What poet to bring back from the dead; The Frogs, Aristophanes

Why you might read The Frogs?

This is a quirky little play about what makes good tragic poetry. It has little to do with frogs and just has them as a chorus during the ferry ride to Hades. It is a very accessible play and an easy read. It does help to know a little about the Greek gods and poets but it is by no means necessary. The play does a good job at introducing its characters for those without this background. 

Synopsis of The Frogs

Dionysis is missing Euripides and decides to go to the underworld and retrieve him. With his servant, he goes to Hercules to find out the way to Hades. Hercules comically lists ways for him to kill himself. He does eventually tell Dionysis and reminds him he will have to pay the ferryman.

On coming to the ferry, the ferryman will not let his servant in the boat. The servant is forced to walk around. While on the boat Dionysis must listen to the chorus of frogs. This is where the name of the play comes from but it is not an important part of the story.

When he arrives in Hades Dionysis finds that there is a squabble. Pluto lets the best of a given area sit at his table. The seat for tragedy is being disputed between Euripides and Aeschylus.

Dionysis gets involved as the judge and a competition ensues. Dionysis has them each weigh various quotes from the works on a pair of scales. Aeschylus is declared victor every time. Dionysis decides he doesn't want Euripides back but rather Aeschylus. Aeschylus give his seat at Plutos table to Sophocles as his second. Aeschylus and Dionysis leave Hades.

Reflections on The Frogs

Dionysis and good of wine and women is an odd choice for the protagonist. This is especially true when he chooses the more serious and weighty of the two poets of tragedy. His servant only exists to provide a foil to Dionysis in the first half of the play. He is also the butt of most of the jokes. He is then almost completely forgotten in the second.

The idea of weighing pieces of poetry is very interesting. Even more interesting is how Dionysis judges. He bases it on not the quality of the verse but the weight of the subjects. Maybe that would seem more normal to the ancient audience but to me, that seems a little backwards. The better verse should be the one better constructed. 

Dionysis choosing to take Aeschylus back to the land of the living is a good resolution of his quest. If he had taken Euripides it would seem out of place to have judged Aeschylus the winner and then leave him in Hades.

What others have to say about The Frogs

"The underlying theme of "The Frogs" is essentially "old ways good, new ways bad", and that Athens should turn back to men of known integrity who were brought up in the style of noble and wealthy families, a common refrain in Aristophanes' plays." From Classical Literature

"As can be obvious from the parabasis and the exodos, The Frogs is also a very political comedy. Aristophanes couldn’t have known that Athens was about to lose the Peloponnesian War against Sparta" From Greek Mythology

Comparisons with other texts

Like most of Aristophanes' works, The Frogs is full of jokes and absurdities. Like The Acharnians it is about the politics surrounding the Peloponnesian War. The Frogs comes much later in the conflict. His audience though is no less war-weary with The Acharnians.

Thucydides covers the context of the war in his piece titled The Peloponnesian War. He deals with it in terms of history. Facts, Figures and Battles. Unlike Aristophanes who deals with the internal politics of Athens.

Conclusion

The Frogs has very little to do with frogs. It is instead a comedy about what is good poetry. Dionysis is especially after a poet to inspire fortitude in the Athenians. In the process, it takes us to Hades along the path Hercules took.  It both takes the idea of tragic poetry quite seriously and yet makes fun of its writers at any chance it gets. In all a good little comedy with a satisfying ending.

Have you read The Frogs? If so what did you think of it? 

 

Want to read The Frogs but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of The Frogs. 

What happens if we put the women in charge; The Assemblywomen, Aristophanes

 Why you might read The Assemblywomen?

The Assemblywomen is another of Aristophanes' plays about the upset of normal proceedings. In this case, we see the women take charge by taking power. It shows us the first mention in literature of what will come to be known as communism. Being still a comedy it is full of the absurd and is an enjoyable read.

Story of The Assemblywomen

The Assemblywomen starts with a group of women plotting to go to the assembly dressed as men. They steal their husband's cloaks, shoes and staves. They collect together plotting to speak at the assembly. They hope to get the men to pass the control over to the women. They hope that this can stop the war with Sparta and create a better Athens.

Their husbands come out while they are gone. They complain of their missing cloaks and missing going to assembly because they get paid to go. They discuss how you must go early to the assembly otherwise it is full and you don't get paid if you don't get in.

