth. Dionysus originally came to Hades to take Euripides back to earth. But at the end we see Dionysus changing his mind in favour of Aeschylus. Dionysus could have easily been rigid about his original intention, but he was not. It signifies the fact that Dionysus has been very liberal in finding the dramatist whom Athens needs at this moment while there is a great dearth of capable dramatists who can help save the theatre of Athens and contribute to the political stability of Athens with their dramatic performances. Aeschylus, for Dionysus, is also a dramatist of that kind who can come up with effective counsel on the political and social crises of Athens. Dionysus ultimately gives significance to the fact of merit and the journey of Dionysus to Hades.

Dionysus ultimately gives significance to the fact of merit and ability that should be given importance over cheap popularity. This journey of Dionysus to Hades, in another sense is the journey to find out the right person who can help in making right choices at a time when Athens is going through political and cultural turmoil.

Give an account of the journey of Dionysus to Hades

Green Land | July 23, 2018 | 1comments

The journey of Dionysus to Hades

In all the serious epics, the hero undertakes a journey to the underworld to bring back a friend, a relation, or a poet. On the way he encounters numerous hazards before reaching his destination. In The Odyssey, the protagonist Odysseus is given a bag of wind by the underworld deities. In Virgil's Aeneid, the journey is undertaken by the hero Aeneas who carries a golden bough for his protection. Aristophanes parodied this epic convention in The Frogs. Where he makes the god Dionysus go on a journey to the kingdom of Pluto to bring back to Athens one of her great tragic poets, preferably Euripides though finally, he settles on Aeschylus.

Dionysus, the patron god of poetry and drama, feels miserably down-heartened because of all three great tragic playwrights of Athens being dead by now - Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. In the mean time, some new poets have taken over their places by contesting for prizes like their predecessors at Dionysid. However, Dionysus is dissatisfied with their substandard performances and poor dramatic skills. This also makes him greatly worried about the future of Athenian theatre. For this reason, he decides to go to Hades to bring back Euripides to earth. Heracles was the only living being who had been to Hades. So, Dionysus wishes to take his help. He goes to Heracles with his slave Xanthias. Heracles warmly greets him and suggests how he should negotiate the journey to Hades.  Heracles provides Dionysus with necessary information about the passage to Hell and its general condition. Dressed in the lion-skin uniform of Heracles, Dionysus takes his arduous journey to Hades accompanied by his slave Xanthias. As the god and his slave cross the Stys in Charon's boat, they hear the Chorus of the frogs singing lyrics of the rain and marshes, welcoming them with their protracted croaking:

 Brekeke-kex, ko-ax,ko-ax ko-ax,ko-ax,ko-ax!"

After a series of adventures, Dionysus and xanthias arrive at Pluto's dwelling. Approching Pluto's palace in fear, he knocks at the gate. Aeacus, a judge of the dead, accuses Dionysus of pretending to be Heracles and funny scenes follow when the tosrified god aske his slave Xanthias to change clothing with him. When Dionysus finally reveals that he is a god, a son of Zeus, Aeacus refuses to believe him. They all go out, Aeacus determined to end the confusion and find out the truth, and finally he comes to know who the real Dionysus is. Soon after this incident, Aeacus and Xanthias hear off-stage shouts and sounds of quarrelling. We learn that the two dead dramatists, Aeschylus and Euripides, are arguing over the right to eat at the table of Pluto. It is thus that Aristophanes introduces the famous contest scene between Aeschylus and Euripides in the play. Aeschylus and Euripides engage themselves in a heated debate about the relative merits of their plays. Sophocles is also present there. But he has the least intention to come back to earth. Dionysus must choose between Aeschylus and Euripides Both of the playwrights present strong arguments in their favour. The two tragedians compare their talents in almost every department of dramatic art. Dionysus, as the judge, finds it very difficult to choose one between the two. The contest is extremely close and Dionysus cannot reach a decision. To resolve the dispute, Aeschylus verses are weighed against Euripides' in a large cheese-scale. Aeschylus wins three rounds of competitions to the great dismay of Euripides. in the mean time, Dionysus forgets that he came to Hades to take Euripides back to earth with him .With Dionysus being confused about his verdict, Pluto insists on his making choice about the playwright whom he would take back to earth with him. Dionysus then decides to take decision in the favour of that dramatist who will give the best advice on public policy, the dramatist who can help save Athens from destruction in the Peloponnesian war. Aeschylus sound counsel makes him the winner in the contest and Dionysus decides to take him back to earth with him. Here comes Dionysus journey to the underworld to an end. Dionysus' journey to the underworld is very significant in terms of the end result that it brings forth. Dionysus originally came to Hades to take Euripides back to earth. But at the end we see Dionysus changing his mind in favour of Aeschylus. Dionysus could have easily been rigid about his original intention, but he was not. It signifies the fact that Dionysus has been very liberal in finding the dramatist whom Athens needs at this moment while there is a great dearth of capable dramatists who can help save the theatre of Athens and contribute to the political stability of Athens with their dramatic performances. Aeschylus, for Dionysus, is also a dramatist of that kind who can come up with effective counsel on the political and social crises of Athens. Dionysus ultimately gives significance to the fact of merit and the journey of Dionysus to Hades.

