What do you think?
Rate this book
Heracles and Other Plays
Euripides wrote about timeless themes, of friendship and enmity, hope and despair, duty and betrayal. The first three plays in this volume are imbued with an atmosphere of violence, while the fourth, Cyclops , is our only surviving example of a genuine satyr play, with all the crude and
slapstick humor that characterized the genre. Alcestis shows various reactions to death with pathos and grim humor while the blood-soaked Heracles portrays deep emotional pain and undeserved suffering. Children of Heracles deals with the effects of war on refugees and the consequences of sheltering
them.
slapstick humor that characterized the genre. Alcestis shows various reactions to death with pathos and grim humor while the blood-soaked Heracles portrays deep emotional pain and undeserved suffering. Children of Heracles deals with the effects of war on refugees and the consequences of sheltering
them.
224 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 417
15 people are currently reading
285 people want to read
About the author
Euripides
2,831 books1,980 followersEuripides (Greek: Ευριπίδης) (ca. 480 BC–406 BC) was a tragedian of classical Athens. Along with Aeschylus and Sophocles, he is one of the three ancient Greek tragedians for whom any plays have survived in full. Some ancient scholars attributed ninety-five plays to him, but the Suda says it was ninety-two at most. Of these, eighteen or nineteen have survived more or less complete (Rhesus is suspect). There are many fragments (some substantial) of most of his other plays. More of his plays have survived intact than those of Aeschylus and Sophocles together, partly because his popularity grew as theirs declined—he became, in the Hellenistic Age, a cornerstone of ancient literary education, along with Homer, Demosthenes, and Menander.
Euripides is identified with theatrical innovations that have profoundly influenced drama down to modern times, especially in the representation of traditional, mythical heroes as ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances. This new approach led him to pioneer developments that later writers adapted to comedy, some of which are characteristic of romance. He also became "the most tragic of poets", focusing on the inner lives and motives of his characters in a way previously unknown. He was "the creator of ... that cage which is the theatre of William Shakespeare's Othello, Jean Racine's Phèdre, of Henrik Ibsen and August Strindberg," in which "imprisoned men and women destroy each other by the intensity of their loves and hates". But he was also the literary ancestor of comic dramatists as diverse as Menander and George Bernard Shaw.
His contemporaries associated him with Socrates as a leader of a decadent intellectualism. Both were frequently lampooned by comic poets such as Aristophanes. Socrates was eventually put on trial and executed as a corrupting influence. Ancient biographies hold that Euripides chose a voluntary exile in old age, dying in Macedonia, but recent scholarship casts doubt on these sources.
Euripides is identified with theatrical innovations that have profoundly influenced drama down to modern times, especially in the representation of traditional, mythical heroes as ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances. This new approach led him to pioneer developments that later writers adapted to comedy, some of which are characteristic of romance. He also became "the most tragic of poets", focusing on the inner lives and motives of his characters in a way previously unknown. He was "the creator of ... that cage which is the theatre of William Shakespeare's Othello, Jean Racine's Phèdre, of Henrik Ibsen and August Strindberg," in which "imprisoned men and women destroy each other by the intensity of their loves and hates". But he was also the literary ancestor of comic dramatists as diverse as Menander and George Bernard Shaw.
His contemporaries associated him with Socrates as a leader of a decadent intellectualism. Both were frequently lampooned by comic poets such as Aristophanes. Socrates was eventually put on trial and executed as a corrupting influence. Ancient biographies hold that Euripides chose a voluntary exile in old age, dying in Macedonia, but recent scholarship casts doubt on these sources.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
May 11, 2021
Overall a 3.5**** rounded up!
Alcestis: 3.5*** the woman who offers to take her husbands place in the underworld. This provides information of funeral rites and the importance of Xenia in Ancient Greece. It is one of the few Greek tragedies where someone dies on-stage (usually this would take place offstage).
Heracles: 4**** this was a longer play compared to the others in this book. Delves into the labours Hercales had to complete as well as the consequences of Hera’s anger at Zeus and the curses she places Zeus’ women or/and offspring (especially Heracles). In this case, the insanity of Heracles that Hera plans and the deaths that follow.
Unfortunately Theseus is also in this... and he is still an awful character.
Heracles children: 3*** didn’t enjoy this as much but gave more information on the laws of suppliants.
Cyclops: 4.5**** my favourite of this. This play retells Odysseus’ journey to the island of the Cyclops. Here he encounters the Satyr’s and Silenus (father of the satyrs and therefore much older) who have gotten separated from Bacchus and are now slaves to the Cyclopes. It was such weird play with its jokes and wits referring to sexual organs.... specifically phalluses which are also on display in the play. This features the craze of wine, the bacchic rites (of drinking/sexual behaviour/openness) and was just humouring overall. I loved seeing the satyr’s and their devotion to Dionysus... as well as their excitement of Odysseus bringing some wine. We also got to see Odysseus’ cunning and wit which follows “The Odyssey” by Homer. While this was a short play it was a funny one with plenty of sarcasm and wine, which I enjoyed the most.
Alcestis: 3.5*** the woman who offers to take her husbands place in the underworld. This provides information of funeral rites and the importance of Xenia in Ancient Greece. It is one of the few Greek tragedies where someone dies on-stage (usually this would take place offstage).