The women return and tell of how they spoke loudly and enthusiastically at the assembly. As a result, they got the women appointed in charge. Praxagora, our main character, is put in charge and proposes sweeping changes. These changes include having all property in common and doing communal meals.

The men discuss the changes and one is going to turn over his goods. The other however is waiting until other people do before complying himself. He also tries to persuade the other to wait. But when it comes to food he is the first one in. He is happy to take but reluctant to give.

The play ends with the second man going for food at his allotted place.

Reflections on The Assemblywomen

It is interesting to see a power play taken by the women to try and change their situation. Aristophanes has no problem with the idea of strong women. That being said this is a comedy and as such tends towards the absurd in the execution of this strength. The women being in charge is not taken with alarm by any of the men involved either. Whether this is indicative of general attitudes or whether it is part of the absurdity of the play is hard to tell.

The measures taken by the women are along the lines of what we would now call communism. Aristophanes does not take a position for or against this idea. He instead portrays it almost as a natural consequence of women being in charge. It is interesting to see these concepts in literature before the manifesto. This reminds me that most ideas aren't new they are just rehashed.

What others have to say about The Assemblywomen

"However, the similarities between some aspects of the play and the utopian ideas of Plato in his Republic have made Assemblywomen the subject of numerous comparative analyses and philosophical or historical speculations." From Greek Mythology

"Written in 391 BC, it’s a wonderfully fun play, a comic fantasy about women being in charge of government and men reduced to feeble, pitiable creatures in drag." From Interesting Literature

Comparisons with other texts

Like Wealth, The Assemblywomen is a reversal of the usual status quo. In Wealth it is good things coming to the good. Whereas in the Assemblywomen it is women ending up in charge. This is about all these two have in common. They are focused one on fortune and the other on ending the war.

We see the theme again of how to end the war come to the front. We have already seen this in Peace and Lysistrata. And with Lysistrata, we again see it is the women doing the outrageous that seems to get the job done. In the Assemblywomen we see the women take power from the men by guile. By contrast in the Lysistrata, we see them use their innate power around sex to make the war end.

Conclusion

As one of Aristophanes most overlooked plays, there is still much to glean from the text. It is an interesting reversal of roles with the men becoming feeble and the women gaining power. It shows us that the ideas of communism existed long before their modern form. While they are portrayed in the absurd it still shows the existence of the ideas. Again we see the woman take centre stage and in this case, take control from the law giving down.

Have you read The Assemblywomen? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read The Assemblywomen but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of The Assemblywomen. 

Getting wealth for those who do good; Wealth, Aristophanes

Why you might read Wealth?

Wealth is another tale of assisting the personification of a trait, to gain great rewards. In this case, those rewards are wealth. 

In my Self Education project, it continues the expansion of the idea of the play. It also foreshadows the more modern form of the satirical play.

Story of Wealth

Wealth is a play in two acts with the second act having 5 scenes. Wealth starts with our main character Chremylus returning from the Oracle. He is following an old blind man. He does so because he was told by the oracle to not let the first person he came across depart from him. He and his servant ask who he is and find out that he is Wealth. They quickly devise a plan for him to regain his sight. This is so that he can visit the worthy instead of those who cheat and steal. Poverty as an old woman tries to dissuade them of this saying without the threat of poverty man will not work. They disregard her and she leaves.

In the second act, they action this plan. Wealth regains his sight and stays with Chremylus. Chremylus' house increase in wealth rapidly. It is not long before a wicked man comes to complain that his wealth has left him. He and Chremylus's slave argue but he is sent on his way. Eventually, Hermes arrives to complain that there are no longer sacrifices to the gods. With wealth falling on the upright they do not see the need for the gods. He begs to be taken into the house and this is granted. The play ends with them going to set up Wealth as the new god in Zeus' place.

Reflections on Wealth

In the first act, it seems that this play is set up to warm against the softness of prosperity. We see this in the dialogue with poverty. But when we get to the second act this idea is not followed through. The most we see in the form of negative consequences is the gods no longer getting their sacrifices. Considering Aristophanes' previous work I am surprised by this. In general, he is not against using his plays to convey a point.

That being said what poverty says about the struggle against poverty being what makes man strive for better is profound. It still rings true today. We see those who have plenty don't have quite the same motivations as those who need to make a living. 

The idea that man only needs the gods when he is struggling is also interesting. It is an indictment against those of the time. The idea that the gods are only for bad times is something we see in a lot of pantheistic groups. By contrast it is taught against in the likes of Judaism and Christianity.