Dionysus ultimately gives significance to the fact of merit and ability that should be given importance over cheap popularity. This journey of Dionysus to Hades, in another sense is the journey to find out the right person who can help in making right choices at a time when Athens is going through political and cultural turmoil.

Aristophanes , The Frogs

Discuss Aristophanes' idea of comedy as revealed in The Frogs.

Aristophanes' idea of comedy

The period of Old Comedy at Athens began in 486 BC, when comedy first became part of the festival of the Greater Dionysia and by convention it ended in 388 BC, when Aristophanes produced his last play. During this period some 600 comedies were produced. We know the titles of some fifty comic poets and the titles of some 300 plays. We have eleven complete plays by Aristophanes, the first one (Acharnians) dating from 425, and several thousand fragments of their plays by Aristophanes and other poets, most of them only a line or so long and very few deriving from plays written before 440.

Old Comedy aimed at direct political, personal, and social satire. It ridiculed everything and every person with the purpose of producing humorous laughter. It dealt with things in a manner not allowed by the common rules of propriety. However, Old Comedy was not all for laughter; it also meant for education, ie. educating the people to be better citizens. There was also advice for the rulers of the country. On the whole, Old Comedy prompted both laughter and serious thought to make its satire a success.

Aristophanes was the unrivalled master of Old Comedy. He skillfully dealt with the comic issues that ranged from political dishonesty through the corruption of literary taste to idiosyncrasy of character. His plays are both farcical and witty. His comedy is brilliant; one wild fantasy leads to another. However, with its main emphasis on political and social satire, Aristophanes wrote to persuade the Athenians to modify their state policies and correct certain tendencies in their social life. In this sense, his plays are built around local problems and local persons. In other words, his plays are topical rather than universal. Although his plays are topical, they are not dated. His commentaries on war and political corruption, his criticism of demagogues, and pretenders to learning, seem all too pertinent today.

Old Comedy was based on a set of formal conventions. However it was less bound by formal rules than tragedy. Its form was composed of varied structural elements. The core elements were: (a) a parodos, or entry of the Chorus; (b) an agon, or contest; and (c)a parabasis, or address by the Chorus to the audience. In the parodos the Chorus presents itself in the character chosen for it by the poet- birds, wasps, women of Athens, initiates, or whatever-and performs a series of songs and dances in which it retains this character more or less consistently. In The Frogs, the Chorus is composed of the Chorus of the frogs, and the Chorus of certain Initiated Persons. The parodos here is a passage as much dramatic as lyrical-a mixture of song, recitation, and simple dialogue. The agon, as handled by Aristophanes, usually takes the form of a debate or dispute culminating in the decisive defeat of one of the parties. Here we have a literary contest taken place between Aeschylus and Euripides, where the former wins over the latter. In the parabasis, the Chorus wholly or partly abandons its assumed character, and addresses the audience directly, speaking as the mouthpiece of the author. They come forward and address the audience in the person of the poet, introducing advice, or complaint, in a tone of moralising or of satire.on current events, e.g, the famous political parabasis in The Frogs. The parabasis of The Frogs is the poet's fervent plea to the people of Athens to abjure faction, partisan spirit, party allegiance, social and economic jealousy, personal enmity, and malicious bickering at a time when the city is at the brink of ultimate peril after twenty-six years of war.