Heracles: 4**** this was a longer play compared to the others in this book. Delves into the labours Hercales had to complete as well as the consequences of Hera’s anger at Zeus and the curses she places Zeus’ women or/and offspring (especially Heracles). In this case, the insanity of Heracles that Hera plans and the deaths that follow.
Unfortunately Theseus is also in this... and he is still an awful character.
Heracles children: 3*** didn’t enjoy this as much but gave more information on the laws of suppliants.
Cyclops: 4.5**** my favourite of this. This play retells Odysseus’ journey to the island of the Cyclops. Here he encounters the Satyr’s and Silenus (father of the satyrs and therefore much older) who have gotten separated from Bacchus and are now slaves to the Cyclopes. It was such weird play with its jokes and wits referring to sexual organs.... specifically phalluses which are also on display in the play. This features the craze of wine, the bacchic rites (of drinking/sexual behaviour/openness) and was just humouring overall. I loved seeing the satyr’s and their devotion to Dionysus... as well as their excitement of Odysseus bringing some wine. We also got to see Odysseus’ cunning and wit which follows “The Odyssey” by Homer. While this was a short play it was a funny one with plenty of sarcasm and wine, which I enjoyed the most.
January 12, 2025
And I've now finished all of the Greek tragedies. And it ended with a completist whimper not a bang.
Heracles: Heracles kills his wife and three children halfway through the play for reasons that are not clear--Hera was mad at Zeus for fathering him so she sent a goddess to drive him mad. No real tragic buildup, punishment for choices, misunderstandings, or anything. Just driven into a homicidal rage. Then you need to read the second half of play when you would have thought it was over you get a little interesting self reflection and desire for suicide by Heracles but mostly you get a long dialogue with his pal Theseus.
Heracles' Children: Now Heracles is dead and his children are alive. They're seeking protection from the tyrant Eurystheus. He ends up dead. Overall feels like a bit of a mess of plot, characters, and a bit repetitive from other plays.
Cyclops: The only surviving of hundreds (?) of "Satyr" plays which played at the end of tragic trilogies, this made me think maybe we were not missing much. It is basically the cyclops episode from the Odyssey but with satyrs, more bawdy humor (some of it quite explicitly translated in this volume, like "bonk" for sex), and all of the characters either more humorous or more ridiculous depending on your taste.
I should also note that this is a prose translation so the speeches all appear as full paragraphs not lines of verse. I have mixed feelings about that approach, I don't really "hear" the poetry in most translations (a comment more about me than the translations), but still did not like all of the dense text in this version either.
Finally, I have often wondered if the Greek works we have are the best works or if there were things that were even better than the Iliad, the Odyssey, the Oresteia and Medea. These plays and some of the other Euripides plays I was less excited about suggest maybe we do have the best works because they were more actively preserved with more copies made etc. In particular, most of the Greek tragedy we have is from "best of" or instructional collections. The one exception is the random preservation of one volume of Euripides that is part of the alphabet (so part of a fuller collection in alphabetical order). And all of these plays were from the random preservation. And more generally just about everything from the greatest hits volume seems better than the randomly preserved ones. So maybe there was more intentionality than accident in what we have today--although I would still love to have much, much more.
(Note, this collection also includes Alcetis but I had read it already and did not re-read it.)
Heracles: Heracles kills his wife and three children halfway through the play for reasons that are not clear--Hera was mad at Zeus for fathering him so she sent a goddess to drive him mad. No real tragic buildup, punishment for choices, misunderstandings, or anything. Just driven into a homicidal rage. Then you need to read the second half of play when you would have thought it was over you get a little interesting self reflection and desire for suicide by Heracles but mostly you get a long dialogue with his pal Theseus.
Heracles' Children: Now Heracles is dead and his children are alive. They're seeking protection from the tyrant Eurystheus. He ends up dead. Overall feels like a bit of a mess of plot, characters, and a bit repetitive from other plays.
Cyclops: The only surviving of hundreds (?) of "Satyr" plays which played at the end of tragic trilogies, this made me think maybe we were not missing much. It is basically the cyclops episode from the Odyssey but with satyrs, more bawdy humor (some of it quite explicitly translated in this volume, like "bonk" for sex), and all of the characters either more humorous or more ridiculous depending on your taste.
I should also note that this is a prose translation so the speeches all appear as full paragraphs not lines of verse. I have mixed feelings about that approach, I don't really "hear" the poetry in most translations (a comment more about me than the translations), but still did not like all of the dense text in this version either.
Finally, I have often wondered if the Greek works we have are the best works or if there were things that were even better than the Iliad, the Odyssey, the Oresteia and Medea. These plays and some of the other Euripides plays I was less excited about suggest maybe we do have the best works because they were more actively preserved with more copies made etc. In particular, most of the Greek tragedy we have is from "best of" or instructional collections. The one exception is the random preservation of one volume of Euripides that is part of the alphabet (so part of a fuller collection in alphabetical order). And all of these plays were from the random preservation. And more generally just about everything from the greatest hits volume seems better than the randomly preserved ones. So maybe there was more intentionality than accident in what we have today--although I would still love to have much, much more.
(Note, this collection also includes Alcetis but I had read it already and did not re-read it.)