What others have to say about Wealth

"In essence, it is a twist on an observation probably as old as civilization itself – namely that “wealth is blind.” The meaning of the proverb is pretty straightforward: the evil are usually wealthy because the god of wealth, Plutus, is unable to distinguish good men from bad." From Greek Mythology

"Plutus’ eyesight is restored at the temple of Asclepius, famous for cures and miracles of this nature, and he formally becomes a member of Chremylus’ household." From Classical Literature

Comparisons to other texts

This is the second play of Aristophanes where we have seen the stopping of sacrifice to the gods. The other being the Birds. Though in this case, it is by making the people wealthy. Whereas in the birds it is a direct block of the path between the altars and the gods. We have also seen the rescue of a personified quality. This time we see Wealth regaining his sight. In Peace, we see the rescue of peace from a cave. Though with Wealth we see the gods disadvantaged by this, in peace they also want to end the fighting.

Conclusion

 Wealth, over its two acts, tells the story of recovering wealth's sight to help him come to the upright. It dabbles into the consequences of the upright getting wealthy. But it does not fully explore them. On the other hand, the positive side is seen. Those who are upright coming up in the world and those who are gaining by foul means losing their wealth. 

Have you read Wealth? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read Wealth but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of Wealth. 

Ending the war by rescuing peace; Peace, Aristophanes

 Why you might read Peace?

Peace is another fantastical tale about how to end the war. As such it gives us insight into the war-weariness of the people. As well as how Aristophanes felt compelled and safe to criticize the war.

For my Self Education project, it is a great stepping stone toward modern plays and modern satire.

The Story of Peace

Peace is a play in two acts. The first takes place both on earth and in heaven. The second is restricted to the mortal coil. Peace starts with our main character Trygaeus being sick and tired of the war. He constantly looks up at the sky and talks to Zeus asking why he has forsaken Greece. He hatches a plan to go and see Zeus. He has an oversized flying dung beetle that he has his servants looking after. He mounts this and heads off to heaven. There are a few hiccups on the way with the beetle getting distracted.

Trygaeus arrives in heaven to find all the gods gone except Hermes who has been left to look after things. The gods have gone as they are sick of giving Greece chances for peace but one side or other choosing war. Trygaeus finds out that Peace has been put in a dark cave. He then gets the chorus together to remove rocks from the entrance and heave and pull Peace out. Peace turns out to be a statue with two girls in attendance. Hermes offers one, Harvest, as Trygaeus's wife. The other, Festival, Trygaeus takes to give to the assembly in Athens. Then having lost the beetle he heads for home by foot.

Once home these things are set into motion and a feast is prepared for the wedding. Before this, Trygaeus prepares a sacrifice to peace. An oracle comes and tries to first tell them that the war cannot be over and then tries to help them eat the sacrifice. He is blocked from the sacrificed food and drink. Then his is sent on his way with a beating after he refuses to take no for an answer. After the sacrifice but before the feast two merchants approach him to thank him for the peace. Their peaceful businesses have increased again. He is then accosted by three merchants who have lost business because they sell spears and armor. He mocks them and sends them on their way. He then invites all to the feast and has two young boys sing but both will only sing war songs so he quickly stops them. Peace ends with the wedding feast.

Reflection on Peace

Aristophanes is not afraid to venture into the realms of sex and innuendo. He is quite blunt about Trygaeus wanting to bed Harvest and she is described in rather sexual terms. Though this is more earthy in nature than we tend to see today. This was performed publically so it cannot have been seen as a lack of modesty or propriety. This would have been true at some other points in history. 

It is interesting that while Peace is just a statue her attendants are living girls. It is also interesting that while the other gods are portrayed as living Peace is just a statue. It also makes Trygaeus's sacrifice to Peace a little odd. I am surprised by it because while on the earth it was normal to portray a god as a statue. From most sources, we see that they were expected to be living in Heaven.

What others have to say about Peace

"Aristophanes is known to criticize war leaders, politicians, men of fame, philosophers, etc. directly through his plays – the two pestle reference is a direct attack on the Athenian leader Cleon and Spartan leader Brasidas who led the war for years. " From Classical Arts Universe

"First produced in 421 BC – just two weeks before a peace treaty that ended the first half of the Peloponnesian War" From Greek Mythology

Comparisons with other texts

This is not the first time we have seen a play by Aristophanes about creative ways to end the Peloponnesian war. In Lysistrata we also see him proposes a novel end to the war. The difference is that in Lysistrata it is people, in this case, the women, who bring this about. By contrast in Peace, it is in the realms of the gods that this is achieved.