This basic pattern of parodos-agon-parabasis involved a set of other scenes with the spoken language as its centrepiece. Written in an iambic metre similar to, but less strict than, the metre of tragedy, the scenes consisted of (a) a prologue, enlivened by various forms of verbal humour, in which the protagonist is introduced and his predicament explained; (b) (after the parodos) a series of comic episodes arising out of, or leading up to, the agon; (c) a further series of episodes, in which, as a rule, a succession of more or less unwelcome characters are discomforted and driven away. The episodes, when not already separated by the agon or the parabasis, are often marked off from each other by brief choral lyrics, and the play ends with a choral finale (exodos). With all these elements, Aristophanes' The Frogs is an exquisite example of an Old Comedy.

From the thematic perspective, the concept of 'happy idea play an important part in the overall design of Old Comedy. The 'happy idea is the prop on which Old Comedy balances. It is an initial concept or a plan developed by one of the characters to improve his personal lot or the lot of all mankind. The first part of The Frogs ends with the adoption of the 'happy idea,' after all arguments have been disposed of and the of and the latter part deals with scenes showing how the 'happy idea' works out in practice. As for example, the 'happy idea' of The Frogs is as follows: Inspired by a reading of Euripides' Andromeda, Dionysus desires to take on the journey to Hades to bring back to earth Euripides, the famous  ded tragic poet of Athens, because the current writers of tragedy are of very poor talent. Incidentally the play is also an attack on Athenian political and literary decadence. The play has a parabasis, which recommends amnesty for past offences, particularly in the affairs of the Four Hundred, and unitý among all the citizens to avert the ruin of the State. This political advice is separated in two parts: first, the adventures of Dionysus on his journey to Hades in search of a good poet, Sophocles and Euripides being lately dead; and secondly, the political contest of Aeschylus and Euripides, and the final victory of Aeschylus.

In the Comedy, the characters, whether they were taken from real life or were the personification of abstract ideas, were mere symbols or caricatures, not morally responsible human beings. Aristophanes has created no character at all, comments Dr. Norwood. His personages are mere types. His characters, though brilliant as types, lack individuality. But a critic is of the opinion that, "it is untrue to say that Aristophanes creates only types. New Comedy dealt in types; Old Comedy notoriously dealt in individuals, real or invented. This critic opines further that the problem of the individual is of the utmost importance to Aristophanes whole idea of drama; it is the individual who embodies the poetic core of his greatest plays.

There are fifteen characters worth mentioning in The Frogs. There is only one character, namely, Dionysus, who is present throughout the comedy. In The Frogs Aristophanes has "stripped Dionysus of all his divine attributes; he has made him a vulgar and ridiculous man, a brash tricker who is present like a stranger at the rites celebrated before him." Dionysus, the god of wine and revelry, is, indeed, very roughly handled in this comedy. But to wonder at this impious drollery is to fail to understand the privileges of Old Comedy and the very nature of the Athenian society. The comic poets of Old Comedy enjoyed unbounded rights of making fun; there is no record in annals of a single one of the class having ever been called to the bar of justice to answer for the boldness of his dramatic efforts. The same liberty was extended to religious issues; the Athenians were very keen to witness joke and warm-hearted laughter for its own sake, although the poet spoke against the people themselves. The people were of the view that the God enjoyed raillery just as well as men did.

Indecency abounds in Old Comedy as a natural part of the original fertility ritual. Aristophanes exploits it frankly.As for example, he writes in The Frogs: "Men: A girl 1 did spy as we sported and played:/A really remarkably pretty young maid./ She winked and she giggled, but what I liked best/ Was the little pink titty that peeped from her vest. Notwithstanding this, Aristophanes was not pre-occupied with indecency, and in time, he toned down the worst excesses if only because they were a feeble form of humour. Although ribald, Aristophanes is never offensive; the bodily referenees that occur constantly in his comedies are always amusing, and they are rather incidental and recall the ritual obscenities of the phallic fertility rites from which Greek Comedy was derived.