November 8, 2025
This volume collects three of Euripides' surviving plays concerning Heracles, and the sole surviving Satyr play from antiquity - and the reason I bought the volume - the Cyclops. There is an introduction by Edith Hall to Euripides in general and the plays in this volume in particular, which is insightful and interesting as one might expect. The translations are in prose, which is not my preferred mode at the moment, but is fine. Robin Waterfield has brought out certain elements of the original text, but in the only play I have certainly read in another translation, Alcestis, that other translation highlighted things he appears to have missed. This is why, when you read in translation, you need to read a variety.
There is quite a contrast between the plays. Alcestis, which was originally performed in the position of a Satyr play, shifts dramatically from mourning and devastation to Heracles in comic mode. There are sinister undertones, especially in the ending, but it resolves in a way that could be called happy. Then Heracles, often known as The Madness of Heracles is perhaps one of the most devastating tragedies to survive from fifth-century Athens. It also features Amphitryon, perhaps the only good man in Greek tragedy. Although Heracles is Zeus's son by his wife, Alcmene, Amphitryon shows a fatherly love to the hero that is not matched by his divine parent - and that contrasts sharply with the fury of Zeus's spouse, Hera.
In The Children of Heracles Alcmene shows anger, not love, in her thirst for vengeance against Eurystheus. Fair enough - the man was the means by which Hera made Heracles' life miserable, and now, after his death, is looking to kill his innumerable, nameless children. The Children of Herakles has a similar theme to Eumenides by Aeschylus and Oedipus at Colonus by Sophocles, in that at the end of a mythic arc Athens and its institutions become the refuge and salvation of the beleaguered tragic hero. I think The Children of Heracles may be the weakest of the three, but it doesn't have the sour taste of misogyny like the Eumenides, so perhaps it wins out there.
Cyclops is crude, silly, and very good. The story is familiar from the Odyssey, but is made new by the inclusion of the Satyrs - although it also emphasises the slightly comic silliness of the original story and the 'Nobody' trick. In the way that Odysseus interacts with the Satyrs I found myself thinking of A Muppet's Christmas Carol, although he is perhaps not quite as straight-faced as Michael Caine in that movie. Still, I think the idea holds.
I think the four plays collected here include one of Euripides' best (Heracles), the delight of the Cyclops, and two other's that make me think I really do prefer Sophocles. The introduction is good, the notes variable, and the translation solid.
There is quite a contrast between the plays. Alcestis, which was originally performed in the position of a Satyr play, shifts dramatically from mourning and devastation to Heracles in comic mode. There are sinister undertones, especially in the ending, but it resolves in a way that could be called happy. Then Heracles, often known as The Madness of Heracles is perhaps one of the most devastating tragedies to survive from fifth-century Athens. It also features Amphitryon, perhaps the only good man in Greek tragedy. Although Heracles is Zeus's son by his wife, Alcmene, Amphitryon shows a fatherly love to the hero that is not matched by his divine parent - and that contrasts sharply with the fury of Zeus's spouse, Hera.
In The Children of Heracles Alcmene shows anger, not love, in her thirst for vengeance against Eurystheus. Fair enough - the man was the means by which Hera made Heracles' life miserable, and now, after his death, is looking to kill his innumerable, nameless children. The Children of Herakles has a similar theme to Eumenides by Aeschylus and Oedipus at Colonus by Sophocles, in that at the end of a mythic arc Athens and its institutions become the refuge and salvation of the beleaguered tragic hero. I think The Children of Heracles may be the weakest of the three, but it doesn't have the sour taste of misogyny like the Eumenides, so perhaps it wins out there.
Cyclops is crude, silly, and very good. The story is familiar from the Odyssey, but is made new by the inclusion of the Satyrs - although it also emphasises the slightly comic silliness of the original story and the 'Nobody' trick. In the way that Odysseus interacts with the Satyrs I found myself thinking of A Muppet's Christmas Carol, although he is perhaps not quite as straight-faced as Michael Caine in that movie. Still, I think the idea holds.
I think the four plays collected here include one of Euripides' best (Heracles), the delight of the Cyclops, and two other's that make me think I really do prefer Sophocles. The introduction is good, the notes variable, and the translation solid.
February 14, 2022
Euripides' 4 Heracles plays under one cover. Although he does not appear in 2 of the plays.
Includes the lone surviving complete example of a satyr play, "Cyclops".
Not Euripides best work - but asks some important questions, and the 3 tragedies include his ubiquitous older characters.
Great Notes (James Morwood) and Textual Notes. And a fantastic Introduction by one of the top Euripides/Greek drama scholars, Edith Hall.
The texts are presented more as blocks, as in modern novels, than as poetic lines, as many other translaters choose to do. But the flow of the text works well, both as it is presented on the page, and as it is translated by Robin Waterfield.
One of the few sources for this material, and it has been excellently compiled and annotated.
Includes the lone surviving complete example of a satyr play, "Cyclops".
Not Euripides best work - but asks some important questions, and the 3 tragedies include his ubiquitous older characters.
Great Notes (James Morwood) and Textual Notes. And a fantastic Introduction by one of the top Euripides/Greek drama scholars, Edith Hall.
The texts are presented more as blocks, as in modern novels, than as poetic lines, as many other translaters choose to do. But the flow of the text works well, both as it is presented on the page, and as it is translated by Robin Waterfield.
