title page · web viewthe electra of euripides page 35 7 conclusion page 46 8 bibliography page 48...

Siobhan Rogers 0118384- 1 -

Contents

1 List of illustrations Page 3

2 Introduction Page 4

3 Women in Greek Tragedy Page 6

4 The Electra of Aeschylus Page 16

5 The Electra of Sophocles 3

6 The Electra of Euripides Page 35

7 Conclusion Page 46

8 Bibliography Page 48


List of Illustrations

Figure 1 Paestan amphora by the Painter pf the Boston Orestes. Orestes and his

companion Pylades meet his sister Electra at the tomb of their father

Agamemnon. Furies with snakes await the outcome in the upper

corners.1

Figure 2 Lekythos attributed to the Villa Giulia Painter, and depicting a seated

woman. Made in Athens about 460 B.C.2

Figure 3 Orestes killing my Clytemenestra

Figure 4 Pelike by the Berlin Painter (?). Death of Aegisthus3

Figure 5 Calyx crater by the Dokimasia Painter. Death of Agamemnon.4

Figure 6 Cup by the Byrgos Painter, Clytemnestra.5

1 Boardman, The history of Greek vases, page 1152 Williams, Greek Vases, page 503 Boardman, Athenina red figure vases, figure 1734 Boardman, Athenina red figure vases, figure 274.15 Boardman, Athenina red figure vases, figure 250


Introduction

Greek tragedy although written in Athens in the fifth century still has an

extraordinarily wide influence and cultural prestige over Western culture today. Many

surviving plays are still part of the theatrical repertoire. My interest in Greek tragedy

is of the female and the importance that she held on the stage. There is only one myth,

which is dealt with by the three great tragedians. This is the myth of the house of

Atreus. This dissertation aims to investigate the female in Greek tragedy, with

particular reference to the portrayal of the character of Electra by Aeschylus,

Sophocles and Euripides. I hope to provide an insight into the character of Electra in

each tragedy and her role within the play. I have chosen to study Aeschylus’

Choephori, Sophocles’ Electra and Euripides’ Electra.

Tragedy has had a profound effect over literature of the past ages. The impact

of these plays has been felt strongly in the twentieth century; the myth of the house of

Atreus holds problematic questions even in the present day. We can see elements of

these myths in Eugene O’Neill’s Mourning Becomes Electra (1931), T.S. Eliot’s The

Family Reunion (1939), and Jean Paul Sarte’s Les Mouches (The Flies 1943.) This

dissertation aims to discover what the female in Greek tragedy could offer to the

audience. I aim to show how one myth could be interpreted to form three individual

versions, and how this was done by the playwrights skill as a presenter of visual

effects and how he interpreted different aspects of the myth.

The dissertation is divided into four sections. The first chapter is an

introduction to the subject of women in Greek Tragedy. The second chapter


introduces us to our first picture of Electra by Aeschylus. The third chapter deals with

the character of Electra as elevated by Sophocles to show us a true tragic heroine. In

the final chapter we see Euripides brilliant psychological study of Electra. I have

decided to deal with the plays in this order, because I like to read the order of the

plays as being Sophocles’ Electra before Euripides’. My reasoning behind my

decision is that I feel that the character of Electra becomes the most involved in the

killing of her mother, when she reaches her portrayal by Euripides. Therefore, the

exploration of her character should end our discussions.


Women in Greek tragedy

“There is, in fact, no literature no art of any country in which women are more

prominent, more important, more carefully studied and with more interest than

in the tragedy, sculpture, and painting of fifth-century Athens.” Gomme. 6

Women appear prominently in ancient Greek

Drama. Tragedy featured many of the most famous

heroines of the Greek tradition in leading roles, and

interest in women dominates much of old and new

comedy. However, the dramatic conventions of the

dramatic stage marked a distinction from ordinary social

life. The dramatic stage was a realm of imagination, in

which the dramatists could explore the ambiguities,

tensions, and contradictions of the present-day polis and

its ideals within the mythological plot of their play. In

these plays, social, political, and religious issues were

played out in family dramas, and tragic polarities.

Greek tragedy was written by men, performed by men and performed to men

(by this, I mean predominantly to a male audience, as the other part of the audience

would have been a small proportion that were not male citizens; such as slaves,

metics, foreigners and maybe women), however, it seems that the male conflicts and

issues were performed through these women.7 Tragedy gives people the chance to

6 Gomme, The Position of Women in Classical Athens, page 47 Foley, Female Acts in Greek Tragedy, page 3


Fig 2.

imagine a world where the norms of everyday life are challenged. Tragedy did not

reflect contemporary life; it reflected an imaginary world, one in which the powerful

aristocrat played an important part. In this imaginary world the norms of society were

distorted and inverted. This is why in tragedy women are portrayed in such a different

way from what one sees in historical evidence. In fifth century Athens, women would

have limited independence as they were seen as socially inferior to men. Tragedy

turns this idea upside, and this is when the cultural norms are challenged. The women

who deviate from this typical image are so powerful that they completely challenge

the cultural norms within society. The disruptive female is something that would have

caused the Athenian male citizens much anxiety. There are some female characters

which do not violate these boundaries that are imposed upon women. However, those

that are in the forefront of the action usually speak out in public and for their own

benefit. These are the women that are the most interesting to the audience and the

reader of Greek tragedy.

Helene Foley believes that women in these tragic plays are taking on two

roles. Their first role is that they embody the female position in either domestic life

within the family or within the city. These roles then offer themselves to explore the

problematic issues that men wish to address indirectly, but not through the male

character8.

Greek Tragedy has held much importance into the exploration of women’s

lives in fifth century Athens. Scholars such as A.W. Gomme and his followers relied

primarily on evidence from Classical tragedy, and they believed that the heroines

were modelled on fifth century Athenian women. From this they believed that women 8 Foley, Female Acts in Greek Tragedy, page 4


were well respected and had much independence and freedom. There are other

scholars such as W.K. Lacey who reject this theory entirely and do not believe these

heroines represent the norm. However, there are some scholars who seem to hold both

views on a certain level such as Victor Ehrenberg who believed that Euripides’

presentation of women was a true picture of women in classical Athens rather than

Sophocles’ and Aeschylus’ presentations.9

Before one can start to look at how these tragic heroines were portrayed on

stage, one needs to look at what the status of Athenian women in Athens was at the

time when these plays were being performed. A strong compulsion of women in fifth

century Athens was the obligations to both family and state. Women were seen as a

tool for the purpose of reproduction: to bear a legitimate son the Athenian male

citizen needed to have a wife. It was the duty of citizen women to their polis to

produce legitimate heirs for the oikoi. Pericles’ funeral oration that was delivered one

year after the Peloponnesian War encouraged women to bear more children as there

was a shortage of males due to the war. Pericles said that, “Those of you who are still

of an age to have children must be stout-hearted in the hope of having other sons: for

you as individuals, the new children will help you forget those who are more; and for

the city there will be a double benefit, deliverance from shortage of men, and a source

of safety, since men who do not contribute children and so run the same risks as the

others cannot be fair or just in their deliberations.”10 This speech shows the

importance of women to the state of Athens and their duty that they owed to the oikoi.

