Classical Irony

[slyc_willie]

I was watching a show on one of the history channels tonight, regarding the story of Orpheus. I was glad that the expert commentators -- historians -- got the story right.

For those who don't know the story off the top of their heads, let me explain. No, there is too much. I will sum up.

Orpheus' wife, Eurydice, is accosted by nature spirits in the form of satyrs. They chase her until she falls into a nest of vipers. She gets bitten on the heel and dies (the Greeks, I've noticed, seem to have a morbid foot fetish; Eurydice, Achilles, and so on).

Upon finding his wife's body, Orpheus sings such a soulful litany that the spirits are touched. They encourage him to take his plight to Hades, lord of the underworld, and ask that his wife be returned. Orpheus does so, but Hades refuses. Undaunted, Orpheus more or less seduces Persephone, Hades' wife with his lyrics. She agrees to let Orpheus take Eurydice out of the underworld.

But on a condition: Orpheus must always walk ahead of his wife, and never look back until they are both back in the world of the living.

And that's where a lot of the interpretations of the myth get it wrong. In a lot of later versions (written during the Renaissance), Orpheus is so joyful that he has emerged from the underworld that he looks back to help Eurydice with her final steps. But, as she is still, technically, in the underworld, she is instantly reclaimed and returned to hell forevermore.

No. No. And again, no.

The idea that Orpheus has made it and only wishes to encourage his wife those last few steps takes away the impact that the nature of the story is one about faith. It erases the nature of faith and replaces it with human stupidity.

The entire point of having Orpheus walk before his wife, without looking back at her as they climb through the caves of the underworld, is to illustrate the power of faith. Orpheus is depicted as a man gallantly in love with his wife, so much so that he is willing to brave a confrontation with Hades in order to get her back. This sets him on a course of action that supremely tests not only his faith in himself, but in his wife as well.

Persephone, Hades' wife, is no stranger to irony, despair, and loss. She gave in to her husband's deception and, as a result, must dwell three months out of each year in the dismal abyss of the underworld. No doubt she looks at life with a certain cynical angle. So when she tells Orpheus to walk ahead of his wife and not look back, she is telling him, "trust in yourself, and in your wife, and you will both be free."

But Orpheus can't bear it. Climbing up from the bowels of hell with his wife behind him, doubt begins to set in. The longer he climbs, the greater the doubt becomes. Finally, he gives in to the fear that his wife has given up. He doubts his wife's faith. And that is his downfall. Doubting that his wife's devotion is as strong as his compromises his own faith, and they are both doomed. Ironically, Orpheus proves he does not have enough faith in either himself or his wife.

He looks back, and Eurydice is dragged back to hell for eternity. And Orpheus is left with the pain of his decision.

If only he had just kept looking upward and forward, to the life that awaited them. If only he'd had enough faith, not only himself, but in his wife.

Ah, the irony of the Greeks.

 

[NaokoSmith]

Yes, the faithless Greeks!

For the Greeks, tragedy lay in inherent characteristics. This doesn't emerge so strongly in the Orpheus stories but in other stories, we see a tragic fatalism. A certain set of events is set in motion. Characters strive to do what they can to escape a doom they see coming on them. However, owing to some inherent flaw - in classic Greece actually a good side to their character, they can't help bringing the doom upon themselves. There's a particularly poignant irony because it's a good side to the character which can ultimately bring about tragedy.

Hamlet, for example, is a thoughtful and intelligent Prince. But what Denmark needs is some strongarm thug (Fortinbras - fort, strong, in and bras,arms). Hamlet's sensitive deliberations and failure to take up arms and act lead to the deaths and downfall of pretty much everybody.

Still, it's a good story, whereas some boring saga about a strongarm thug just striding in, taking the women under his arm and carrying them off ...

Excuse me a minute, sudden need to lie down.

 

[slyc_willie]

Yes, the faithless Greeks!

For the Greeks, tragedy lay in inherent characteristics. This doesn't emerge so strongly in the Orpheus stories but in other stories, we see a tragic fatalism. A certain set of events is set in motion. Characters strive to do what they can to escape a doom they see coming on them. However, owing to some inherent flaw - in classic Greece actually a good side to their character, they can't help bringing the doom upon themselves. There's a particularly poignant irony because it's a good side to the character which can ultimately bring about tragedy.

Hamlet, for example, is a thoughtful and intelligent Prince. But what Denmark needs is some strongarm thug (Fortinbras - fort, strong, in and bras,arms). Hamlet's sensitive deliberations and failure to take up arms and act lead to the deaths and downfall of pretty much everybody.

Still, it's a good story, whereas some boring saga about a strongarm thug just striding in, taking the women under his arm and carrying them off ...

Excuse me a minute, sudden need to lie down.