One of the few sources for this material, and it has been excellently compiled and annotated.
March 23, 2024
2.5 but rounded up.
Alcestis was incredible. The others not so much...
Alcestis was incredible. The others not so much...
June 8, 2025
3.5 / 5.0
After Fagles' fabulous translation of Oresteia, a prose translation by John Davie seems far inferior in comparison. Nothing dismal, yet one can't dwell on the beauty of the language with this one; rather, the language just seems to communicate the plot to you with some mildly evocative oaths. As a result, what I paid attention to with this edition was the plot and the psychology of the characters, rather than the verbal output.
Euripides may have been a woman-hater, but it is nonetheless undeniable that he was also the best ancient author to provide psychologically complex and moving portraits of his female characters. In this compilation, the most interesting female portrayals we have are those of Iphigenia (Iphigenia among the Taurians), Creusa (Ion) and Helen (s/t). Iphigenia's is that of an embittered yet resigned victim, whose callousness is slowly thawed and whose sororal affections are finally given vent towards the end of the play, however, without losing the sharp presence of mind needed for some top-shelf scheming. Creusa is first a poor victim of divine rape who believes to be childless (as she believes that the fruitful outcome of Apollo's sexual assault, whom she abandoned after birth, had long since been killed by beasts) and who is nonetheless together with his husband yearning for the joys of parenthood, however to no avail. She too shows some signs of bloodlust towards the end, when she (guided by her surprisingly unhinged senior servant) mistakes Ion for a possible love-child of her current husband, which awakes her conspiratorial side. Towards the end, however, once the crisis has been averted, we get to see the true motherly side of her. And finally, the most powerful portrayal of the work (male or female), Helen: we all know what hell she has to carry within her, but here she nonetheless tries to stand tall and remind herself, that (possibly Euripides' invention?) Paris only abducted a mirror image of her, making Helen innocent of adultery and the bloody, pointless war of Troy. She is united with her husband, Menelaus, but that naturally calls for serious skills in persuasion and honesty; indeed, anyone reading this play will be surprised how much their opinion on Helen will change.
The two remaining plays of this compilation, Heracles and Cyclops, may not have strong lady characters, but it hardly matters. The former is a gripping fleshing-out of one of the most odd events in the Greek mythology: Heracles killing his wife and children in a bout of madness. While Heracles character is not as wonderful as, say, Helen's or Medea's, the family tragedy here is painfully poignant. A good chunk of the play is about Megara, her children and Heracles' father, Amphitryon, being afraid for their lives, which are threatened by the usurper king of Thebes, Lycus. They are finally saved by Heracles, who had been anachronistically rounding off his labours in the Underworld (fetching both Kerberos and Theseus from the pit). Lycus is killed and the family life of the hero seems to have settled, until suddenly (like always in Euripides...) the two divinities, Iris and Madness appear to bring trouble. Funnily enough, it is Iris who is baying for blood, in the name of her mistress Hera, while Madness seems the reluctant civil servant, simply doing has they are told. Then we have the bout of madness and the horrid slaughters, after which we are shown how his deeds finally dawn on Heracles, and how he tries to cope with it all. In Cyclopes, on a much lighter note, we simply have a funny re-telling of Odysseus in the cave of Polyphemos, including satyrs and bibbing.
While Euripides offers much food for thought and really humanises the mythological characters like no one else in his time, he also has his flaws. The most obvious one is that he just pulls stuff out of the backside when it comes to the denouements. Suddenly, a messenger appears and conveniently explains everything to a character who has been left in the dark. Suddenly, a god appears and puts things to rights. I don't see how this kind of heavy-handedness could be defended even by referring to the times: I think even Aristotle critisised the dei ex machina. Their artificiality does not do justice to the finely-wrought portraits of his heroes and heroines in no way. The other thing that's rather unfortunate about Euripides is that he is a bit of a needless rambler: towards the end of most plays, characters explain other characters things that the spectator / reader already knows, which just makes the whole charade appear like pedantry. And as I already pointed out that this prose translation wasn't particularly moving, one can't even have the recourse of focusing on the beauties of the Euripidean language.
But if one can blink at such foibles, one gets excellent marginalia on the characters of our favourite mythology. Of course, had I been Aristophanes' Dionysus, I wouldn't have needed such deliberations in trying to decide between Euripides and the far mightier Aeschylus – but it is beyond doubt that Euripides has his steady place in the august canon of playwrights.
After Fagles' fabulous translation of Oresteia, a prose translation by John Davie seems far inferior in comparison. Nothing dismal, yet one can't dwell on the beauty of the language with this one; rather, the language just seems to communicate the plot to you with some mildly evocative oaths. As a result, what I paid attention to with this edition was the plot and the psychology of the characters, rather than the verbal output.
