I took the opportunuty to peruse the other comments before my review just to see the focus of the comments. I don't find fault with any but the review should be about Hughes' adaptation. The story is 2500 years old no need to retell it here.

Hughes is not chained to the original as Fagles is. But in fairness to both their reasons for translating are different. Ted did it for a stage performance by the royal National Theatre and Fagles has done it for academia.

Hughes' poetic background shines throughout this "translation". Clytemnestra dialog is outstanding and Agamemnon's dialog is perceptive, raw and refreshing. C-- You are afraid of the rable's disapproval. A -- Do you mean the rabble or the people. Seeing this on stage must have been a real treat to the ears and the mind.

Most interesting to me through is Hughes' portayal of the Furies in The Eumenides. Hughes portays them as so perceptive and cutting in their insight. The ending -- which all the classics experts love because it shows that raw vengence has been supplanted by law and community blah blah blah thank god for tenure -- is trite even in Hughes's able hands. I don't care what all the pundits say. This play should end with the Furies unsympetheitc to Athene's sophist arguments. I do understand the play functioned as an instructional tool for society at that time but the ending is sophmoric and I'm sure the viewers felt this way 2500 years ago. Go back in your hole but we will love you.

I believe Hughes' really hints at this by not repeating the furies comments which has a tendency to make them mechanized and less perceptive. I would have loved Hughes to take the liberty of doing as Racine had done in Phaedra: retell the tale and prove to everyone that Orestes and Athene and Apollo's arguments are casuistic. Oh well, we will have to leave it to the next set of able hands. Wonderful book a great read! ( )

Phenomonal to the point that it made me hysterical after reading each drama. I had to take a break from each play just to make sure I'd savored it properly.

If I were a Greek queen, would I be as ruthless as Clytemnestra? Dare I say yes? ( )

Aeschylus (525-456 BC) is the father of Greek tragedies. Of the seventy tragedies that he wrote, only seven have survived to the present day. These three plays form the most complete tetralogy that we have (a tetralogy contained three tragedies and one satyr play--a semi-religious, semi-mocking performance that acted as a postlude to the tragic trilogy)--only the satyr play is missing.

In Agamemnon, the Greek king returns from the Trojan War, with his prize of the Trojan prophetess Cassandra. Cassandra knows that Agamemnon's wife, Clytemnestra, will kill them, but she is fated to be not be believed. And so, the deed is done.

In The Libation Bearers, Clytemnestra has a nightmare that she gave birth to a snake, and so she sends her daughter Electra to Agamemnon's grave to pour out a libation. However, Electra meets her brother, Orestes, and the two plot revenge upon their mother, and her loved. And so, murder begets murder.

In The Eumenides, Orestes is fleeing the Furies, who are pursuing him for murdering his mother. Orestes flees to Apollo, who sends him on to Athens, to be judged by Athena herself.

This volume has the well-known Lattimore translation which sound find tendentious. I believe it is acceptable and corresponds well enough to the original Greek. At some point a more in-depth comparison between various translations may be revealing but this one is serviceable.

I love Agamemnon. I don't know if it's because I read it in high school, so it has a special place in my heart, but I really just love Agamemnon. ( )

My interest in reading what I knew would be a difficult play grew from good old Harry Potter. In case you’ve been living under a rock, J.K. Rowling studied Classic Literature at the University of Exeter and she prefaces her final novel in the Potter canon with a section from The Oresteia by Aeschylus:

“Oh, the torment bred in the race,
the grinding scream of death
and the stroke that hits the vein,
the hemorrhage none can staunch, the grief,
the curse no man can bear.
But there is a cure in the house
and not outside it, no,
not from others but from them,
their bloody strife. We sing to you,
dark gods beneath the earth.
Now hear, you blissful powers underground—
answer the call, send help.
Bless the children, give them triumph now.”

But I’m not here to obsess over Rowling’s intent; there are plenty of sites to google that will debate Rowling’s intent. I’m first here to proclaim how difficult and intense reading a Classic Greek tragedy can be without a decent translation. My copy is the Penguin Classics version translated by Robert Fagles. After much frustration, I ended up jumping between my copy and an eBook version by Ian Johston. For me, Johnston’s version was an easier read. Since I’d read the first story, Agememnon, many years ago while attending Indiana State University, I did a brief review and then began The Libation Bearers.
Basically, The Libation Bearers bears all the archetypal Greek themes. There’s blood and death, sex and adultery, confused identity, matricide, snakes and oracles, agony and despair…. Greek tragedy at its highest form. If you’ve missed the Greek Tragedy bandwagon, this is a great place to start. The Oresteia has influenced innumerable writers and is a constant theme in popular culture.

Aside from Rowling’s use, one of my son’s favorite bands, A Perfect Circle, has adapted the play into a song; both T.S. Eliot and Sylvia Plath have used it as their muse, and there are many stage adaptations that present the themes in both traditional and modern settings.

I can’t say that I enjoyed The Libation Bearers, after all, how can you enjoy such a thing? But it was interesting and brought back knowledge I’d forgotten I had crawling between my ears.

Review first published on Many A Quaint & Curious Volume
© Tasses 2007-2009