9 Pomeroy, S, Goddesses, Whores, Wives, & Slaves, page 5910 Thucydides, 2.44.3-4, trans P.J.Rhodes page 93


An interesting discussion of a woman’s role can be found in Xenophon’s

dialogues, which feature Socrates and Ischomachus discussing household

management. “It is important then, when the provisions are brought into the home, for

someone to keep them safe and do the work of the household. A home is required for

the rearing of infant children, and a home is required for making food out of the

harvest. Similarly, a home is required for the making of clothing from wool.”11 These

were some of the activities that Athenian women had full involvement in; it was seen

as the duty of a woman to stick to the role that was described. Women were excluded

from the political life of their city. This meant that they were not allowed to attend

assemblies, or serve on juries.12 The education of women was very limited, and due to

this they would not have even have been capable of playing an active role in the

political life of their city. For a male citizen to have a legitimate heir, he needed a

citizen wife. But this is somewhat a contradiction in terms, as women were not

registered at birth as citizens. The women of fifth century Athens were excluded from

political life; however, they were deeply involved in the religious aspects of city life.

Women were priestesses of many important cults, and female religious involvement

was imperative to the city.13 Greek tragedy focuses on the female life in the oikos and

their daily involvement in religious activities.

From historical sources, such as Xenophon’s Oeconomicus, we tend to have

evidence that concerns the women that were considered respectable by Athenian

society; these were the upper and middle class women. This class of women spent

their time indoors it seems with other women and their main activities consisted of

household affairs. Women tended to only come out of the house for events such as

11 Lefkowitz, Fant, Women’s life in Greece and Rome, page 19912 Foley, Female Acts in Greek Tragedy, page 713 Foley, Female Acts in Greek Tragedy, page 7


religious festivals; even menial tasks such as the fetching of food and water would

have been carried out by household slaves.

Their role in the oikos was one of their most important functions. These were

the roles that women were known for (reproduction and the oikos); therefore, these

roles are easily targeted to be used in tragedies. After all they are real situations but

with a difference. The female shown here has her own characteristics such as

independence that was not normally allowed. The independence that these women

were given is often shown later on in the play to be a mistake and the cause of their

downfall.

Women were always under the supervision of their kurios, so the kurios

played an important role in all of their decisions. This rule does not tend to apply to

many tragic females; they often make decisions without the supervision of a guardian,

and repeatedly go against male authority.14 This is seen as disobedience of the cultural

norm, however many of these acts of disobedience are concerned with domestic rather

than public life, of course there are many that are not.

Images that we are given of women’s personal characteristics were that they

were silent and secluded. Sarah Pomeroy discusses this point, and then asks, “Then

how are we to account for the forceful heroines of tragedy and comedy?”15 A good

example for this silence and seclusion that women had to suffer is found in the

character of Andromache in Euripides’ Trojan Women. “I aimed at a fine reputation

and got more than my share of good fortune. For everything that has been found

proper for a woman I did in Hector’s house. First, here-whether women deserve to be

14 Gould, J, Law, custom and myth: aspects of the social position of women in classical Athens, page 4315 Pomeroy, S, Goddesses, Whores, Wives, & Slaves, page 93


blamed for it or not-since for what causes women a bad reputation is not remaining

inside, I put aside my desire (for going out), and remained within the house. I did not

bring women’s bragging talk into the house, and since I had my intelligence as a good

teacher I was self-sufficient. I offered my husband a silent tongue and a calm

appearance.”16 One now has to ask the question, what made the great tragedians of

Athens portray women as forceful, strong, domineering and intelligent women?

There has been much deliberation over the relationship between contemporary

women and dramatic female characters. Some scholars believed that the dramatist had

to portray strong characters and he took his characters from the mythological past,

these were already known to him and had been given a prominent role by mythology.

There is a view held by some scholars that he chose to portray a female character as

they were a more dramatically effective device. 17 Another theory is that he chose to

portray strong women known to him by acquaintance.

Psychoanalysis has been used to try and ascertain why the dramatist chose to

depict strong heroines. Philip Slater uses this to analyse the experience of young boys

in classical Athens. He believed that a young Athenian boy spent his early years in the

company of his mother and female slaves. His father was not one of the main figures

in his life, as he was often away. His mother was very hostile to the fact that his father

was away from the house each day so, therefore she would either transfer her anger of

the disappearance of her husband to her son, or she would give the attention that she

would have given to her husband, to her son. Therefore, the boy would see his mother

as an emotionally charged figure. This figure then transcended into the dominant

16 Lefkowitz, Fant, Women’s life in Greece and Rome, page 1117 Des Bouvrie, Women in Greek Tragedy, an anthropological approach, page 24


female figures that were presented in their plays. The dramatist chose the myths from

the Bronze Age as they were the most interesting and he then could exercise the

conflicts that he has seen within his mother’s personality and his own.18 There are

problems with this theory. There is evidence that the fathers were distant from their

children. However in new comedy we actually see a close relationship between

fathers and children so this is contradictory. It could be said that the modern idea of

the ‘commuting father’ has influenced Slater’s views of antiquity. These opinions

cannot help us in our picture of the Athenian wife, but it does give us a plausible

insight into the playwright’s mind.

An important influence for the playwrights was the literature of past ages.

Mythology that spawned male power can be seen in the tales of matriarchies and the

amazons’ myths. These myths showed women in opposition to men. One of the fears

of the male citizen was the idea of the women defying authority and being in control.

A character from tragedy that supports this theory is Antigone. She is being portrayed

as a dominant woman who could be seen as a projection of men’s fear of women. She

is the centre of attention, and is characterised by her determination, courage and her

formidable nature. She is defending the right to bury her brother. This would have

been seen as appropriate for a woman because she was motivated by love, which was

seen of as part of women’s nature. Women were shown on stage to be involved with

their children, husbands, sisters, and brothers. They were shown to be family

orientated; this image of them coincides with the real image of Athenian women.

One can look to the characters of Ismene in Antigone, Chrysothemis in the

plays dealing with the family of Agamemnon, Tecmessa in Ajax, Deianira in 18 Pomperoy, S, Goddesses, Whores, Wives, & Slaves, page 96


Trachinian Women, and the female choruses in tragedy they are all seen as the

“normal” women of the tragic world. These are the characters that are presented to us

as what women should be. Therefore, the forceful female characters of Greek Tragedy

are sometimes said to be “masculine” because these woman do not stay within the

realms of the cultural norm.19 In Aristotle’s Poetics he informs us that it was not a

compliment for a woman to gain the title of “masculine”, it was inappropriate for a

woman’s character.

