Orestes

It is evident in everything that this is a piece by the mature Euripides. It was performed in 408 BCE, one or two years before his death (the exact date of which we do not know), when he was already well into his 70s. The composition is quite complex, with a long build-up in which verbal passages predominate, and a very dynamic and even a bit chaotic final section brimming with dramatic action.

As in the Orestes plays by Aeschyles and Sophocles (in his case, specifically in the play titled Electra), the question of the justice of revenge is central. After all, Orestes, together with his sister Electra and his friend Pylades, murdered his mother Clytemnestra because she had murdered her husband (and thus Orestes’ father). In Euripides, show more we see once again a wavering Orestes who is well aware of what he has done and anxiously awaits the consequences, to see whether he can escape divine justice (in the form of the goddesses of vengeance, the Erinyes) or human justice (the court at Argos). It comes to a (secular) trial in which all the arguments for and against are laid out once again, and ultimately a condemnation follows.

What is new in Euripides is that, for the first time, arguments of reason are explicitly addressed in that trial (the spiral of blood revenge must be brought to an end by applying alternative punishments such as banishment). And ultimately, it is not divine law, but secular law that prevails (a murderer must undergo the consequences of his deed, according to the letter of the law), although some leniency is applied.

The strange thing is that in the final part, Euripides then shows how blind hatred leads to complete derailment. At the instigation of his friend Pylades and his sister Electra, a violent plan of desperation is carried out, which unfolds in chaotic fashion and, strangely enough, is narrated through the eyes of a Phrygian slave, a complete outsider. It all ends rather suddenly, with Apollo, acting as a literal Deus ex Machina, settling the matter amicably.

In this play, Euripides introduces a tangle of narrative elements and themes that do not all come into their own equally well, but which nevertheless make this play one of the most interesting in his oeuvre.

There are also several historically interesting aspects, which are discussed in the review on my History account on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/8592190196.

Disclaimer: I'm reading and reviewing all classic ancient Greek plays, more or less in chronological order. But I'm not giving a rating. How could I, given their age? I'll make an exception only when a play is exceptional and still strikes an emotional and/or intellectual chord. show less

My tepid rating of this play is due in part to the translation by Theodore Buckley (this is the most commonly available one in the public domain) & partly due to Euripides' writing. I read this as part of the Kindle omnibus, "The Tragedies Of Euripides Volume I" and also listened along to the Librivox recording.

While the plot of this play includes a considerable amount of bloody action, it almost all takes place off stage. This is basically a "talking" play -- the various characters tell each other about the action rather than portray it. Because of this, the late Victorian style of Buckley's translation has a large impact on the effect of the play on the reader. I found that in some passages, I was drifting off even as murder and show more revenge were being discussed.

I would recommend anyone considering this play to seek out a more modern translation. The plot itself is quite interesting, dealing with fate & punishment, revenge & murder. show less

My tepid rating of this play is due in part to the translation by Theodore Buckley (this is the most commonly available one in the public domain) & partly due to Euripides' writing. I read this as part of the Kindle omnibus, "The Tragedies Of Euripides Volume 1" and also listened along to the Librivox recording.

While the plot of this play includes a considerable amount of bloody action, it almost all takes place off stage. This is basically a "talking" play -- the various characters tell each other about the action rather than portray it. Because of this, the late Victorian style of Buckley's translation has a large impact on the effect of the play on the reader. I found that in some passages, I was drifting off even as murder and show more revenge were being discussed.

I would recommend anyone considering this play to seek out a more modern translation. The plot itself is quite interesting, dealing with fate & punishment, revenge & murder. show less

Goodness, this is blood drenched. And I'm not sure I follow the logic behind it.