Euripides may have been a woman-hater, but it is nonetheless undeniable that he was also the best ancient author to provide psychologically complex and moving portraits of his female characters. In this compilation, the most interesting female portrayals we have are those of Iphigenia (Iphigenia among the Taurians), Creusa (Ion) and Helen (s/t). Iphigenia's is that of an embittered yet resigned victim, whose callousness is slowly thawed and whose sororal affections are finally given vent towards the end of the play, however, without losing the sharp presence of mind needed for some top-shelf scheming. Creusa is first a poor victim of divine rape who believes to be childless (as she believes that the fruitful outcome of Apollo's sexual assault, whom she abandoned after birth, had long since been killed by beasts) and who is nonetheless together with his husband yearning for the joys of parenthood, however to no avail. She too shows some signs of bloodlust towards the end, when she (guided by her surprisingly unhinged senior servant) mistakes Ion for a possible love-child of her current husband, which awakes her conspiratorial side. Towards the end, however, once the crisis has been averted, we get to see the true motherly side of her. And finally, the most powerful portrayal of the work (male or female), Helen: we all know what hell she has to carry within her, but here she nonetheless tries to stand tall and remind herself, that (possibly Euripides' invention?) Paris only abducted a mirror image of her, making Helen innocent of adultery and the bloody, pointless war of Troy. She is united with her husband, Menelaus, but that naturally calls for serious skills in persuasion and honesty; indeed, anyone reading this play will be surprised how much their opinion on Helen will change.
The two remaining plays of this compilation, Heracles and Cyclops, may not have strong lady characters, but it hardly matters. The former is a gripping fleshing-out of one of the most odd events in the Greek mythology: Heracles killing his wife and children in a bout of madness. While Heracles character is not as wonderful as, say, Helen's or Medea's, the family tragedy here is painfully poignant. A good chunk of the play is about Megara, her children and Heracles' father, Amphitryon, being afraid for their lives, which are threatened by the usurper king of Thebes, Lycus. They are finally saved by Heracles, who had been anachronistically rounding off his labours in the Underworld (fetching both Kerberos and Theseus from the pit). Lycus is killed and the family life of the hero seems to have settled, until suddenly (like always in Euripides...) the two divinities, Iris and Madness appear to bring trouble. Funnily enough, it is Iris who is baying for blood, in the name of her mistress Hera, while Madness seems the reluctant civil servant, simply doing has they are told. Then we have the bout of madness and the horrid slaughters, after which we are shown how his deeds finally dawn on Heracles, and how he tries to cope with it all. In Cyclopes, on a much lighter note, we simply have a funny re-telling of Odysseus in the cave of Polyphemos, including satyrs and bibbing.
While Euripides offers much food for thought and really humanises the mythological characters like no one else in his time, he also has his flaws. The most obvious one is that he just pulls stuff out of the backside when it comes to the denouements. Suddenly, a messenger appears and conveniently explains everything to a character who has been left in the dark. Suddenly, a god appears and puts things to rights. I don't see how this kind of heavy-handedness could be defended even by referring to the times: I think even Aristotle critisised the dei ex machina. Their artificiality does not do justice to the finely-wrought portraits of his heroes and heroines in no way. The other thing that's rather unfortunate about Euripides is that he is a bit of a needless rambler: towards the end of most plays, characters explain other characters things that the spectator / reader already knows, which just makes the whole charade appear like pedantry. And as I already pointed out that this prose translation wasn't particularly moving, one can't even have the recourse of focusing on the beauties of the Euripidean language.
But if one can blink at such foibles, one gets excellent marginalia on the characters of our favourite mythology. Of course, had I been Aristophanes' Dionysus, I wouldn't have needed such deliberations in trying to decide between Euripides and the far mightier Aeschylus – but it is beyond doubt that Euripides has his steady place in the august canon of playwrights.
May 6, 2024
Look, I’m definitely a big fan of Euripides, but this collection was... not great.
Alcestis
★★★★☆
Alcestis is an odd one, combining tragic and comedic elements, and clearly quite experimental for its time. From the strangely funny opening bickering between Apollo and Death, to the utter buffoonery of Heracles with his complete inability to read the room to the fact that Heracles quite literally ambushes Death and fights him to bring back Alcestis, this one’s quite a wild ride, and a lot of fun.
I think my favourite part of the play though is when Admetus’ father Pheres puts him in his place as the former rebukes his father for not offering to die in his place. Admetus is clearly the dick in this scenario, and expecting your parents to literally die for you because they are old and will be dead soon anyways is showing an astonishing level of entitlement on his behalf, so I really appreciate Pheres for tearing his arguments apart.
Heracles
★★★☆☆
I think this is the only play in the collection I would actually call a tragedy, and what happens is undeniably tragic, but... Eh.
I don’t actually have much of anything to say about this one, it was just a very mid play and I feel pretty “blah” about it.
Children of Heracles
★★☆☆☆
This one’s honestly just a bit of a mess. Like, it feels very disjointed, and there’s the thread of Heracles unnamed daughter going to get sacrificed and then never getting mentioned again which is incredibly unsatisfying.
Honestly, that entire plotline was just all around bad.
Like, “Maiden”, daughter of Heracles cheerily volunteering to be sacrificed for the sake of some vague omen demanding it in order to save her family in a stupid-ass conflict is no Polyxena bravely walking to her own doom, preferring a swift death as a sacrifice over a life in slavery.
The plot is all over the place. The conflict feels immature and ridiculous, and not in a particularly fun way. “Maiden’s” sacrifice feels extremely hollow, especially since she literally just disappears from the plot, never to be mentioned again. There’s a really boring off-screen battle scene. Oh, and the ending is WEAK.
The one thing I genuinely loved was Alcmene, who entered the scene ready to throw hands and who was totally gung ho about executing their enemy. Total BAMF.