We have also seen Aristophanes comment on the war before in The Acharnians. The Acharnians also deals with unusual peace but in this case, an individual sues for individual peace. By contrast, Peace gains peace for the whole of Greece. The war is a big part of daily life for Aristophanes as he spent the time to write many plays about it. 

Conclusion

Peace is another of Aristophanes' plays about possible ends to the Peloponnesian war. It covers what is happening in the realm of the gods rather than the realm of men. It is set right at what turned out to be the end of the war and is first performed mere weeks before the war ends. It portrays Peace as a statue lost in a cave. she is then restored and sacrificed to.

Have you read Peace? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read Peace but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of Peace. 

The battle of two scoundrels for the top job; The Knights, Aristophanes

 Why you might read The Knights?

The Knights gives us insight into the politics of Athens following the Peloponnesian war. It shows us that the Athenians were to an extent self-aware of the corruption in their politics and in politicians pandering to the populace.

For my Self Education project, it is part of the whole picture of Aristophanes. Who so far is a comedic and satirical writer, but unafraid to upset the apple cart.

Story of The Knights

The Knights is a play of two acts with three scenes but the same set. It is set in Athens during the Peloponnesian war and was also performed then. It starts with two slaves complaining about the current master. They also complain that he sucks up to thepeople. The master beats them day in and day out. They conspire to steal from him his oracle. Once they have it, it reveals that he will be replaced by a sausage seller. One then chances on by and they convince him that he should vie for the top spot.

The master Paphlagonian enters and threatens the slaves with more beatings. The sausage seller intervenes and gets into an argument with Paphlagonian. After a while, Paphlagonian runs off to the debating chamber to put the sausage seller on charges. The seller charges off to take him on in the assembly.

The two return and the sausage seller tells of his victory. Then thepeople comes out of the house.  The sausage seller then talks his way into becoming his agent. So that he can do things on thepeoples behalf instead of Paphlagonian. Paphlagonian then realised the oracle and starts asking questions of the sausage seller. He quickly finds that he fills the oracle and gives up the fight. Paphlagonian then goes and sells sausages in the other man's place.

Reflections on The Knights

Aristophanes is very critical of politicians in this piece. He calls them liars and thieves. He does so under the guise of convincing the sausage seller he has what it takes for politics. Either it was a commonly held belief or the theater was a safe space to make these remarks. It is also a piece of humor that could be agreed with safely enough even if you would not dare say it yourself.

The namesake of the Knights only have a passing role as the chorus. The meat of the play has nothing to do with them in particular. Because of this, I wonder why it has been named such or why it has not had a second name attached.

What other have to say about The Knights

"It won first prize at the Lenaia festival when it was produced in 424 BCE. The play is a satire on political and social life in 5th Century BCE Athens" From Classical Literature

"Cleon, however, is mentioned only once by name and is rather transparently represented in the figure of Paphlagon." From Greek Mythology

Comparisons with other texts

Like The Birds, this is a comedy but unlike it, this is more satirical. The Knights is far more political than The Birds which is more fantastical in its approach. Like the Birds, the titular characters form the chorus.

Like The Acharnians which is also satire and political commentary. The biggest difference is that The Knights is after the war while The Acharnians is during the war. As such The Knights deals with power after the conflict. While The Acharnians deals with the absurdities of the war itself.

Conclusion

The Knights is a satirical play about the struggle for power and control after the war. The titular characters are actually the chorus and not a very important part of the play. The sausage seller upset the incumbent to take control of thepeople a character used to represent the people of Athens.

Have you read The Knights? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read The Knights but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of The Knights.

The creation of the city of the birds; The Birds, Aristophanes

 Why you might read The Birds?

You might find you actually enjoy it. The Birds is a comedy and quite fantastical and quite enjoyable. It shows us that comedic plays did not have to be satirical to get written or performed in the ancient Greek world.

For my Self Education project, it is part of the whole picture of Aristophanes. Who so far is a comedic and satirical writer, but unafraid to upset the apple cart.