The main female characters that are presented to us by the playwrights are

heroines not the “normal” women of the time. These women have an urge to achieve

goals, and to accomplish their plans they need to adopt characteristics that are

associated with the opposite sex. This is why their presence on stage was much more

dramatically interesting to the audience, and because these heroines were not seen as

“normal” women they could push the boundaries of many issues. An excellent

example of a female characteristic who so famously takes on male characteristics is

Clytemnestra who appears in the Oresteia trilogy. I have decided to briefly look at

Clytemnestra as she is more relevant to my work. (Later in the further chapters, I will

proceed to investigate her relationship with her daughter Electra both presented by

Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides.) We see the chorus of the old men of Argos

constantly reminding Clytemnestra that she is a woman. For example, after one of her

speeches, the chorus address her in this way,

“Spoken like a man, my lady, loyal,

full of self-command.”20

19 Pomperoy, S, Goddesses, Whores, Wives, & Slaves, page 9820 Aeschylus, Agamemnon, trans Robert Fagels, page 116


She also addresses them by saying,

“And you,

you try me like some desperate woman. My heart is steel.”21

In this play Clytemnestra exhibits qualities that were associated with men, for

example her persuasion of Agamemnon to walk on the purple carpet, and her skilful

planning and accomplishment of his murder. The chorus find it incredibly hard to

process the information that the King had been murdered by his Queen. This was a

reversal of roles in a horrendous situation. Laura McClure believes that the Athenian

drama of the time liked to portray women as masterful and convincing speakers

whose brilliant words got the better of men.22

Through these discussions one has gained an insight into the simple existence

of a woman of the fifth century period. The female that would have been portrayed on

stage to a male audience would have been significantly different to what they had

previously experienced. Although no specific characters have been examined in much

detail, we have seen some suggestions of what the tool of using a predominant woman

held for the playwright. She enabled him in his dramatic production of his play,

through her, ethical and moral situations could be explored and exploited.

21 Aeschylus, Agamemnon, trans Robert Fagels, page 16222 McClure, Spoken Like A Woman, page 25


The Electra of Aeschylus

The Oresteia, of which the

Choephori is the second play, is the only

surviving trilogy we have from antiquity.

This play is concerned with the tragedy of

Orestes; however it does feature his sister

Electra, who is of greater importance to

this study. As Aeschylus was dramatising

the tragedy of Orestes, she does not play

that much of an important role. The

portrayal of Electra will be discussed in the next two chapters and how she was

depicted by Sophocles and Euripides. However, I have decided to look at how

Aeschylus gave Sophocles and Euripides a character to which they elevated to the

status of a tragic heroine.

The myth of the House of Atreus was a mythological story that the audience

would have been very familiar with. However, in Homer the role of Clytemnestra

plays a much less important part, Aegisthus is given the role of the executioner of

Agamemnon. There is also no explicit mention of matricide, or that the act of Orestes

was a crime of vengeance.23 It must have been between the times of Homer and

Aeschylus that the myth was developed, so that Clytemnestra played a more

23 Garvie, Aeschylus, Choephori, page x (introduction)


Fig 3.

important part and the role of Orestes was changed. The myth was handled by the

poets of the epic cycle, such as Agias of Trozen. 24

The action that takes place in the Choephori (“The Libation Bearers”) relates

to the acts of vengeance that take place upon Clytemnestra and Aegisthus. These acts

of vengeance that are performed by Orestes and Electra are needed to vindicate their

father’s horrific death by Clytemnestra and Aegisthus, and to restore correct control to

the oikos. Due to the nature of the play, it is considered the darkest of the three plays

from the trilogy.25

Electra first enters with the chorus of slave women. They are dressed in black

and bearing libations, which they are going to offer to the grave. They begin with

what could be called a conventional lamenting speech,

“Rushed from the house we come

escorting cups for the dead,

in step with hand’ hard beat,

our cheeks glistening,

flushed where the nails have raked new furrows running blood;

and life beats on, and

we nurse our lives with tears, to the sound of rippling linen beat our robes in

sorrow

close to the breast the beats throb

and laughter’s gone and fortune throbs and throbs…”26

24 Garvie, Aeschylus, Choephori, page xiv (introduction)25 Conacher, Aeschylus’ Oresteia: A Literary Commentary, page 10226 Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, trans R.Fagles, page 178


At the end of the choral ode, the chorus remind us of their captive status, and

their inability to inflict revenge upon the house, as there are powerless. When Electra

first speaks, we can identify her as the chief lamenter of the women and the chief

libation bearer. However, even though we identify her as the chief libation bearer, we

see that she looks to the older women of the chorus, for constant guidance,

“Dear women,

you keep the house in order, best you can;

and now you’ve come to the grave to say a prayer

with me, my escorts. I’ll need your help with this.

What to say when I pour the cup of sorrow?”27

During this conversation with the chorus, one can identify Electra as a very gentle and

diffident character, who seems to need help and direction in how she should deal with

this harsh situation that she has to live in. She begins by asking the chorus a set of

timid questions, and seems to be speaking in a nervous manner. She needs the chorus

to guide her through this fearful journey, “I’m so unseasoned, teach me what to say.”28

In this dialogue, we see the chorus saying words that Electra hesitates to say herself,

due to the fact that she is so unsure about the situation she is faced with. Electra

begins her libation prayers with invocations. Her prayers follow the same approach

that she used with the chorus; she is tentative and careful in what she prayers. D.J.

Conacher believes that her prayers have a certain innocent tone about them. He

believes that before the vengeance can be fulfilled, Electra must make a change in

27 Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, trans R.Fagles, page 18028 Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, trans R.Fagles, page 182


herself. The chorus end this passage by praying for the coming of an avenger in the

same way Electra does. They say.

“Dear god, let him come! Some man

with a strong spear, born to free the house.”29

When Electra finds the evidence of Orestes’ presence, we see the same

tentative quality in Electra that she displayed earlier in previous speeches. While it is

Electra who presents the evidence to the chorus, it is them who say that it must be

Orestes, “Orestes…he brought a gift in secret?”30 It seems that Electra is lacking in

confidence, or it could be that she does not want to raise her hopes that it could be her

brother. Electra recognises Orestes by three tokens, the lock of hair that has been laid

on Agamemnon’s tomb, the footprint that fits her own nearby; and finally when

Orestes declares himself to be her brother he shows her a piece of clothing that she

made for him as a child. Orestes warns her not to be too joyful, once she has realised

that he is her dear brother,

“No, no control yourself-don’t loose yourself in joy!

Our loved ones, well I know, would slit our throats.”31

The speech Electra makes after he has warned her not to be too joyful shows how

much she needed his return. Her dependence on him gives him strength; it also places

pressure on him to act as a protector of Electra. She says to him.

29 Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, trans R.Fagles, page 18430 Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, trans R.Fagles, page 18531 Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, trans R.Fagles, page 189


“I have to call you father, it is fate:

and I turn to you the love I gave my mother-

I despise her.”32

These words show the support that Electra can offer Orestes; she is turning all her

affections towards him. We have seen the extent of her feelings that she has for her

father, and it seems as if she is transferring them all onto Orestes as he is her hope.

We then have a speech of Orestes, which gives us an insight into Orestes’

motivations in the action he will be taking. Electra and Orestes try and evoke the spirit

of Agamemnon from the dead. Through this we see that the intensity of hate that

Electra feels for Aegisthus and Clytemnestra is increased dramatically, “Reckless,

brutal mother-oh dear god!”33 She needs Orestes to know how harshly she has been

treated, and how unhappy she has been,

“I wept-laughter died that day…

I wept, pouring out the tears behind my veils,

Hear that, my brother, carve it on your heart!.” 34

Now that Orestes has returned, it seems that Electra has gained the confidence that

her mother and Aegisthus will be avenged. She expresses her feelings against them in

a more active way, she realises there will be action taken against them. “Zeus, crush

32 Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, trans R.Fagles, page 18933 Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, trans R.Fagles, page 19634 Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, trans R.Fagles, page 197


their skills! Kill! Kill!”35 Electra does not appear in the rest of the play, the last words

of Orestes before the ‘the great kommos’ are that her role is to,

“Keep a close watch inside, dear, be careful.