In Old Comedy, the dramatic Unities unity of place, time and action were by no means hard-and-fast rules. No one disputed with the comic poet's action. He was given every liberty to adapt any means to amuse his audience. Unity of place and time were not so understood as to fetter the poet's imagination. He could, if he so liked, conceive his heroes in the sky, transport them to the Internal region (as for example in The Frogs), or call clouds in the sky.

The costume of the comic actors in Old Comedy admitted a variety of extravagances harmonising with that of the situations and personages represented. Tragic costume was often ridiculed on the comic stage. Dionysus (as for instance in The Frogs), the patron god of Tragedy, "appears in an attempted disguise, wearing the lion-skin of Heracles over his tragic robes and buskins." Artificial lighting was not necessary, neither it was possible in Old Comedy. However torehes were often used to get spectacular and professional effects, as for example, the torch procession  of the chorus of Initiates in the Frogs. The presence of a lamp on the stage indicated night.

Considering all the aspects mentioned above, it is quite clear that the Frogs is a very good example of an Old Comedy. It deals with a serious issue in such a humorous way that it provokes laughter, at the same time, serious thought among the audience in the theatre and the readers. On the one hand, the play directs satire at the poor- skilled contemporary playwrights of Athens by equating their erformances with the croakings of the frogs, and on the other hand by advising the Athenians on how to think better.

Discuss Aristophanes' idea of comedy as revealed in The Frogs.

Green Land | July 20, 2018 | 0 comments

Aristophanes' idea of comedy

The period of Old Comedy at Athens began in 486 BC, when comedy first became part of the festival of the Greater Dionysia and by convention it ended in 388 BC, when Aristophanes produced his last play. During this period some 600 comedies were produced. We know the titles of some fifty comic poets and the titles of some 300 plays. We have eleven complete plays by Aristophanes, the first one (Acharnians) dating from 425, and several thousand fragments of their plays by Aristophanes and other poets, most of them only a line or so long and very few deriving from plays written before 440.

Old Comedy aimed at direct political, personal, and social satire. It ridiculed everything and every person with the purpose of producing humorous laughter. It dealt with things in a manner not allowed by the common rules of propriety. However, Old Comedy was not all for laughter; it also meant for education, ie. educating the people to be better citizens. There was also advice for the rulers of the country. On the whole, Old Comedy prompted both laughter and serious thought to make its satire a success.

Aristophanes was the unrivalled master of Old Comedy. He skillfully dealt with the comic issues that ranged from political dishonesty through the corruption of literary taste to idiosyncrasy of character. His plays are both farcical and witty. His comedy is brilliant; one wild fantasy leads to another. However, with its main emphasis on political and social satire, Aristophanes wrote to persuade the Athenians to modify their state policies and correct certain tendencies in their social life. In this sense, his plays are built around local problems and local persons. In other words, his plays are topical rather than universal. Although his plays are topical, they are not dated. His commentaries on war and political corruption, his criticism of demagogues, and pretenders to learning, seem all too pertinent today.

Old Comedy was based on a set of formal conventions. However it was less bound by formal rules than tragedy. Its form was composed of varied structural elements. The core elements were: (a) a parodos, or entry of the Chorus; (b) an agon, or contest; and (c)a parabasis, or address by the Chorus to the audience. In the parodos the Chorus presents itself in the character chosen for it by the poet- birds, wasps, women of Athens, initiates, or whatever-and performs a series of songs and dances in which it retains this character more or less consistently. In The Frogs, the Chorus is composed of the Chorus of the frogs, and the Chorus of certain Initiated Persons. The parodos here is a passage as much dramatic as lyrical-a mixture of song, recitation, and simple dialogue. The agon, as handled by Aristophanes, usually takes the form of a debate or dispute culminating in the decisive defeat of one of the parties. Here we have a literary contest taken place between Aeschylus and Euripides, where the former wins over the latter. In the parabasis, the Chorus wholly or partly abandons its assumed character, and addresses the audience directly, speaking as the mouthpiece of the author. They come forward and address the audience in the person of the poet, introducing advice, or complaint, in a tone of moralising or of satire.on current events, e.g, the famous political parabasis in The Frogs. The parabasis of The Frogs is the poet's fervent plea to the people of Athens to abjure faction, partisan spirit, party allegiance, social and economic jealousy, personal enmity, and malicious bickering at a time when the city is at the brink of ultimate peril after twenty-six years of war.