The Story of The Birds

It starts with our main character Peisthtaerus and a friend, both from Athens. They are looking for a prince who has been turned into a bird. They are scaling a cliff.  In an attempt to make more noise they start baning on what turns out to be the prince's kitchen door. Eventually, his servant rouses him and he meets with the two Athenians. After a bit of chatter, Peisthtaerus asks him where they can go that is a nice peaceful city. The prince gives him several options but he turns them all down. He then proposes that the birds make a city in the air. He convinces the prince to call the other birds.

The other birds arrive and are angry that he has invited two humans. they make to attack the two but are eventually persuaded to listen and kill them later. Peisthtaerus spins a yarn about how the bird used to be above the gods. As well as how they were there before the world began and they should take back their rightful place. The birds lap it up and appoint him to make it so.

Once the walls are built Iris is caught traveling through the city and is chased away. Peisthtaerus also declares war on the gods. He sets himself up to give out wings to those who would join the city and recruits a young rebel to the cause. He is then troubled by a slew of grifters from other cities. He chases them away with the very wings he has to give out, seeming to want this to be a more peaceful city.

Prometheus shows up and says the gods will come to ask for peace. He says that Peisthtaerus should ask for the scepter and Sovereignty as his wife.

The gods send Heracles and Poseidon to sue for peace after they have not received sacrifices for a while.  They eventually concede to Peisthtaerus' requirements. They then take him to Olympus to collect his wife. The play ends with them returning to the bird city and getting married.

Reflection on The Birds

The Birds overall is an absurd premise, how you build walls in the sky I do not know. How they keep people out in three dimensions I know even less. But this seems to be part of Aristophanes' design in the play. It is a comedy meant to entertain and that it still does. That the gods could be overthrown so easily is an interesting conceit as well. 

The parade of the birds and the fact that they are all named explicitly at the start is interesting. To bother with this Aristophanes must have been persuaded that his audience knew all these types of birds. Their costumes must have been something to see as well!

That Heracles is part of the diplomatic party is a surprise. He shows that he doesn't really have the temperament for it in his comments on them while looking for Peisthtaerus. He is not known as a thinker or a talker but as a doer. That being said he ends up being the voice of reason to just get the peace treaty done. Eventually, he convinces Posideon to also agree.

What others have to say about The Birds

"First performed in 414 BC at the City Dionysia (where it won the second prize), The Birds is the longest of Aristophanes’ surviving comedies, and perhaps the most acclaimed one." From Greek Mythology

"Unlike the author’s other early plays, it includes no direct mention of the Peloponnesian War, and there are relatively few references to Athenian politics" From Classical Literature

Comparisons with other texts

Unlike Lysistrata or The Achanians, there is no mention of the Peloponnesian war. Even though The Birds was written and performed during the war. In fact, it is a straight-up comedy with no political references. Though there are references to particular people in Athens.

Like Lysistrata or The Achanians, it is a light-hearted work without death and despair. By contrast, we see both of these in the tragedies of Euripides like The Children of Heracles. It also has a looser grasp on reality and is more fantastical than any of these other works.

Conclusion

The Birds is a comedic play that is quite an enjoyable read. It covers the creation of a bird city in the sky and is quite fantastical with talking birds. It is the first comedy we have seen without political aspects woven into it. It was written and performed while the Peloponnesian war was going on.

Have you read The Birds? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read The Birds but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of The Birds.

Withholding sex to end the Peloponnesian war; Lysistrata, Aristophanes

 Why you might read Lysistrata?

Lysistrata is a satirical look at the end of the Peloponnesian war. It uses a slightly absurd premise to show the absurdity of the war. As such it is early anti-war propaganda and gives us insight into the war-weariness of the Athenians.

In my Self Education project, it is a great contrast to the history of the Peloponnesian war. It gives a more human view of the war.

Story of Lysistrata

Lysistrata is a play in two acts with one scene in the first and two in the second act. Lysistrata gets together women of Athens, Sparta, and some of the other states involved in the war. With them, she hatches a plan to end the war. She gets them to all swear to withhold sex from their husbands until the war is ended. They then lock themselves in Athena's temple and wait. Some old men immediately try and smoke them out but the women of the city come to their aid and dump water on the men.

Five days later they are still there and the men are getting desperate. One of the women's husbands comes to the temple and tries to get her to sleep with him. She leads him on and then runs back into the temple. The men eventually settle the peace and wives and husbands join in joyous singing then head home.