We must work together step by step.”36

Aeschylus’ Electra is portrayed as shy and hesitant at first and needs constant

reassurance and support from the chorus. However, once Orestes returns she becomes

more vituperative, and her criticism of Clytemnestra increases. Electra plays no part

in the actual killings of Aegisthus and Clytemnestra; she disappears from the stage

after the kommos. However, her role at the beginning of the play is used by Aeschylus

in validating the matricide. The dramatic impact of Electra is shown in how abject and

despairing she is. She seems to symbolise the extent of the horrendous situation and

the difficult decisions that her and Orestes face, thus validating the matricide.

Electra’s main role could be seen to introduce us to the terrible situation that Orestes

will have to deal with.

Electra assists Orestes in his preparation to prepare himself emotionally to

murder Aegisthus and Clytemnestra. He needs her behind him as his supporter; this

beneficial relationship is also reversed because she needs him as well. They both rely

on each other to provide them with confidence, and they hope that they can avenge

their father’s death. Electra’s feelings of hatred towards her mother increase once

Orestes has arrived. It is almost as if she feels that she is able to now voice her

opinions, and her voicing them will spur Orestes on to avenge their fathers death. The

35 Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, trans R.Fagles, page 19536 Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, trans R.Fagles, page203


emotional support that she offers him is through telling him of the misery she has

suffered. After all Orestes has not had to suffer like Electra. Orestes is now her

protector so would have felt much sympathy towards her; Electra’s sufferings would

have increased his emotional motivation to avenge Agamemnon’s death.

This has just been a brief discussion of the role and character of Electra. In the

next chapter we will see how Sophocles took the role of Electra from Aeschylus and

developed her for his own tragedy of Electra.


The Electra of Sophocles

In this chapter, we will discuss

the portrayal of Electra by Sophocles.

The audience would have been well

acquainted with the role of Electra in

the killing of Clytemnestra and

Aegisthus through Aeschylus’ version

of the myth. However, through close

examination of the text, we will

discover how Sophocles’ version of the events of the House of Atreus, differed from

the other tragedians. My aims are to look carefully at the Sophoclean dramatic

techniques that are used and what their effect is upon the play. We will also look at

what motivated Electra, and how this transformed her from just a girl into a heroine of

Greek tragedy. Electra’s interaction with other characters will be explored to see their

effect upon Electra.

The title of Sophocles’ play is a strong and clear indication on what his

primary concern was. Sophocles’ work is distinguished from that of Aeschylus,

because his interest was in the exploration and dramatisation of the complex character

of Electra, whereas Aeschylus’ interest was in exploring the fate of the House of

Atreus. Sophocles’ desire was not to focus on the aftermath of the matricide, thus

allowing the dramatic focus to remain on Electra. For this reason the part of Electra in

the myth after the matricide is obscure and unimportant. By just looking at the story

of Electra, it allowed Sophocles to present the audience a more unified treatment of


Fig 4.

the story, and it was able to be presented in a single Sophoclean play. Some scholars

believe that the Electra was an attempt to “Homericize” Aeschylus’ Oresteia.

However the character of Electra is not even mentioned by Homer, yet Sophocles

builds his entire tragedy around her. She is the chief character and our attention

focuses solely on her, not Orestes or Clytemnestra.

In order for Sophocles to adapt the myth successfully, there were major

difficulties that he had to overcome. One of them concerned the treatment of Electra,

in previous myths her role was passive and unimportant to the plot. Therefore, he had

to catapult her to play an active and central role. Sophocles had to retain the

importance of Orestes as he plays such an essential part. However the role of Orestes

in the events of the play must not overshadow Electra, and her importance in the

events that unfold. Gordon Kirkwood believes that these were the difficulties that

Sophocles needed to overcome in order to maintain Electra as the main character. He

believes that there are two structural features in the play, which were created by

Sophocles, in order to overcome the difficulties mentioned. These are the second

scene with Chrysothemis and the reversal of order in which Clytemnestra and

Aegisthus die.37 By close examination of the text, one will see how the dramatic

technique of Sophocles, brought Electra to the forefront of the action.

The second scene between Chrysothemis and Electra illustrates Electra’s

fervent and pitiful appeal to Chrysothemis to join her in her plan of revenge. Through

her requests to her sister, one can see the determination of Electra in carrying out

revenge. Before Electra knew of Orestes ‘death’, she only wished for revenge and for

him to carry this out. Her previous activity in this revenge plan was limited. Now 37 Kirkwood, G.M., Two Features of Sophocles’ Electra, page 87


because of Orestes’ ‘death’ she has been projected as the main avenger. She admits to

Chrysothemis that she has always hoped that Orestes would return home and deal

with “our father’s murderers.”38 She then addresses Chrysothemis in these words,

“Now that he is dead,

I turn to you; will you be brave enough

To help me kill the man who killed our father,

Aegisthus?”39

There is a build up to the name of Aegisthus, and this word is emphasised by

the use of enjambement. Electra at this point only mentions the murder of Aegisthus

and one has to think why this is. Many scholars believe that as Aegisthus is the chief

villain, that it is only natural that Electra wishes to exact her revenge on him. To

Electra, Aegisthus is the reason why Clytemnestra killed Agamemnon. It would be

nice to think that Electra has not reached the stage in which she believes she is

capable of killing her mother. After all she has just received that the news that her

brother has ‘died’, previous to this news she was relying on Orestes to avenge her

fathers death.

After revealing her decisions to Chrysothemis, she appeals to her by informing

her of the rewards that will follow after the death of Aegisthus. There is the reward of

marriage and the bearing of children once Aegisthus is dead.

“You’ve little chance

38 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 9739 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 97


Of ever being bride or wife; Aegisthus

Knows better than to let our tree bear fruit.”40

They both will be doing their,

“pious duty to the dead,

Our father and out brother.”41

She talks about the “courage” that will be admired; this word in Greek is andros and

is associated with manliness. Electra is taking on a masculine role; now that Orestes is

‘dead’ she has to in some terms become the ‘son’ that will avenge their father’s death.

Electra in her eyes needs to take on the role of a man, and she attempts to dominate

Chrysothemis by her language. However, this domination of Chrysothemis by Electra

is not successful. Chrysothemis soon reminds Electra of her status and what her

capabilities as a woman are.

“I wonder, Electra, what can have possessed you

To put on such bold armour, and call on me

To serve under your orders? Do you forget

You are only a woman, and weaker than your enemy?”42

Even the image of bold armour presents us with a masculine image for Electra.

40 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 9741 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 9742 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 98


The hopeful words that Electra had offered Chrysothemis were entirely

different to those words she uttered nearer the beginning of the play. She believes

that,

“With evil all around me

There is nothing I can do that is not evil.”43

Electra states that she is corrupted by her circumstances. She also utters words

to her mother such as

“I am ashamed

Of my rudeness and ill-temper

[…] villainy

Is taught by a vile example.”44

There is great difference in what she says to her sister, and what she has said to her

mother and the chorus. Before Electra was facing the situation alone now she is trying

to persuade Chrysothemis to join her by offering her rewards. Therefore, she will be

sharing the burden of her decision of murder with her sister. She does not mention the

matricide to her sister, just the murder of Aegisthus. The purpose of this whole scene

plays Electra at the centre of all the events, and brings about her action in the play.