This basic pattern of parodos-agon-parabasis involved a set of other scenes with the spoken language as its centrepiece. Written in an iambic metre similar to, but less strict than, the metre of tragedy, the scenes consisted of (a) a prologue, enlivened by various forms of verbal humour, in which the protagonist is introduced and his predicament explained; (b) (after the parodos) a series of comic episodes arising out of, or leading up to, the agon; (c) a further series of episodes, in which, as a rule, a succession of more or less unwelcome characters are discomforted and driven away. The episodes, when not already separated by the agon or the parabasis, are often marked off from each other by brief choral lyrics, and the play ends with a choral finale (exodos). With all these elements, Aristophanes' The Frogs is an exquisite example of an Old Comedy.

From the thematic perspective, the concept of 'happy idea play an important part in the overall design of Old Comedy. The 'happy idea is the prop on which Old Comedy balances. It is an initial concept or a plan developed by one of the characters to improve his personal lot or the lot of all mankind. The first part of The Frogs ends with the adoption of the 'happy idea,' after all arguments have been disposed of and the of and the latter part deals with scenes showing how the 'happy idea' works out in practice. As for example, the 'happy idea' of The Frogs is as follows: Inspired by a reading of Euripides' Andromeda, Dionysus desires to take on the journey to Hades to bring back to earth Euripides, the famous  ded tragic poet of Athens, because the current writers of tragedy are of very poor talent. Incidentally the play is also an attack on Athenian political and literary decadence. The play has a parabasis, which recommends amnesty for past offences, particularly in the affairs of the Four Hundred, and unitý among all the citizens to avert the ruin of the State. This political advice is separated in two parts: first, the adventures of Dionysus on his journey to Hades in search of a good poet, Sophocles and Euripides being lately dead; and secondly, the political contest of Aeschylus and Euripides, and the final victory of Aeschylus.

In the Comedy, the characters, whether they were taken from real life or were the personification of abstract ideas, were mere symbols or caricatures, not morally responsible human beings. Aristophanes has created no character at all, comments Dr. Norwood. His personages are mere types. His characters, though brilliant as types, lack individuality. But a critic is of the opinion that, "it is untrue to say that Aristophanes creates only types. New Comedy dealt in types; Old Comedy notoriously dealt in individuals, real or invented. This critic opines further that the problem of the individual is of the utmost importance to Aristophanes whole idea of drama; it is the individual who embodies the poetic core of his greatest plays.

There are fifteen characters worth mentioning in The Frogs. There is only one character, namely, Dionysus, who is present throughout the comedy. In The Frogs Aristophanes has "stripped Dionysus of all his divine attributes; he has made him a vulgar and ridiculous man, a brash tricker who is present like a stranger at the rites celebrated before him." Dionysus, the god of wine and revelry, is, indeed, very roughly handled in this comedy. But to wonder at this impious drollery is to fail to understand the privileges of Old Comedy and the very nature of the Athenian society. The comic poets of Old Comedy enjoyed unbounded rights of making fun; there is no record in annals of a single one of the class having ever been called to the bar of justice to answer for the boldness of his dramatic efforts. The same liberty was extended to religious issues; the Athenians were very keen to witness joke and warm-hearted laughter for its own sake, although the poet spoke against the people themselves. The people were of the view that the God enjoyed raillery just as well as men did.

Indecency abounds in Old Comedy as a natural part of the original fertility ritual. Aristophanes exploits it frankly.As for example, he writes in The Frogs: "Men: A girl 1 did spy as we sported and played:/A really remarkably pretty young maid./ She winked and she giggled, but what I liked best/ Was the little pink titty that peeped from her vest. Notwithstanding this, Aristophanes was not pre-occupied with indecency, and in time, he toned down the worst excesses if only because they were a feeble form of humour. Although ribald, Aristophanes is never offensive; the bodily referenees that occur constantly in his comedies are always amusing, and they are rather incidental and recall the ritual obscenities of the phallic fertility rites from which Greek Comedy was derived.