Reflections on Lysistrata

It is interesting how much power the women have in this play. There are often male characters that try and tell them they have nothing to do with the war. They tell them it is their business and proceed to bring the peace. Aristophanes writes them as powerful in an age where their power was around the homestead. The men he writes are uncomfortable with the change but the women succeed anyway.

Aristophanes writes the female characters as just as interested and needing sex as their male counterparts. This reminds us that the ancient Greeks saw women as the more sexually driven gender. This is contrary to modern societal thought.

What others have to say about Lysistrata

"The name Lysistrata can be translated as “releaser of war” or “army disbander”" From Classical literature

"Further, by occupying the Acropolis, home of the Athenian treasury, the women controlled access to the money necessary to finance the war." From World History Encyclopedia

Comparisons with other texts

Like The Acharnians this is an anti-war piece. They both poke fun at the war and in the war-weariness of the people of Athens. In The Acharnians this is done through an old man suing for his own peace. In Lysistrata, it is the women who take charge of bringing the war to an end.

Unlike The History of the Peloponnesian War, this play does suggest an end to the war. Where Thucydides' work cuts off abruptly in the later war and does not show us the resolution. That being said Lysistrata is clearly satire and while the war truly ended there is no way this was the reason.

Conclusion

Lysistrata is a slightly crude romp through war-weariness. It gives the women the power to end the war through unconventional means. Again it is satire and more a commentary on how over the war the average Athenian was with the war by the time it ended. 

Have you read Lysistrata? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read Lysistrata but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of Lysistrata. 

The ridiculousness of the new Socratic ideas; The Clouds, Aristophanes

 Why you might read The Clouds?

The Clouds is a fun look at the idea of the Old and the New way. The uncertainty that it brings and focuses on the worries of the traditionalist. It takes a look at how Socrates' school was seen at least by some as a threat to their way of life.

In my Self Education project, it is a nice change from the super-serious greek plays we have encountered so far. It also gives insight into how dissent was portrayed in the ancient Greek world.

The story of The Clouds

The Clouds is a play in two acts. The first act is in three scenes while the second is a single scene. It is broadly about the folly of the, at the time new, Socratic thought.

The first act starts with Strepsiades failing to sleep because of the debts his son is racking up. These are coming due for interest that very day. Strepsiades wakes his son and tries to convince him to go to the school of Philosophy next door. His son won't and goes to race his horses instead. Strepsiades decides to go to the school himself. Here he meets the new gods the clouds. After a fairly brief time there leaves as Socrates cannot get him to remember anything. He returns having convinced his son to go to the school. He then asks Socrates to teach his son the arguments right and wrong. If he can only remember one let it be wrong so he can win the argument with those who hold his debt and get out of paying.

The second act starts with Strepsiades' son returning from school. Between him and his father, they argue their way out of the debts that were due. Strepsiades is then hit by his son who uses the wrong argumentation to justify his actions. He then goes on to justify that he should also hit his mother. Strepsiades takes a servant with tools and a torch and gets him to pull up the roof which he then sets on fire. He does this as vengeance for the corruption of his son.

Reflections on The Clouds

This is another satire. This time as a political narrative of the times in Athens. The Socratic way of thinking was new and untested. Many, including Aristophanes, wondered if it would corrupt the youth and threaten their way of life.

The fourth wall breaks with Socrates appealing to the audience is quite interesting. Aristophanes is the earliest in my list that we have seen characters break with the play and acknowledge the audience. It is a device we still see today in the tradition of pantomime. It is also occasionally seen in TV shows.

It is also of interest that Strepsiades is keen for his son to learn the way of wrong when it suits him. Showing that breaking a moral compass may have immediate returns but it always comes back to bite us. His son is neither moral nor immoral as a character before his education. It is his father's choice of education that sets him on this immoral path.

What others have to say about The Clouds

"The 'new education' that the sophists at the 'Thinkery' pioneer represents the first stirrings of scientific theories that were circulating in Athens at the time of the play's production in the fifth century BCE." From Spark Notes

"Aristophanes' comedies were seen as a masterful blend of wit and invention. Often criticized for their crude humor and suggestive tone, his plays were popular among the Athenian audiences. However, to his many critics, he brought Greek tragedy down from the high levels of such tragedians as Aeschylus with his use of parody, satire, and vulgarity. " From World History Encyclopedia

Comparisons with other texts

Like The Acharnians, The Clouds is mainly Satire. Here though the focus is on the fight between the old and the new. By contrast, The Acharnians is dissent against the war with Sparta.