Her contradictions that were mentioned earlier just add to the fact that Electra the

heroine of the play is very much confused over the situation and what she needs to do.



The next scene to be discussed is the order in which Clytemnestra and

Aegisthus are killed. Sophocles designed this scene not to elevate Electra to the centre

of the action, but also to make sure Orestes’ part in the killings of Aegisthus and

Clytemnestra did not rival his sister’s. There seem to have been two scholarly views

on the Sophoclean order of the deaths of Clytemnestra and Aegisthus. Scholars such

as Jebb believe that Aegisthus is the more important enemy and that his death is the

climax, because he is most hated by Electra and Orestes.45 Critics have been

persuaded that the climax of the play is Aegisthus’ death as it occurs second. They

believe that the second death must be a climax otherwise, it could be considered as an

anticlimax. In the works of Aeschylus and Euripides, the death of Clytemnestra is

recognised as a climax; therefore some critics wish to believe that the emphasis is

reversed alongside with the order of the deaths. However, I believe that this is

incorrect; the matricide is the climax at the end of the play and, therefore, is at the

centre of the tragedy.

Throughout the play we are constantly reminded by Electra of her hate for

Aegisthus. He is her one of her main objects of hate. Electra in her speech to the

chorus lists her grievances against Aegisthus and Clytemnestra. She starts off by

abusing Clytemnestra, then both of them, then just Aegisthus,

“Her voices rises to a scream, and her noble lord

Stands by and takes her part-a skulking villain,

A coward hiding behind a woman’s skirt.”46

45 Kirkwood, Two Structural Features of Sophocles’ Electra, page 9146 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 77


In this whole speech, Kirkwood calculates that Clytemnestra is abused for twenty six

lines of Electra’s speech and Aegisthus is only abused for eleven. Electra’s hatred for

Clytemnestra is shown more, Electra’s emotions are incredibly intense and this hatred

she feels is shown to be more personal than her feelings towards Aegisthus. Electra

feels a different type of hatred towards each of them. She feels as if her mother has

betrayed her so this increases the intensity of her hatred.

During the play we never meet Aegisthus, because he is absent. Thus, the

death of Clytemnestra relies on his absence. It is in his absence that she can be killed.

In the Choephori, Aeschylus kills Aegisthus first then Clytemnestra second because

this would have interrupted the dramatic continuity of the play. The death of

Clytemnestra had to occur last because of the furies’ pursuit of Orestes. Another

reason why Sophocles could have reversed the deaths is that he did not want his work

to look as it had been too closely modelled on the Choephori. The audience would

have expected Orestes to be chased by the Furies, establishing him as the point of

interest rather than Electra. Sophocles’ aim was to produce a tragedy concerning

Electra, and throughout we see him making sure Electra is our figure of chief interest.

The most important and horrifying of the two deaths was Clytemnestra’s;

therefore that is why Sophocles’ reversed the order. We do not actually hear or see the

death of Aegisthus. Kirkwood believes that by approaching the death sequence in this

way, Sophocles has allowed the death to carry over. This enables the story to end

while the action is still in progress. This abrupt ending allows no time for reflection; if

there was the focus would be moved to Orestes, and the focus would removed from

Electra.


Electra throughout the play is the dominant character and her enemy is her

mother, Clytemnestra. During her death scene, Sophocles determined it so just Electra

and her mother are the only characters that speak to one another. This creates an

effective climax between the two main characters of the play. Electra torments

Clytemnestra through the closed doors, “Strike her again.”47 The involvement of

Electra in Aegisthus’ death is very small, and there is no such climax as was

previously experienced in the death of Clytemnestra. The death of Clytemnestra by

her daughter and son is horrifically tragic. The death of Aegisthus, compared to the

death of Clytemnestra is seen as a justifiable act of revenge.

There have been many comparisons by scholars between the endings of

Sophocles’ Electra and Aeschylus’ Choephori. The two endings are very different,

Sophocles’ ending does not deal with the matricide, and he does not justify or

condemn it. The matricide is not the central issue of the play. I believe that Sophocles

did not discuss the matricide of Clytemnestra, because it would have added a different

focus to the play. As I have said before, this would have lead to the treatment of

Orestes after the murders, therefore moving the chief object of interest from Electra to

Orestes.

The false messenger speech of Orestes ‘death’ that is employed by Sophocles

is yet another dramatic technique to focus the attention on Electra. This speech could

be considered as a tragedy within a tragedy. Electra is foiled by Orestes and the

Paedogogus’ speech. By deceiving Electra up until the same point as Clytemnestra

47 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 113


and the chorus, Sophocles heightens the tensions of Electra. We seen the extreme

sufferings of Electra,

“Orestes, my darling, you are dead, how can I live?

Your going has torn the last shred of hope from my heart.”48

Electra’s suffering over Orestes death starts her heroic journey; she begins to plan the

suicidal attacks upon Aegisthus and Clytemnestra. Before Electra was just full of

words of revenge, now the Paedogogus’ speech has shifted her character into active

heroism. The audience know that Electra believes the heroic words that she speaks.

All relationships in the play focus around the character of Electra. Electra

throughout the play seeks out all the relationships that will enable her in her task of

revenge upon Clytemnestra and Aegisthus. The most intense of her relationships is

with her father, Agamemnon. She talks as if her father were still living, “Trying to

help my father all I can.”49 It is the intensity of her relationship and the strong bonds

that she feels towards him, that spur her on in her depraved plans of revenge. The

other two close and positive relationships she has are with Orestes and Chrysothemis,

these only bear importance because they are the ones that she believes will assist her

in killing the murderers. However, Electra only maintains a positive relationship with

Chrysothemis when she believes that she will aid her. Electra feels that she lacks

protection, she is lacking in philos, by this she means “dear one”. She tells the chorus

that,

“Half my life is wasted away



In hopeless waiting; all my strength is gone.

I have no husband at my side

To fight for me, I have borne no children.”50

Electra needs in herself to find philoi; much of the play is concerned with her gaining

and loosing them. Agamemnon even though he is dead, is her greatest and dearest

philos; she refers to him as, “The dearest and best of fathers.”51 Electra criticises

Chrysothemis for neglecting her philoi,

“Your ought to be ashamed if you’re our father’s daughter,

To forget him and to take your mother’s part.”52

Electra discovers that Orestes is her real philos and she showers the urn of Orestes

ashes with love and endearments. She talks about him as if he were a son, part of her,

“You were more my child than mother’s; no one else

Looked after you but I; ‘sister’ you called me,

As if you had no other.”53

Her words are only full of love to him, “My lovely brother…My poor dear darling.”54

Once Electra discovers, that her philos is still alive she goes on to destroy another

philos with him her mother. This shows that Electra wants to be loved, and to feel

50 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 7451 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 8252 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 7853 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 10454 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 104


love and she only considers in proceeding with the murders, when she truly believes

that she is alone.