In Old Comedy, the dramatic Unities unity of place, time and action were by no means hard-and-fast rules. No one disputed with the comic poet's action. He was given every liberty to adapt any means to amuse his audience. Unity of place and time were not so understood as to fetter the poet's imagination. He could, if he so liked, conceive his heroes in the sky, transport them to the Internal region (as for example in The Frogs), or call clouds in the sky.

The costume of the comic actors in Old Comedy admitted a variety of extravagances harmonising with that of the situations and personages represented. Tragic costume was often ridiculed on the comic stage. Dionysus (as for instance in The Frogs), the patron god of Tragedy, "appears in an attempted disguise, wearing the lion-skin of Heracles over his tragic robes and buskins." Artificial lighting was not necessary, neither it was possible in Old Comedy. However torehes were often used to get spectacular and professional effects, as for example, the torch procession  of the chorus of Initiates in the Frogs. The presence of a lamp on the stage indicated night.

Considering all the aspects mentioned above, it is quite clear that the Frogs is a very good example of an Old Comedy. It deals with a serious issue in such a humorous way that it provokes laughter, at the same time, serious thought among the audience in the theatre and the readers. On the one hand, the play directs satire at the poor- skilled contemporary playwrights of Athens by equating their erformances with the croakings of the frogs, and on the other hand by advising the Athenians on how to think better.

Aristophanes , The Frogs

Write a critical note on the title of Aristophanes "The Frogs"

The title of Aristophanes "The Frogs"

Dionysus, along with his slave Xanthias, sets out on a journey to Hades with the purpose of bringing Euripides back to earth. Dionysus and Xanthias must cross over the Acherusian Lake to reach their desired destination. Upon their arrival at the Lake, they receive  greetings from the frogs inhabiting the Lake waters. Aristophanes  gives the title to this play after the name of these frogs. However as the frogs appear in only one small scene of the play, this title has generated some debate. Yet, it must be admitted that the title is very significant because of the purpose the playwright aimed at in writing the play.

Firstly, Aristophanes had a theatrical purpose in using the frogsa as one of the two groups of Choruses in the play. According to some Critics, this chorus is probably an off-stage Chorus and is heard but not seen by the spectators. They mock noisy spectators at the theatre.The noise created by the spectators in the theatre is not based on fact but on emotional euphoria that results from their not judgingth the performances of the playwrights on their merits. It is not difficult here to find some connections between the noise of the spectators and the croakings of the frogs. Aristophanes shows disliking to the emotional noise of the spectators devoid of any worthy common sens.These spectatos with poor dramatic judgment are mocked at here by the croaking of the frogs

Secondly, the playwright had a purpose of mocking at the performances of the playwrights belonging to his age. The frogs greet Dionysus and his Xanthias at the gateway of Hades with their famous croakings of "Brekekekex, co-ax, co-ax/ ko-ax, ko-ax, ko-ax!At the surface the croakings might apparently seem to be a meaningless ode, deep inside, however, it is significantly meaningful. It might be a parody of the meaningless performances made by the unckilled and incapable playwrights of his time. This frogs chorus is says a critic a satire on contemporary poetasters whose poems contained an overflow of croaking or whose dramatic productions did not leave any other acoustic memory than a monotonous and ill-sounding brekekekex." The fact to consider here is that Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides were the greatest playwrights of Athens. They made people enamoured by their delightful dramatic performances. They represented Athens by recording its history and events as skilfully as possible. They presented their performances with certain dramatic vision in their mind, which could help Athens in its trouble. They were the advisers of their homeland. Athens misses them now greatly. The playwrights who are producing performances now go nowhere near to the skills of the dead playwrights. To Aristophanes the performances being produced by his contemporary playwrights are like nothing but the croakings of the frogs. In this sense, this title is very well-directed.