I don't think the Greeks were at all faithless. I think they fully understood the nature of faith, but denied it. Logic was the rule of the day, even if they harbored a certain fascination, even a wistful longing, for those who followed the ideals of faith. The idea that something could not be explained was anathema to them. So, they expressed their frustrations through tragedy, comedy, and, above all, irony.

They tried to explain what they could not explain. And that's the gist of it: you can't explain what faith is, just what it does.

And, I'm sure that's going to result in a few posts about the "evils of faith (i.e. religion)" . . . .

 

[NaokoSmith]

I don't think the Greeks were at all faithless. I think they fully understood the nature of faith, but denied it. Logic was the rule of the day, even if they harbored a certain fascination, even a wistful longing, for those who followed the ideals of faith. The idea that something could not be explained was anathema to them. So, they expressed their frustrations through tragedy, comedy, and, above all, irony.

They tried to explain what they could not explain. And that's the gist of it: you can't explain what faith is, just what it does.

And, I'm sure that's going to result in a few posts about the "evils of faith (i.e. religion)" . . . .

I'm very slowly reading The Iliad at the moment and I'm struck by how different their attitudes are, say in terms of who they might be 'faithful' towards and who gets to be 'faithful' to whom. Particularly the women, who are expected to be carried off in a war by any victorious men. Then they expect to be faithful to those men. Occasionally there's a hint that someone got attached to a particular person but it isn't as important as being owned by some bloke who socked the bloke you were previously faithful to over the head with a bronze axe or something.

LOL.

 

[slyc_willie]

I'm very slowly reading The Iliad at the moment and I'm struck by how different their attitudes are, say in terms of who they might be 'faithful' towards and who gets to be 'faithful' to whom. Particularly the women, who are expected to be carried off in a war by any victorious men. Then they expect to be faithful to those men. Occasionally there's a hint that someone got attached to a particular person but it isn't as important as being owned by some bloke who socked the bloke you were previously faithful to over the head with a bronze axe or something.

LOL.

There's a lot of mish-mash in Greek poetry and stories regarding faith and faithfulness. They aren't the same thing. When Penelope wouldn't marry another man, even though Odysseus was considered dead, it wasn't faithfulness to Odysseus that kept her chaste, but faith that he would return and reclaim his kingdom.

When Leonidas' wife (possibly Gorgo) agreed to a dalliance with the traitorous Spartan counselor, it was to buy her husband time. Her faith in her husband overrode her sexual faithfulness (which, among the Greeks, was pretty open; regardless of what the movie '300' might have espoused, the Spartans were 'boy-lovers,' too).

Faith is a degree of belief. Faithfulness is a function of exclusivity.

 

[steve44uk]

I'm very slowly reading The Iliad at the moment and I'm struck by how different their attitudes are, say in terms of who they might be 'faithful' towards and who gets to be 'faithful' to whom. Particularly the women, who are expected to be carried off in a war by any victorious men. Then they expect to be faithful to those men. Occasionally there's a hint that someone got attached to a particular person but it isn't as important as being owned by some bloke who socked the bloke you were previously faithful to over the head with a bronze axe or something.

LOL.

My understanding of "faithless" in this context is more to do with their inherent untrustworthiness than their lack of religion.

 

[NaokoSmith]

My understanding of "faithless" in this context is more to do with their inherent untrustworthiness than their lack of religion.

Ah yes, Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

 

[steve44uk]

Ah yes, Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

Precisely. QED.

 

[MatthewVett]

There's a lot of mish-mash in Greek poetry and stories regarding faith and faithfulness. They aren't the same thing. When Penelope wouldn't marry another man, even though Odysseus was considered dead, it wasn't faithfulness to Odysseus that kept her chaste, but faith that he would return and reclaim his kingdom.

When Leonidas' wife (possibly Gorgo) agreed to a dalliance with the traitorous Spartan counselor, it was to buy her husband time. Her faith in her husband overrode her sexual faithfulness (which, among the Greeks, was pretty open; regardless of what the movie '300' might have espoused, the Spartans were 'boy-lovers,' too).

Faith is a degree of belief. Faithfulness is a function of exclusivity.

I, uh, think you're mixing up your history there. Gorgo was definitely Leonidas's wife, but the whole traitorous Spartan counselor thing isn't actual history. It's possible, but considering that Spartan money was made of giant, purposefully-crappy iron ingots, so horrible for every purpose that most traders avoided Sparta, suddenly receiving a lot of golden coins that are clearly Persian would have set off a few alarm bells.

Queen Gorgo, though, is historically pretty awesome: daughter, wife, and mother of three different kings, and she has more "sayings" than any other Spartan woman in Plutarch: http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Moralia/Sayings_of_Spartan_Women*.html

As for sexual faithfulness among the Spartans, they had a lot, and they had none, depending on your definition. Adultery was famously rare.