Cyclops
★☆☆☆☆
This is a comedic work, and you know, it’s silly and goofy, but I just wasn’t enjoying myself at all.
Maybe it’s because I was already just sick and tired of this collection after the two Heracles plays, or maybe I’m just a stick in the mud, or, idk, maybe it’s just not that funny?
(Also, because of Reasons™ I had to get a different edition for this play and all I could get ahold of was one of those bad, old-timey translations, so that probably didn’t help)
Like, don't get me wrong, historically speaking it's really interesting. It's the only extant satyr play to survive to us, and as such, a really important play.
I just didn't enjoy it very much.
Note: I read Alcestis as part of a different collection last year and did not reread it.
In other words, this reading experience was mediocre at best, pretty insufferable at worst. Really love how you can see the joy slowly draining out of me through the sinking ratings.
My average rating for this is 2,5 but I’m rounding down because of how little I enjoyed myself.
Alcestis
★★★★☆
Alcestis is an odd one, combining tragic and comedic elements, and clearly quite experimental for its time. From the strangely funny opening bickering between Apollo and Death, to the utter buffoonery of Heracles with his complete inability to read the room to the fact that Heracles quite literally ambushes Death and fights him to bring back Alcestis, this one’s quite a wild ride, and a lot of fun.
I think my favourite part of the play though is when Admetus’ father Pheres puts him in his place as the former rebukes his father for not offering to die in his place. Admetus is clearly the dick in this scenario, and expecting your parents to literally die for you because they are old and will be dead soon anyways is showing an astonishing level of entitlement on his behalf, so I really appreciate Pheres for tearing his arguments apart.
Heracles
★★★☆☆
I think this is the only play in the collection I would actually call a tragedy, and what happens is undeniably tragic, but... Eh.
I don’t actually have much of anything to say about this one, it was just a very mid play and I feel pretty “blah” about it.
Children of Heracles
★★☆☆☆
This one’s honestly just a bit of a mess. Like, it feels very disjointed, and there’s the thread of Heracles unnamed daughter going to get sacrificed and then never getting mentioned again which is incredibly unsatisfying.
Honestly, that entire plotline was just all around bad.
Like, “Maiden”, daughter of Heracles cheerily volunteering to be sacrificed for the sake of some vague omen demanding it in order to save her family in a stupid-ass conflict is no Polyxena bravely walking to her own doom, preferring a swift death as a sacrifice over a life in slavery.
The plot is all over the place. The conflict feels immature and ridiculous, and not in a particularly fun way. “Maiden’s” sacrifice feels extremely hollow, especially since she literally just disappears from the plot, never to be mentioned again. There’s a really boring off-screen battle scene. Oh, and the ending is WEAK.
The one thing I genuinely loved was Alcmene, who entered the scene ready to throw hands and who was totally gung ho about executing their enemy. Total BAMF.
Cyclops
★☆☆☆☆
This is a comedic work, and you know, it’s silly and goofy, but I just wasn’t enjoying myself at all.
Maybe it’s because I was already just sick and tired of this collection after the two Heracles plays, or maybe I’m just a stick in the mud, or, idk, maybe it’s just not that funny?
(Also, because of Reasons™ I had to get a different edition for this play and all I could get ahold of was one of those bad, old-timey translations, so that probably didn’t help)
Like, don't get me wrong, historically speaking it's really interesting. It's the only extant satyr play to survive to us, and as such, a really important play.
I just didn't enjoy it very much.
Note: I read Alcestis as part of a different collection last year and did not reread it.
In other words, this reading experience was mediocre at best, pretty insufferable at worst. Really love how you can see the joy slowly draining out of me through the sinking ratings.
My average rating for this is 2,5 but I’m rounding down because of how little I enjoyed myself.
February 5, 2022
The ragtag plays of Euripides – Penguin has republished Medea etc. twice before giving these ones a second go around. But there is quality aplenty here. Heracles is a curious play for its apparent disobedience of Aristotelian unity – events are unjustified, characters suffer without meaning or reason, and satisfaction seems a distant object. I would disagree with these assertions, at least in the distant aspect. For in Heracles is a more profound reflection: on violence, and on murder as tools of justice. I am no doubt projecting a modern sensibility upon an ancient work: I shall continue to do so. Heracles’ tragedy occurs not merely for the madness impelled upon him by Hera (or whomever), but for his own urge to kill the children of his opponent. This act of savagery – savage in the way that the first part of the play makes immensely clear w/r/t Lycus – is punished by its exact reversal. The meaningless slaughter of his own wife and children; the phantom king is not slain, only his phantom offspring. Slay children less, speaks the sage Euripides, and less children will die. A salient enough reading, I should think. And aesthetically: gruesome, godless. Iphigenia and Ion are the weaker pieces each, though both contain an antidotal comedy to this first play. Ion especially, whose complex recognition-plotting is itself worthy of its play-long exposition. Of all the plays here-featured, the one I would like most to adapt or produce would be Helen. Imperfect in its nature, with some confusing asides by way of the chorus, but tragicomic to wonderful effect. The moment in which Menelaus supposes that there might be two Helens, two Troys, two Greeces – I find this idea enormously compelling, that of a phantom-world, of endless recursions. Is that not the situation of Greek literature? The same ghosts rearranged, a tessellation of the same beings shaped and reshaped, forever onwards. Again, I doubt Euripides had this in mind. But upon his grave I cannot be stopped. The genuine intentions of the playwright are hardly less worthy. Another of his recognition dramas, only this time reaching the maximum in comic potential; the ingenious (and noble!) Helen with her servant-scorned husband, outmanoeuvring a king who is, himself, confronted by the serving class. In Egypt all things are upside down – let it be! If only Gilbert and Sullivan had got their hands on this one. Cyclops then represents a joy and a tragedy. How sad that this is the only complete satyr play – how many gags have been lost to oblivion? Too many. But an entertaining riff on Homeric origins, albeit not quite so clever as the original, by requirement of the stage. Funnier, certainly.