Thirdly, Dionysus being greeted to Hades by none but the frogs is also significant in its own right. Is it possible to call it greeting? Possibly not. These frogs are surrogate for the playwrights of his age in whom he found almost no worth to represent Athens or, in his own words, to "save the city". Hence, the greeting of Dionysus by the frogs stands for the greeting of these poor-skilled playwrights offered to him. Dionysus, the patron god of poetry and drama, has no other way but to swallow it. This absurd greeting acts as some kind of justification for Dionysus' journey to Hades to bring back to Athens one of its greatest playwrights. From these perspectives, The Frogs as the title of this play successfully underscores the ideas that the author tries to bring to the notice of his readers. It is clearly linked with the intention of Dionysus to have a great dead playwright of Athens brought back to earth. The contemporary playwrights are only producing croakings in the name of dramas. This title excellently encapsulates this sad feeling of Aristophanes about the degradation of the Athenian theatre on the heels of the death of all of its three great tragedians.

Write a critical note on the title of Aristophanes "The Frogs"

Green Land | July 18, 2018 | 0 comments

The title of Aristophanes "The Frogs"

Dionysus, along with his slave Xanthias, sets out on a journey to Hades with the purpose of bringing Euripides back to earth. Dionysus and Xanthias must cross over the Acherusian Lake to reach their desired destination. Upon their arrival at the Lake, they receive  greetings from the frogs inhabiting the Lake waters. Aristophanes  gives the title to this play after the name of these frogs. However as the frogs appear in only one small scene of the play, this title has generated some debate. Yet, it must be admitted that the title is very significant because of the purpose the playwright aimed at in writing the play.

Firstly, Aristophanes had a theatrical purpose in using the frogsa as one of the two groups of Choruses in the play. According to some Critics, this chorus is probably an off-stage Chorus and is heard but not seen by the spectators. They mock noisy spectators at the theatre.The noise created by the spectators in the theatre is not based on fact but on emotional euphoria that results from their not judgingth the performances of the playwrights on their merits. It is not difficult here to find some connections between the noise of the spectators and the croakings of the frogs. Aristophanes shows disliking to the emotional noise of the spectators devoid of any worthy common sens.These spectatos with poor dramatic judgment are mocked at here by the croaking of the frogs

Secondly, the playwright had a purpose of mocking at the performances of the playwrights belonging to his age. The frogs greet Dionysus and his Xanthias at the gateway of Hades with their famous croakings of "Brekekekex, co-ax, co-ax/ ko-ax, ko-ax, ko-ax!At the surface the croakings might apparently seem to be a meaningless ode, deep inside, however, it is significantly meaningful. It might be a parody of the meaningless performances made by the unckilled and incapable playwrights of his time. This frogs chorus is says a critic a satire on contemporary poetasters whose poems contained an overflow of croaking or whose dramatic productions did not leave any other acoustic memory than a monotonous and ill-sounding brekekekex." The fact to consider here is that Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides were the greatest playwrights of Athens. They made people enamoured by their delightful dramatic performances. They represented Athens by recording its history and events as skilfully as possible. They presented their performances with certain dramatic vision in their mind, which could help Athens in its trouble. They were the advisers of their homeland. Athens misses them now greatly. The playwrights who are producing performances now go nowhere near to the skills of the dead playwrights. To Aristophanes the performances being produced by his contemporary playwrights are like nothing but the croakings of the frogs. In this sense, this title is very well-directed.

Thirdly, Dionysus being greeted to Hades by none but the frogs is also significant in its own right. Is it possible to call it greeting? Possibly not. These frogs are surrogate for the playwrights of his age in whom he found almost no worth to represent Athens or, in his own words, to "save the city". Hence, the greeting of Dionysus by the frogs stands for the greeting of these poor-skilled playwrights offered to him. Dionysus, the patron god of poetry and drama, has no other way but to swallow it. This absurd greeting acts as some kind of justification for Dionysus' journey to Hades to bring back to Athens one of its greatest playwrights. From these perspectives, The Frogs as the title of this play successfully underscores the ideas that the author tries to bring to the notice of his readers. It is clearly linked with the intention of Dionysus to have a great dead playwright of Athens brought back to earth. The contemporary playwrights are only producing croakings in the name of dramas. This title excellently encapsulates this sad feeling of Aristophanes about the degradation of the Athenian theatre on the heels of the death of all of its three great tragedians.

Aristophanes , The Frogs