The relationship between Chrysothemis and Electra is not shown as a

particularly loving one. It is the chorus that are shown to be Electra’s confidant,

whereas Electra’s relationship with Chrysothemis does not have this same level of

trust and compassion. The first words Chrysothemis utters to Electra are that of

criticism,

“Electra! Why are you here again, out of doors,

And holding forth in this fashion?”55

Electra’s anger is directed at Chrysothemis because she believes that she is controlled

by their mother, as she still lives in luxury with their mother,

“Would I give in to them-no, not for all

The privileges on which you pride yourself.”56

Electra accuses Chrysothemis or being something of a theatricality, as she speaks

their mothers words and not her own,

“The lessons you read to me are not your own,

She taught you them.”57

55 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 7856 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 7957 Sophocles, Electra and other plays, trans E.F. Watling, page 97


Mark Ringer believes that, “Electra has already established the idea of Clytemnestra

as the playwright and director of Chrysothemis’ hollow actions and words.”58 When

one examines the relationship of the two sisters, it seems a lonely relationship, they

both feel that they are on their own, but this is particularly the case with Electra. In

many ways Electra is trying to control Chrysothemis, in the same ways as she accuses

Clytemnestra of controlling Chrysothemis. The lack of support that Electra receives

from her sister, leads her to her journey of heroism. Electra has no choice but to act

alone (while she thinks Orestes is dead).

The aim of this discussion of Electra’s character was to show how Sophocles

maintained Electra as the main character, in this complex mythological story. Ringer

believes that, “Sophocles in Electra has not manipulated myths so much as

manhandled them. Electra seems to spiral out of control, helped along by the poet’s

acute self-consciousness.”59 Through his dramatic techniques, the character of Electra

has been propelled, so that she is our main focal point throughout the play. Sophocles

is telling the tragedy of the tragic heroine of Electra, not Orestes nor Clytemnestra. In

my discussion of the character of Electra, I have chosen key points, which I feel

illustrate the tragedy of Electra, and how the unimportant figure of Aeschylus’ Electra

was transformed into a powerful, strong, independent and formidable heroine.

58 Ringer, Electra and the Empty Urn: Metatheater and Role Playing in Sophocles, page 15759 Ringer, Electra and the Empty Urn: Metatheater and Role Playing in Sophocles, page 212


The Electra of Euripides

In contrast with the

treatment of Electra by Aeschylus

and Sophocles, it is in Euripides’

treatment of the myth that we see

Euripides presenting matricide as a

crime. John Ferguson believes that,

“Electra in Euripides is a brilliant

pathological study, fascinated and

repelled by sex, with her

masochism and sadism, her

fixation on her father and her hatred of her mother, her obsessive hopes and fears, her

dominating personality.”60 This description of the character of Electra illustrates how

different this Electra is compared to Sophocles.’ Sophocles tells us of the tragedy of

Electra. Euripides’ Electra has the dominant role but it is more than just the story of

her and Orestes; it is a play about the perversion of rituals and the social order. 61 In

this chapter, I aim to show how different Euripides’ presentation of Electra was to that

of Sophocles. I will argue that Euripides portrays her so bitterly fuelled by hatred that

she acts as a criminal character, rather than a character that we should feel sympathy

for.

The play opens at a peasant’s cottage; we learn that the peasant, who opens the

play, is in fact the husband of Electra. This would have been a shock to the audience,

60 Ferguson J., Euripides’ Medea and Electra, page 1861 Baldock, Greek Tragedy, page 110


Fig 5.

as the name Electra actually means unmarried, and in all over versions of the story of

Electra, she never has been married. This is just one of the examples the play offers in

the perversion of the social order, a princess being married to a peasant. The first

picture we receive of Electra is that of a girl engrossed in her own self-martyrdom.

She does not show herself to the audience to be a sympathetic character,

“bearing this jar poised on my head, to fetch

Water from the springs of the rivers.”62

The peasant insists that she does not do the work as she is of noble birth but yet she

feels the need to partake in this activity and lament over her circumstances. G.M.A

Grube believes that the ritual of the peasant insisting that Electra does not do the work

was that of a daily one63. However, he also believes that Electra showed much

appreciation to his kindness, “To me your kindness is the kindness of the gods.”64 I

believe that she is to some extent grateful of the peasants thoughtfulness, but later on

in the play she is very condescending towards him when he invites Orestes and

Pylades into his home,

“You fool, you know how bare your

house is. These two guests

Are far above your level.”65

62 Euripides, Electra,, trans P.Vellacott, page 10763 Grube, The Drama of Euripides, page 29964 Euripides, Electra,, trans P.Vellacott, page 10765 Euripides, Electra,, trans P. Vellacott, page 118


W.G. Arnott refers to Electra as being a “superior Princess.”66 This scene gives us an

insight into the hatred Electra feels towards Clytemnestra and Aegisthus, as it is

prevalent in all she does. The fetching of water is even controlled by her utter loathing

of the two of them. Her desire for revenge takes over the most simple of situations,

and her revenge makes everything she does more complicated and difficult. For

Electra it is Clytemnestra who is the murderer. It is this hate of Electra that is her

dominating quality in this tragedy. However, it is interesting to note that Orestes sees

Aegisthus as the murderer,

“murdering my father-

He, and my fiendish-hearted mother.”67

The first picture Orestes has of his sister, (although at this time he does not

know it is her) is that of a lamenting one,

“Quicken your step; the hour grows late.

Walk weeping as you go,

Weeping, weeping.”68

Once again we are faced with her lamentation which ends with her lamenting over the

death of her father. Her hatred for her mother resurfaces as she tells the audience of

the horrific details of his death. The poor state in which she lives, is frequently

mentioned by Electra throughout the play. Electra at points in the play seems obsessed

with her status, and the luxurious aspects of her life that she has lost. When the chorus

66 Arnott, Double the vision: a reading of Euripides’ Electra, page 18367 Euripides, Electra,, trans P.Vellacott, page 10868 Euripides, Electra,, trans P.Vellacott, page 109


wish for Electra to join them in a ritual procession to the temple of Hera, “to walk in

procession to Hera’s temple,”69 her reply is that she is not fit to attend such an event;

she is a princess and her ragged state would not allow her to appear in public. The

chorus even offer to lend her the necessary items, but she rejects their offer; she seems

determined to keep herself apart from the community. Her bitterness towards her

status is yet another motivational reason of hate for her to kill Clytemnestra. These

earlier scenes of the play focus on the grief and isolation of Electra. This grief and

isolation increase the bitterness Electra feels towards Clytemnestra and Aegisthus,

and spurns her on in her desire for revenge. J.T. Sheppard believes that, “she is not

indeed a monster, but she is a thwarted woman, which is often much the same thing…

Simply, she hates her mother, and is anxious for revenge…Cruelty and the thwarting

of her womanhood have made her sour.”70

When Electra is speaking to ‘Orestes friend’ she shows how deep her hatred is

rooted. She tells him how Clytemnestra has made her an outcast. Orestes asks her a

question that is very revealing in her motivations, “Would you be resolute to help him

kill your mother?”71 She answers him, “I would-with the same axe by which my father

died.”72 She shows to him her resolution to kill her mother. Electra gives the

impression to ‘Orestes friend’ that she will do everything in her power to avenge her

father’s death and kill her mother. It is clear that Orestes waits to reveal himself to his

sister, as he can see her overpowering hatred that she feels against her mother. Grube

believes that, “He is not blinded with hysterical hatred as Electra is, and he now

knows the moment he does reveal himself to this unbalanced virago of a sister he will

69 Euripides, Electra,, trans P.Vellacott, page 11070 Sheppard, The Electra Of Euripides, page 13971 Euripides, Electra,, trans P.Vellacott, page 11472 Euripides, Electra,, trans P.Vellacott, page 114


not be allowed further delay but plunged into possibly the most reckless course of

action.”73

Electra tells Orestes of the sorry situation that she has to live in. It is a very

revealing speech, as it is shown that it is the hatred for her mother that nurtures her

revenge, rather than love for her father. Electra’s revenge for her mother is venomous,

she feels unnatural loathing for Clytemnestra. It seems that her virginity, which in

turn has led to her sexual repression and her sense of loneliness have all feed her bitter

and blind hatred for her mother. She discusses all of these things in her speech; she

also compares her terrible state of poverty to the luxurious life of Clytemnestra,

“Meanwhile my mother sits

Lapped in the spoils of Troy.”74

It is interesting that Agamemnon’s grave is mentioned after she whines of her

poverty, and her own self humiliation. By placing Agamemnon last, she is emphasises

her hatred that she feels for Clytemnestra.

