Mario Telò
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- September 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780226309699
- eISBN:
- 9780226309729
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226309729.001.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Plays and Playwrights: Classical, Early, and Medieval
Aristophanes, whose eleven surviving plays are all that remain of Old Comedy, has been stereotyped since ancient times as the poet who brought order and stability to this rowdy theatrical genre. But ...
More
Aristophanes, whose eleven surviving plays are all that remain of Old Comedy, has been stereotyped since ancient times as the poet who brought order and stability to this rowdy theatrical genre. But how did this image arise, and why were the rivals Cratinus and Eupolis relegated to secondary status and merely fragmentary survival? This book traces Aristophanes’ supremacy, paradoxically, back to the defeat of his Clouds at the Great Dionysia in 423 BCE. Both Wasps (422) and the revised Clouds (419–417), the two plays at the center of this study, depict the earlier Clouds as a failed attempt by Aristophanes, the good son, to heal the comic audience—reflected in the plays in a pair of dysfunctional fathers. Through this narrative of failure, Aristophanes advances a “proto-canonical” discourse that anticipates the contours of the Hellenistic comic canon by elevating his aesthetic mode while delegitimizing his rivals. Aristophanic comedy is cast as a prestigious object, an expression of the supposedly timeless values of dignity and self-control. This discourse, which depends on both internal and external textual connections, is grounded in the distinctive feelings that different comic modes purportedly transmitted to an audience. In Wasps and Clouds the Aristophanic style is figured as a soft, protective cloak meant to shield an audience from debilitating competitors and restore it to paternal responsibility and authority. Aristophanes’ narrative of afflicted fathers and healing sons, of audience and poet, is thus shown to be at the center of the proto-canonical discourse that shaped his eventual dominance.Less
Aristophanes, whose eleven surviving plays are all that remain of Old Comedy, has been stereotyped since ancient times as the poet who brought order and stability to this rowdy theatrical genre. But how did this image arise, and why were the rivals Cratinus and Eupolis relegated to secondary status and merely fragmentary survival? This book traces Aristophanes’ supremacy, paradoxically, back to the defeat of his Clouds at the Great Dionysia in 423 BCE. Both Wasps (422) and the revised Clouds (419–417), the two plays at the center of this study, depict the earlier Clouds as a failed attempt by Aristophanes, the good son, to heal the comic audience—reflected in the plays in a pair of dysfunctional fathers. Through this narrative of failure, Aristophanes advances a “proto-canonical” discourse that anticipates the contours of the Hellenistic comic canon by elevating his aesthetic mode while delegitimizing his rivals. Aristophanic comedy is cast as a prestigious object, an expression of the supposedly timeless values of dignity and self-control. This discourse, which depends on both internal and external textual connections, is grounded in the distinctive feelings that different comic modes purportedly transmitted to an audience. In Wasps and Clouds the Aristophanic style is figured as a soft, protective cloak meant to shield an audience from debilitating competitors and restore it to paternal responsibility and authority. Aristophanes’ narrative of afflicted fathers and healing sons, of audience and poet, is thus shown to be at the center of the proto-canonical discourse that shaped his eventual dominance.
I. A. Ruffell
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- May 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199587216
- eISBN:
- 9780191731297
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199587216.003.0009
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Plays and Playwrights: Classical, Early, and Medieval
The interactions between comic poets has been increasingly recognized in recent years. This chapter develops a model for such constructive and competitive interactions, drawing on both ...
More
The interactions between comic poets has been increasingly recognized in recent years. This chapter develops a model for such constructive and competitive interactions, drawing on both studies of the seriality of popular culture and the analysis of running jokes that was earlier articulated with reference to comic plot. Intertextual appropriation of comic jokes, ideas, and plots is shown to be part of an intertextual game of competitive capping which is central to the construction and maintenance of poet's authority. Imaginative re-use of material and imaginative claims of novelty are the corollaries of political and cultural value, while also providing the basis of impossible comic worlds, episodes and characters. Such competition and construction of impossible worlds is shown through the series of plays featuring worlds of spontaneous plenty, through the interaction between Aristophanes and Kratinos, and through the plays of Aristophanes and Pherekrates where women are central. Explicit and implicit comic intertextuality are brought together in further consideration of Aristophanes' Peace, in relation to both Kratinos and Eupolis.Less
The interactions between comic poets has been increasingly recognized in recent years. This chapter develops a model for such constructive and competitive interactions, drawing on both studies of the seriality of popular culture and the analysis of running jokes that was earlier articulated with reference to comic plot. Intertextual appropriation of comic jokes, ideas, and plots is shown to be part of an intertextual game of competitive capping which is central to the construction and maintenance of poet's authority. Imaginative re-use of material and imaginative claims of novelty are the corollaries of political and cultural value, while also providing the basis of impossible comic worlds, episodes and characters. Such competition and construction of impossible worlds is shown through the series of plays featuring worlds of spontaneous plenty, through the interaction between Aristophanes and Kratinos, and through the plays of Aristophanes and Pherekrates where women are central. Explicit and implicit comic intertextuality are brought together in further consideration of Aristophanes' Peace, in relation to both Kratinos and Eupolis.
Ian C. Storey
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199259922
- eISBN:
- 9780191717420
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199259922.001.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Poetry and Poets: Classical, Early, and Medieval
Eupolis (fl. 429–411 BC) was one of the best-attested of Aristophanes' rivals, and a major figure in the history of Athenian comedy. No complete work by this lost master has survived, but of his ...