So strict in those times was the virtue of the women, and so far removed from the laxity of morals which later affected them, that in the earlier days the idea of adultery among them was an incredible thing. There is still recalled a saying of a certain Geradatas, a Spartan of the very early times, who, on being asked by a foreigner what was done to adulterers in their country, since he saw that there had been no legislation by Lycurgus on that subject, said, "Sir, there is never an adulterer in our country." But when the other retorted with, "Yes, but if there should be?" Geradatas said, "His penalty is to provide an enormous bull which by stretching his neck over Mount Taygetus can drink from the river Eurotas." And when the other in amazement said, "But how could there ever be a bull of that size?" Geradatas laughed and said, "But how could there ever be an adulterer in Sparta, in which wealth and luxury and adventitious aids to beauty are held in disesteem, and respect and good order and obedience to authority are given the highest place?"

However, at the same time, spouse swapping was commonplace, and it wasn't rare for a husband to allow another man whom he respected to sire a child by his wife.

As for being boy-lovers, yep, pretty much all of Greece was, although the Spartans were much less gung ho about it than the Athenians, by most accounts. They were, however, notorious for their love of anal sex, with both men and women. Interesting, yeah?

 

[MatthewVett]

I'm very slowly reading The Iliad at the moment and I'm struck by how different their attitudes are, say in terms of who they might be 'faithful' towards and who gets to be 'faithful' to whom. Particularly the women, who are expected to be carried off in a war by any victorious men. Then they expect to be faithful to those men. Occasionally there's a hint that someone got attached to a particular person but it isn't as important as being owned by some bloke who socked the bloke you were previously faithful to over the head with a bronze axe or something.

LOL.

How are you enjoying it so far? I've still never read it... I'm awful. I like all the little side stories about the Trojan War. There's one story that Helen was actually in Egypt the whole time, and the whole war was even more pointless than it appeared. And then oodles of nations claimed descent from the Trojans, like the British with Brutus and the Romans with Aeneas. It's like, the event that began fanfiction.

 

[3113]

You got it backwards--the faithful are holding onto power

I don't think the Greeks were at all faithless. I think they fully understood the nature of faith, but denied it. Logic was the rule of the day

That doesn't make sense to me--though I admit I'm working from a bias here. If logic was the rule of the day, why all those temples to the gods, including that huge one on Athens? Why were people from all over Greece and the world listening to the predictions made by a bunch of drugged girls at Delphi? If logic was the rule of the day, why do we find all kinds of magical curses and such carved on rocks all over Greece?

I suspect it was the opposite. Logic was NOT the rule of the day, not, at least as we view it. Magic and absolute belief in higher and greater powers was the rule of the day. And faith was a no-brainer. And what that means to me is that this is a story written by the powerful (those with faith) against the minority that they feared might lure away their children away from faith (the logicians), not a single, persecuted believer in faith fighting against what everyone else was into (logic, the rule of the day).

I mean, imagine someone looking back on us from a few thousand years; they'd probably says "Logic was the rule of the day" or we believed in science....and point to our stories as evidence of someone trying to change that. But the truth is, the U.S. is a nation of "faith." And the biggest most popular shows on television are the ones that support the majority, not ones that are lone voices rebelling against that majority. These shows are all about "validate my feelings" rather than "do what is logical and has evidence." Watch "Homeland" sometime. No matter that the heroine has no evidence for what she thinks and doesn't make sense, the woman, who is usually ranting hysterically, is always right.

This is the "validate my feeling and trust me" motif that is hugely popular with us. Never mind science, logic, common sense...what we feel (intuit) is right. And when it comes to kids shows or holiday shows, the theme is always a battle between the person who says, "There is no Santa/magic" and the kid or someone who says "you've just go to believe! You've got to have faith." And the person with belief and faith is always right.

Now, obviously, there is no poll showing how many Greeks were into logic vs. magic and faith, and so I could be wrong, but logical Plato was put to death for "corrupting the youth" and so many of the stories *do* argue for faith over logic--which argues the popularity of faith, because if logic was so popular, why no stories or plays about logic? So when I see this story, I don't see some lone voice in the wilderness begging cold logicians to have faith. I see a member from a temple full of evangelicals reaffirming his belief in magic and faith and feelings; and taking to task a pitiful handful of logicians who are arguing otherwise, and telling them to join the majority or else!

 

[NaokoSmith]

How are you enjoying it so far? I've still never read it... I'm awful. I like all the little side stories about the Trojan War. There's one story that Helen was actually in Egypt the whole time, and the whole war was even more pointless than it appeared. And then oodles of nations claimed descent from the Trojans, like the British with Brutus and the Romans with Aeneas. It's like, the event that began fanfiction.