By contrast one of Euripides' plays, for example, Orestes is a lot more serious and tragic. While both end with death the tone of The Clouds is a lot more jovial. It feels as if Aristophanes is having a lot more fun with his audience by not being so lofty with his storytelling.

Conclusion

The Clouds is a satirical play that explores the idea of the new way against the old way. It centers around a father and son. The son eventually goes to the Socratic thinkery. He comes out corrupted and argumentative. This is what the father wanted to escape his creditors. It is not long however until the son turns this against his father. 

Have you read The Clouds? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read The Clouds but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of The Clouds. 

Poking fun at the Peloponnesian war in Athens; The Acharnians, Aristophanes

Why you might read The Achanians?

The Achanians is the first political Satire on the list. As such it is both an interesting read and a step in the development of the play. As well as being the start of satire as a way to criticize the ruling powers.

For my Self Education project, it is a great stepping stone toward modern plays and modern satire.

Story of The Achanians

The Achanians is a two Act play with two distinct scenes. The first is in the Pynx where the Assembly meets in Athens. The second is in front of our main character Dikaiopolis' house. 

The first act starts with Dikaiopolis sitting in the Pynx waiting for everyone to show up. He waits even though he arrived on time. He laments how no-one seems to take it seriously.  The others, including the council, arrive and the session is started. There are delegates from Persia who Dikaiopolis speaks against. Then delegates from Thrace are seen and again Dikaiopolis speaks against them.

The scene shifts to in front of Dikaiopolis' house. Here Dikaiopolis gets a friend to go to Sparta and sue for a personal peace. The friend returns with three different wineskins representing three different durations of peace. He chooses the longest one. He is then accosted by the chorus as a traitor but talks his way out of being stoned to death.

The second act starts with  Dikaiopolis setting up a market outside his house. In his market, there is only one exemption that the hero Lamachus cannot buy. He allows Boethians and Megarians to trade though they are banned in the rest of Athens. He sells first to a Magarian who sells him, two girls. He then sells an Informer to a Boethian. Both times Informers try and disrupt the sale and confiscate the goods. Both times Dikaiopolis sends them on their way. The play ends with Lamachus being called to war and Dikaiopolis being called to a feast. Lamachus returns injured and dismayed. While Dikaiopolis returns full of wine having triumphed in the drinking contest.

Reflections on The Achanians

It is interesting to read the first real piece of satire and dissonance. Here we have one old man going against the mainstay of Athens during the Peloponnesian war. He even sues for his own peace and argues for the Spartan side of the war as valid. He just wants to live the simple life and the war to go away.  The whole thing seems to be, especially the end part, a stick in the eye for anyone thinking this time was about glory in Athens.

Our main character is a nobody, he is just a farmer stuck in Athens. All of Attica was in Athens as the Spartans were raiding around the countryside for years on end. Aristophanes puts this nobody up against the assembly. And then against other Athenian citizens who were for the war. Yet he and his personal peace with Sparta come through intact. Everything comes out rosey for our nobody.

From a little digging, it looks like this was actually written at the time of the war. It was also performed at the time. As such it really is a political Satire of the war.

What others have to say about The Achanians

"Produced at the Lenaea in 425 BC, The Acharnians is the third play composed by Aristophanes, his earliest extant work, and the earliest Ancient Greek comedy that has survived entirely intact to this day." From Greek Mythology

"The play is notable for its absurd humour and its imaginative appeal for an end to the Peloponnesian War against the Spartans, which was already into its sixth year when the play was produced." From Ancient Literature

Comparisons with other texts

Unlike the History of the Peloponnesian War, this text is a commentary aimed at putting an end to the war. The history of the Peloponnesian war covers the entire war. By contrast, this text captures a snapshot after 6 years. They clearly cover the same event but in various styles. Thucydides is trying to report true history. Aristophanes on the other hand is conveying dissent to the war as it is going on. 

We can also look at The Suppliant Women by Euripides. This was a far more serious play and a tragedy. By comparison, The Acharnians is a comedy in both the traditional and modern sense. Its absurdist humor shines through every stage of the play. And as such, it was an interesting read.

Conclusion

The Acharnians is a play in two acts. It is a piece of satire and political dissent. As such it is a much easier read than some of the plays covered so far. It pokes fun at the first six years of the Peloponnesian war. It even takes shots at the leaders and generals of the war. 

Have you read The Acharnians? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read The Acharnians but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of The Acharnians.