Once Orestes and Electra have taken part in their joyful recognition scene,

Orestes then looks to Electra for guidance in what he should do next, “What is my

next step?...What way shall I set out to meet my enemies?”75 Orestes appears weak

and indecisive, compared to Electra who seems strong and in control. The old man

and Orestes then discuss how the murder of Aegisthus should be executed. During

this conversation, Electra makes no comment. It is after this pause in speech from

73 Grube,G.M.A., The Drama of Euripides, page 30274 Euripides, Electra, trans P.Vellacott, page 11575 Euripides, Electra, trans P.Vellacott, page 125


Electra that she utters these shocking words, “The killing of my mother I shall claim

myself.”76 They then switch roles; Orestes remains silent while Electra discusses the

death of their mother with the old man. Her plan is especially horrible and cruel, she

is to send word to Clytemnestra that she had given birth to a son, ten days before, and

it is now the correct time for the birth sacrifices. The plan is horrid, because Electra

knows that she still has Clytemnestra’s affection, “She will come and weep over my

son’s low birth.”77This affection is what seals the plan. At this point, Orestes leaves

her to as he is now ready to kill Aegisthus.

Electra’s instability is re-emphasised when she comes out of the house

hysterical as she does not know who has been killed, she even attempts suicide but is

talked out of it by the chorus until she knows the full details, “That means the sword

for me-now; I must lose no time.”78 Her instability leads to the killing of her mother,

criminal minds lack stability of character. Orestes returns and the dead Aegisthus is

brought out for Electra to see. Electra gives a speech in which she says all of the

things that she would have wished to have said to him, had she ever had the power to

do so while he was alive. This speech is an intensely personal speech that is

dominated by sexual insults; some commentators have suggested that Euripides

intended to portray Electra as frustrated and sexually jealous.79 She abuses Aegisthus,

blaming him for Agamemnon’s death, hinting that he has other mistresses besides

Clytemnestra and calling him a character. Ultimately she is stating that he was not a

real man. The picture of Aegisthus as presented by Electra is not the same as his

actual behaviour in the play. He is described sacrificing respectful to the nymphs and

76 Euripides, Electra, trans P.Vellacott, page 12777 Euripides, Electra, trans P.Vellacott, page 12878 Euripides, Electra,, trans P.Vellacott, page 13179 Baldock, Greek Tragedy, page 108


he kindly invites the strangers to join him. The picture of Aegisthus contrasted against

Electra makes her an even viler character.

When Orestes sees Clytemnestra approaching, Electra comments, “how fine

she is-a carriage, slaves, and her best gown!”80 Electra dominates Orestes, she taunts

him with cowardice, and he asks her the question, “Are we going to kill our

mother?”81 and she replies, “Have you grown soft, as soon as you set eyes on her?”82

Orestes recognises the fact that is wrong to kill Clytemnestra, he even doubts the

oracle from Delphi, yet he is deeply pressurised by Electra to carry out the crime of

matricide, “It is wrong to kill my mother! Yet you said I must.”83 Electra seems to be

asserting the role of the ‘male’ here, and Orestes is being dominating by her, like he is

a woman. But Electra is a woman of tragedy, and is shown to be taking on male

qualities. The long awaited death of Clytemnestra is an occasion Electra has been

yearning for many years.

On Clytemnestra’s arrival we again see the contrast of Electra’s poverty and

the luxury of Clytemnestra. We then find ourselves with a long speech between

Clytemnestra and Electra. Clytemnestra presents herself as a reasonable character, and

she does not seem to be the evil woman that Electra portrayed to us earlier.

Clytemnestra is her speech tries to justify the murder of Agamemnon. After

Clytemnestra has argued her case, Electra is the given the chance to respond to her

mother. She rises to this full of passion; after all she is standing before her real hate,

her real enemy, her mother. This is her last chance before she kills her mother, to give

80 Euripides, Electra, trans P.Vellacott, page 13881 Euripides, Electra,, trans P.Vellacott, page 13882 Euripides, Electra, trans P.Vellacott, page 13883 Euripides, Electra, trans P.Vellacott, page 138


a memorable performance. It seems as if in this dialogue between mother and

daughter that Clytemnestra is trying to make peace with her daughter, but Electra is

just mocking her mother. This debate of guilt between Clytemnestra and Electra is

paralleled in Sophocles’ arguments. However, Euripides argument is that of the crime

of matricide. Euripides contrasts the helplessness of Clytemnestra and the ruthlessness

of Electra. Electra destiny is controlled by the hatred she feels towards her mother. It

is the all consuming force that propels her action.

After this tense and dramatic moment between Clytemnestra and Electra, she

enters the house to perform the birthing rituals. Electra then utters evil and horrid

words to her mother,

“Please come in

To our poor house. Take care this smoky wall does not

Dirty your dress. Now you shall offer the gods

The sacrifice that is due now.”84

The next words she speaks have to be some of the most horrific and chilling in all of

Greek Tragedy,

“All is prepared. The sword

Of Sacrifice which felled the bull, by whose side you

You shall be his bride whose bed you shared in life.

This ‘favour’ is all I grant you. In return I take

84 Euripides, Electra, trans P.Vellacott, page 144


Justice, your life in payment for my father’s life.”85

We hear the cries of Clytemnestra from the house, begging her children not to kill her.

Electra and Orestes leave the house appalled by what they have done. We learn that

they killed their mother together, “And I held the sword, my hand beside yours.”86

Through their utterances, we learn that it was Electra who was the most eager to

plunge their sword into their mother’s chest. They both leave the house and recognise

the burden of their responsibility, especially Electra. She finally recognises what her

hatred towards her mother meant. She says to Castor,

“Then what of me? No Apollo,

No Oracle named me

As my mother’s destined murderer.”87

The play does not end in triumph; it ends in degradation, guilt and misery. The chorus

reveal that Electra forced Orestes against his will to carry out the deed. One feels

sadness for Electra when she says,

“As we wrap this cloak around you

We love you, though we hated you.”88

Castor and Pollux the divine brothers of Clytemnestra appear and reveal the fortunes

of Electra and Orestes. Orestes and Electra now have to part from one another; there

85 Euripides, Electra, trans P.Vellacott, page 14486 Euripides, Electra, trans P.Vellacott, page 14787 Euripides, Electra, trans P.Vellacott, page 14788 Euripides, Electra,, trans P.Vellacott, page 148


is an element of sadness as they have after all just found one another again after all

these years. The tragedy of Electra is that she was so blind in her hatred; she did not

understand what her actions would really mean. It is only after the murder of her

mother, she fully understands what her hatred has driven her to do.