Gasp! in Egypt? but there's a whole scene where she kicks Paris up the bum and says, "You lazy cowardly slacker, get out there and fight before my husband comes along to give me one too."

Phwoar, it's full of muscular men standing about in statuesque poses before plunging some weapon into some other muscular man, all the way through his shield and his corslet and then some other bit of protective gear, into the very middle of his ribcage (long string of gross details). It's a winner! Er, I mean it's very interesting how physical some of the descriptions can be, and the rhyme and metre are very interesting.

3113, you may want to consider the distinction between scientific rationality and logic. Post Enlightenment, we all rely on observed scientific law for judging how to go on in the universe as we know it. The universe as the Greeks knew it was full of anomalous events which they explained as the result of divine jealousy or boredom. "Gods I'm bored today, I think I'll top off a few of my half-brother's most fervent worshippers, then he'll be pissed off and start a war with me and we will no longer be bored." In such a realm of being, it is logical to say: "Well, I want to appeal to Apollo and I know he's a leg man so I will pay off some half-drunken nymphettes to prance about showing their legs off, then he will look favourably on my prayer."

Where is Ogg, or CarlusMagnus? I was hoping they would come and remember the word for Greek tragic irony so I don't have to google it. I haven't got time now, I have to cook tea and run out the door to the Piglet's synchronised swimming lesson, I'll go into Seldom Used Words and give them a nudge.

 

[oggbashan]

Hubris

This Wiki article is a reasonable summary of the traditions of Greek tragedy.

What the Greeks understood by Classical Irony is that the audience KNEW the plot, knew that the protagonist(s) were going to meet disaster, not because of their innate evil, but because of who they are.

There was no punishment of evil in the Christian sense, but an inevitability that a tragedy will end badly.

 

[MatthewVett]

Gasp! in Egypt? but there's a whole scene where she kicks Paris up the bum and says, "You lazy cowardly slacker, get out there and fight before my husband comes along to give me one too."

From Wikipedia...

"At least three Ancient Greek authors denied that Helen ever went to Troy; instead, they suggested, Helen stayed in Egypt during the duration of the Trojan War. Those three authors are Euripides, Stesichorus, and Herodotus. In the version put forth by Euripides in his play Helen, Hera fashioned a likeness of Helen (eidolon, εἴδωλον) out of clouds at Zeus' request, Hermes took her to Egypt, and Helen never went to Troy, spending the entire war in Egypt. Eidolon is also present in Stesichorus' account, but not in Herodotus' rationalizing version of the myth.
Herodotus adds weight to the "Egyptian" version of events by putting forward his own evidence—he traveled to Egypt and interviewed the priests of the temple of (Foreign Aphrodite, ξείνης Ἀφροδίτης) at Memphis. According to these priests, Helen had arrived in Egypt shortly after leaving Sparta, because strong winds had blown Paris's ship off course. King Proteus of Egypt, appalled that Paris had seduced his host's wife and plundered his host's home in Sparta, disallowed Paris from taking Helen to Troy. Paris returned to Troy without a new bride, but the Greeks refused to believe that Helen was in Egypt and not within Troy's walls. Thus, Helen waited in Memphis for ten years, while the Greek and the Trojans fought. Following the conclusion of the Trojan War, Menelaus sailed to Memphis, where Proteus reunited him with Helen."

Another thing to remember is that Helen of Troy is really Helen of Sparta, a city famed for the beauty of its women.

 

[NaokoSmith]

Well, Matthew, all I can say is, she has a lot of dialogue in The Iliad, for a woman who is actually in Egypt! I was able to finish Chapt. 13 in the swimming pool cafe. Lots of splendid bronze-breasted men driving spears through carefully named organs of the body as well as interesting metaphors revealing much about agricultural practices of the time.

Ogg, thank you so much for that much more lucid account. My mind is distracted by fish fingers and synchronous piglets tonight. Never mind my students' essays.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

The events of the Iliad were a good five hundred years or more before the Classical Era. Classical Greek authors hadn't a clue about what was going on back in Mycenean times. Hell, they didn't even speak the same language. And the Iliad and Odyssey were oral sagae for centuries before anyone wrote them down. There's no evidence that there even was a Helen though some of the other protagonists in the story are are corroborated by Akkadian accounts.

As to the question of logic vs belief in Greece. People who wrote things down, i.e. were literate, may have been philosophical and logical but the vast majority weren't and weren't. So while philosophy and logic may have influence on us, they didn't have much on the population as a whole. Very superstitious and magical place, Ancient Greece. Also remember that the philosophical reputation of the place rests on about a hundred years in one city, Athens. Greek culture was spread all over the Mediterranean and clear out to the Black Sea.

And it was Socrates who was condemned to death, not Plato.