September 1, 2022
Heracles would have been genuinely shocking with a completely unexpected and intentionally random tragic twist which contradicts the myth. One could imagine the audience feeling tension as they notice the story isn't lining up correctly which pays off with a great twist. This follows with a meditation on dealing with trauma which is sadly underwhelming given its amazing potential. Overall though, this play shows the better side of Euripides as seen in other plays such as Medea.
Iphigenia in Tauris (like the remaining plays) are more comic than tragic, with an optimistic story akin to a Victorian adventure novel set in the African jungle or a Pacific island.
Ion could be described as a problem play with a good ending which complicates a tragic setting. With Ion's mother Creusa being raped by Apollo and exposing her child. Despite Ion not dying and growing up to be pious and father of the Ionians it seems Euripides is overlooking or justifying Apollo's actions in a way that is unconvincing. Even if Euripides does not intend to evaluate the God's the play then seems lacking in meaning. While less exciting than Iphigenia in Tauris, the tension and dramtic irony maintains intrigue.
Helen is based on a controversial (albeit not unprecedented) decision in Greek myth by placing Helen not in Troy but Egypt. This has the consequence that the Trojan War was completely pointless (as opposed to largely pointless). While in the context of the wider Epic Cycle this is a poor decision, it works within the context of a single play so as to emphasise the futility of war which Eurpipides seemingly started to believe after decades of the Peloponnesian War. Nevertheless, this play is not miserable, being a funny adventure akin to Iphigenia, which makes it more enjoyable but undermines the tragic context.
Cyclops is the only satyr play we have at all, being a real comedy and a fun reading of Odysseus' encounter with the cyclops. All the characters are pretty terrible in the most humorous, especially the elder satyr Silenus. Being fittingly Dionysian, there is plenty of ecstatic and erotic humour than is comedic today.
Iphigenia in Tauris (like the remaining plays) are more comic than tragic, with an optimistic story akin to a Victorian adventure novel set in the African jungle or a Pacific island.
Ion could be described as a problem play with a good ending which complicates a tragic setting. With Ion's mother Creusa being raped by Apollo and exposing her child. Despite Ion not dying and growing up to be pious and father of the Ionians it seems Euripides is overlooking or justifying Apollo's actions in a way that is unconvincing. Even if Euripides does not intend to evaluate the God's the play then seems lacking in meaning. While less exciting than Iphigenia in Tauris, the tension and dramtic irony maintains intrigue.
Helen is based on a controversial (albeit not unprecedented) decision in Greek myth by placing Helen not in Troy but Egypt. This has the consequence that the Trojan War was completely pointless (as opposed to largely pointless). While in the context of the wider Epic Cycle this is a poor decision, it works within the context of a single play so as to emphasise the futility of war which Eurpipides seemingly started to believe after decades of the Peloponnesian War. Nevertheless, this play is not miserable, being a funny adventure akin to Iphigenia, which makes it more enjoyable but undermines the tragic context.
Cyclops is the only satyr play we have at all, being a real comedy and a fun reading of Odysseus' encounter with the cyclops. All the characters are pretty terrible in the most humorous, especially the elder satyr Silenus. Being fittingly Dionysian, there is plenty of ecstatic and erotic humour than is comedic today.
January 28, 2020
I'm a big fan of Euripides on the whole. He deftly weaves tragedy and comedy in his plays, his themes form a tight line through each work, and he manages to keep his plots simple in spite of fairly complex characters. His works presented here are all great, and while I know some of the stories it's my first time reading the actual translated works.
Alcestis is the story of a lord whose deal to return from Hades caused the death of his wife, and he tries to be a good host to the belligerent Heracles while grieving for her. Euripides manages to carefully juggle the emotional aspects of Admetus' grief and rage with Heracles' general meatheadedness, and in spite of the happy ending it really seems to be as emotional as any proper Greek tragedy.
Of which Heracles is. Heracles' family is being strong-armed out of their home after his supposed death in the underworld, and just when he turns out to be alive he is tragically spurred into madness to kill them all. Reading even a brief summary of Heracles' mythical tragedy always made me sad, so seeing the desperation of his family and his numb grief after the fact was much more moving than I expected.
Children of Heracles takes place after his actual death, when his comrade Iolaus is trying to keep Heracles' children safe from the machinations of Eurystheus of Argos who seeks their deaths. The back and forth as Iolaus continually overcomes one challenge to be presented with a greater one is engaging, and the ending comes as a relief more than anything. Plus an old man being a badass in combat is always fun.