Euripides’ Electra is on stage for sixth sevenths of the play and dominates the

action throughout, although the focus of her dominance is on the matricide.89

Throughout the play we see Electra’s hatred, her suffering, her loss of royal status and

her attachment to her father. Euripides is presenting Electra as a tragic figure. He

condemns the matricide, but presents it to us as a moral error, that the gods and

historical circumstances, and present situation added to; it was not simply her

character.90 Masaaki Kubo believes that, “the play is an attack upon Aeschylus; that

the attack has been launched from a modernistic ground; and that Euripides, pursuing

his relentless realism, denigrated the spirit of tragedy and degraded it to study of

criminal psychology. But…Euripides heroine turned out to be a pugnacious woman

who savagely wants to slaughter her own mother.”91 While I do not agree that

Euripides was attacking Aeschylus, I do agree that the Electra Euripides has created is

that of a mentally unbalanced woman, who is fixated on the death of her father. Many

times throughout the play, I felt repulsed by the characteristics that Electra chose to

display. Electra is portrayed a young, volatile and unstable, she shows signs of

extreme emotionalism, in her constant lamenting and also through the suicidal anxiety

she shows near the end of the play. Grubb believes that Euripides has laid bare the

distorted soul of Electra.92

89 Cropp, M.J., Euripides: Electra, page xxxv90 Cropp, M.J., Euripides: Electra, page xxxviii91 Kubo, M., The Norm of Myth:Euripides’ Electra, page 1592 Grube,G.M.A., The Drama of Euripides, page 314


Despite the clear wrongs that have been done to Electra, I believe that we

cannot sympathise with her because of Euripides presentation of her as a vile

character. He presents her reasons for lamenting as trivial; this is shown most clearly

in the clear contrast between the unusually nice Aegisthus and Clytemnestra. We also

see her treatment of her husband and her bullying of Orestes over the matricide.

J.W.Halporn sees, “the true motive for the murder of Clytemnestra as nothing more

than the personal humiliation of Electra, combined with the very human emotions of

malice, resentment, and hatred.”93 In this way Euripides has removed the honourable

aspects of the revenge, thus leaving it as purely criminal. The idea of avenging their

father’s death because of honour is no longer there, it is the hatred that Electra feels

towards her mother than propels her in her violent crimes.

93 Halporn, The Skeptical Electra, page 101


Conclusion

Through our discussions of the character of Electra, I have shown how the

treatment of one myth has been dealt with by Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides.

Each one has taken this myth and created an individual spin with their dramatic

technique to make it gripping, stimulating and thrilling for the audience. In these

discussions, I have not purposefully compared and contrasted the figure of Electra.

However, I will briefly do so in some comparison to end these discussions.

In Aeschylus we see the figure of Electra in the background of the action, as

she is not in the whole play. Her main role is to support her brother, and give him

confidence in his actions. Sophocles takes this role presented to him by Aeschylus and

transforms her into a domineering heroine, who takes the role of supporter to her

brother beyond necessity. We have discussed the various dramatic techniques that

Sophocles used in making Electra the main tragic character in a myth that previously

she has little involvement with. We then see Euripides’ response to this, and how he

treated the character of Electra as a bitter young woman who was fuelled with hatred

towards her mother, she is presented as more of a pathological creature than heroic.

Euripides condemns the matricide, so the presentation of Electra is a lot less

sympathetic than that of Sophocles.

This piece of work has aimed to look at how the female in Greek tragedy

offered the playwright a range of roles. The female character offered a more

emotional position, thus giving greater dramatic action on the stage and for the reader.

The female offered the dramatist a chance to explore tensions, ambiguities and moral


dilemmas through her character. The character of Electra exemplifies all of these in

her presentation by Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides. This tragic female is at the

forefront of the action and violates the boundaries that usually repressed her. By

Aeschylus she is shown as a diffident young girl, by Sophocles as a tragic heroic

character and by Euripides as a tragic bitter woman. All of these representations of

Electra have been shown through a moral dilemma, as a complex ethical situation

always appealed to the Greeks.


Bibliography

Aeschylus, Agamemnon, trans R. Fagles (Penguin 1977)

Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, trans R. Fagles (Penguin 1977)

Arnott, W.G., “Double the vision: a reading of Euripides’ Electra.” Greece and Rome

28 (1981): 179-191

Baldock, M., Greek Tragedy (Bristol Classical Press 1989)

Boardman, J., Athenian Red Figure Vases: The Archaic Period (London Thames and

Hudson 1975)

Boardman, J., The history of Greek vases (London Thames and Hudson 2001)

Conacher, D.J., Aeschylus’ Oresteia: a literary commentary (University of Toronto

Press 1987)

Cropp, M.J., Euripides: Electra (Aris & Phillips 1988)

Ferguson, J., Euripides’ Medea and Electra (Bristol Classical Press 1987)

Foley, H.P., Female Acts in Greek Tragedy (Princeton University Press 2003)


Des Bouvrie, S., Women in tragedy, an anthropological approach (Norwegian

University Press 1990)

Euripides, Medea, Hippolytus, Electra and Helen trans J.Morwood (Clarendon Press

1997)

Euripides, Medea and other plays trans P. Vellacott (Penguin 1963)

Garvie, Choephori: Aeschylus, (Clarendon Press 1986)

Gomme, A.W., “The Position of Women in Classical Athens.” Classical Philology 20

(1925): 1-25

Gould, J., “Law, Custom and Myth: Aspects of the Social Position of Women in

Classical Athens.” Journal of Hellenic Studies 100 (1980): 38-59

Grube, G.M.A., The drama of Euripides (Methuen 1941)

Halporn, J.W., “The sceptical Electra.” Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 87

(1983): 101-118

Kirkwood, G. M., “Two Structural Feature of Sophocles’ Electra.” Transactions and

Proceedings of the American Philological Association 73 (1942): 85-95


Kubo, M., “The norm of myth: Euripides’ Electra.” Harvard Studies in Classical

Philology 71 (1966): 15-31

Lekowitz, M.R., Fant, M.B., Women’s life in Greece & Rome: a source book in

translation (Duckworth 1992)

McClure, L., Spoken like a woman: speech and gender in Athenian drama (Princeton

University Press 1999)

Pomeroy, S.B., Goddesses, whores, wives and slaves: women in classical antiquity

(Pimlico 1994)

Ringer, M., Electra and the empty urn: metatheater and role playing in Sophocles

(University of North Carolina Press 1998)

Sheppard, J.T., “The Electra of Euripides.” The Classical Review 32 (1918): 137-141

Sophocles, Electra and other plays trans E.F. Watling (Penguin 1953)

Thucydides, History II, edited with translation and commentary by P.J. Rhodes ( Aris

& Phillips 1988)

Williams, D., Greek Vases (British Museum Publications 1985)


title page · web viewthe electra of euripides page 35 7 conclusion page 46 8 bibliography page 48...

Documents