More
Eupolis (fl. 429–411 BC) was one of the best-attested of Aristophanes' rivals, and a major figure in the history of Athenian comedy. No complete work by this lost master has survived, but of his fourteen plays we have 500 fragments. These include 120 lines of his best-known comedy, Demoi (The Demes), which were discovered and published in 1911. Even in fragmentary form, Eupolis' plays shed interesting light on the whole range of issues — political, poetic, and dramatic — that make Aristophanes so perennially fascinating. This book provides a new annotated translation of all the remaining fragments, as well as a separate chapter on each lost play. It discusses Eupolis' career, redates the plays, examines how Eupolis was known in the ancient world, explores his relationship with Aristophanes (as both rival and collaborator), and delineates the distinct nature of the comedy that this prizewinning poet created.Less
Eupolis (fl. 429–411 BC) was one of the best-attested of Aristophanes' rivals, and a major figure in the history of Athenian comedy. No complete work by this lost master has survived, but of his fourteen plays we have 500 fragments. These include 120 lines of his best-known comedy, Demoi (The Demes), which were discovered and published in 1911. Even in fragmentary form, Eupolis' plays shed interesting light on the whole range of issues — political, poetic, and dramatic — that make Aristophanes so perennially fascinating. This book provides a new annotated translation of all the remaining fragments, as well as a separate chapter on each lost play. It discusses Eupolis' career, redates the plays, examines how Eupolis was known in the ancient world, explores his relationship with Aristophanes (as both rival and collaborator), and delineates the distinct nature of the comedy that this prizewinning poet created.
Ian C. Storey
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199259922
- eISBN:
- 9780191717420
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199259922.003.0003
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Poetry and Poets: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter examines how popular Eupolis is among famous Old Comedy writers. It tries to evaluate these writers' works, and determines how often they make citations of Eupolis' works into their own ...
More
This chapter examines how popular Eupolis is among famous Old Comedy writers. It tries to evaluate these writers' works, and determines how often they make citations of Eupolis' works into their own writings. It examines how Eupolis was regarded by writers, and how he was often compared with poets like Kratinos and Aristophanes. It determines Eupolis' position in the history of Old Comedy. It also assesses Platonios literary works and compares them with Eupolis'.Less
This chapter examines how popular Eupolis is among famous Old Comedy writers. It tries to evaluate these writers' works, and determines how often they make citations of Eupolis' works into their own writings. It examines how Eupolis was regarded by writers, and how he was often compared with poets like Kratinos and Aristophanes. It determines Eupolis' position in the history of Old Comedy. It also assesses Platonios literary works and compares them with Eupolis'.
Ian C. Storey
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199259922
- eISBN:
- 9780191717420
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199259922.003.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Poetry and Poets: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter describes Eupolis as a forgotten master of Old Comedy, ranked with Kratinos and Aristophanes. It attempts to discover Eupolis' profile and compares him with other well-known poets. It ...
More
This chapter describes Eupolis as a forgotten master of Old Comedy, ranked with Kratinos and Aristophanes. It attempts to discover Eupolis' profile and compares him with other well-known poets. It investigates his reputation as a poet of Old Comedy and evaluates some of his recovered literary fragments. It also provides a translation of the collection of those fragments.Less
This chapter describes Eupolis as a forgotten master of Old Comedy, ranked with Kratinos and Aristophanes. It attempts to discover Eupolis' profile and compares him with other well-known poets. It investigates his reputation as a poet of Old Comedy and evaluates some of his recovered literary fragments. It also provides a translation of the collection of those fragments.
Mario Telò
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- September 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780226309699
- eISBN:
- 9780226309729
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226309729.003.0005
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Plays and Playwrights: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter suggests that the revised Clouds (419–417 BCE) extends the narrative of the failure of the first version in 423 by deploying against the rival Eupolis the same delegitimating strategies ...
More
This chapter suggests that the revised Clouds (419–417 BCE) extends the narrative of the failure of the first version in 423 by deploying against the rival Eupolis the same delegitimating strategies used in Wasps against Cratinus. The chapter starts by considering how Aristophanes appropriates Electra’s defense of paternal authority to transform the conflict of comic modes in Wasps into opposing types of filial relationship: the child committed to avenging a wronged father versus the spoiled son who brings only ruin. The chapter also draws out affinities between Eupolis and Socrates, the anti-paternal teacher.The revised Clouds seems to depict an audience that the bad son Eupolis has deprived of Aristophanes’ protective cloak—just as Socrates steals the cloak of the comic father Strepsiades. Read through the intratextuality of parabasis and plot, Strepsiades’ destruction of Socrates’ school suggests the audience’s revenge for this loss, a turning of the implied violence of vulgar comedy against its practitioners in an incendiary moment of redemptive recognition that anticipates Aristophanes’ eventual supremacy in the comic canon.Less
This chapter suggests that the revised Clouds (419–417 BCE) extends the narrative of the failure of the first version in 423 by deploying against the rival Eupolis the same delegitimating strategies used in Wasps against Cratinus. The chapter starts by considering how Aristophanes appropriates Electra’s defense of paternal authority to transform the conflict of comic modes in Wasps into opposing types of filial relationship: the child committed to avenging a wronged father versus the spoiled son who brings only ruin. The chapter also draws out affinities between Eupolis and Socrates, the anti-paternal teacher.The revised Clouds seems to depict an audience that the bad son Eupolis has deprived of Aristophanes’ protective cloak—just as Socrates steals the cloak of the comic father Strepsiades. Read through the intratextuality of parabasis and plot, Strepsiades’ destruction of Socrates’ school suggests the audience’s revenge for this loss, a turning of the implied violence of vulgar comedy against its practitioners in an incendiary moment of redemptive recognition that anticipates Aristophanes’ eventual supremacy in the comic canon.