Cyclopes is a bit of a departure from the others, being a satyr play based on Odysseus' escape from the cyclops. All of these plays probably would have been performed for the Dionysia, but this one (typical of satyr plays) feels like it was specifically written for it. The satyrs are as rowdy as you'd hope. Silenus is impotent to the point of hilarity. Odysseus is appropriately devious, and the cyclops is appropriately naive. It's a grand ol' time.
My one problem with this collection is that the translation is a bit wonky in places. Not that it felt wrong, but there's the occasional phrase that feels oddly out of time compared to the rest of the prose and probably could've used another go-over with the editors.
Regardless, this is a great set of plays that anyone interested in Greek tragedians should read. Euripides is a gooder.
Alcestis is the story of a lord whose deal to return from Hades caused the death of his wife, and he tries to be a good host to the belligerent Heracles while grieving for her. Euripides manages to carefully juggle the emotional aspects of Admetus' grief and rage with Heracles' general meatheadedness, and in spite of the happy ending it really seems to be as emotional as any proper Greek tragedy.
Of which Heracles is. Heracles' family is being strong-armed out of their home after his supposed death in the underworld, and just when he turns out to be alive he is tragically spurred into madness to kill them all. Reading even a brief summary of Heracles' mythical tragedy always made me sad, so seeing the desperation of his family and his numb grief after the fact was much more moving than I expected.
Children of Heracles takes place after his actual death, when his comrade Iolaus is trying to keep Heracles' children safe from the machinations of Eurystheus of Argos who seeks their deaths. The back and forth as Iolaus continually overcomes one challenge to be presented with a greater one is engaging, and the ending comes as a relief more than anything. Plus an old man being a badass in combat is always fun.
Cyclopes is a bit of a departure from the others, being a satyr play based on Odysseus' escape from the cyclops. All of these plays probably would have been performed for the Dionysia, but this one (typical of satyr plays) feels like it was specifically written for it. The satyrs are as rowdy as you'd hope. Silenus is impotent to the point of hilarity. Odysseus is appropriately devious, and the cyclops is appropriately naive. It's a grand ol' time.
My one problem with this collection is that the translation is a bit wonky in places. Not that it felt wrong, but there's the occasional phrase that feels oddly out of time compared to the rest of the prose and probably could've used another go-over with the editors.
Regardless, this is a great set of plays that anyone interested in Greek tragedians should read. Euripides is a gooder.
September 18, 2024
This was a very interesting set of plays by Euripides and contained a mix of tragedy and satyr plays.
Alcestis is a tragedy with comedic elements. The tragic portions deal with Alcestis giving her life for her husband and the comedic elements around Heracles who gets drunk the the house of those mourning Alcestis' death.
The Children of Heracles interestingly enough deals with the children of Heracles. Death is at their door as Eurystheus, who put their father Heracles through the Labors, seeks to snuff out potential revenge Brough about by Heracles' children. There are wonderful themes of fate, sacrifice, and courage in this tragedy play.
Heracles is present in all of the plays except for Cyclops, which takes us to the Odyssey story of the cyclops Polyphemus. This one is a satyr play, defined by translator Robin Waterfield as tragedy at play. These plays exist in the middle between tragedy and comedy. They would have been performed after three tragedy plays to apparently lighten the mood. They deal in scandalous behavior, phallic jokes, and great bouts of drinking. This is essentially a more humorous take on the Odysseus and Polyphemus story than what is found in the Odyssey.
Alcestis is a tragedy with comedic elements. The tragic portions deal with Alcestis giving her life for her husband and the comedic elements around Heracles who gets drunk the the house of those mourning Alcestis' death.
The Children of Heracles interestingly enough deals with the children of Heracles. Death is at their door as Eurystheus, who put their father Heracles through the Labors, seeks to snuff out potential revenge Brough about by Heracles' children. There are wonderful themes of fate, sacrifice, and courage in this tragedy play.
Heracles is present in all of the plays except for Cyclops, which takes us to the Odyssey story of the cyclops Polyphemus. This one is a satyr play, defined by translator Robin Waterfield as tragedy at play. These plays exist in the middle between tragedy and comedy. They would have been performed after three tragedy plays to apparently lighten the mood. They deal in scandalous behavior, phallic jokes, and great bouts of drinking. This is essentially a more humorous take on the Odysseus and Polyphemus story than what is found in the Odyssey.
January 11, 2025
Alcestis ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ read 01/10/2025
Heracles ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️⭐️ read 01/11/2025
No, this one had a kick to it.... beautiful in its misery and madness. The idea of preserving after suffering (especially suffering from your actions). It brings up questions of whether people can change.
Modern connections to mental health and healing. Is madness and reason the natural state of humanity?
Also shows the morality of the gods. Zeus is Heracles' father and yet allows Hera to act on her anger towards him for Zeus' actions. It makes Amphitryon his true father (questions of chosen family vs blood). Also observing the moralities of gods such as Madness who sees the misery in this decision and still goes on with it to serve Hera. Just such an interesting mythological tale.
Heracles ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️⭐️ read 01/11/2025
No, this one had a kick to it.... beautiful in its misery and madness. The idea of preserving after suffering (especially suffering from your actions). It brings up questions of whether people can change.
Modern connections to mental health and healing. Is madness and reason the natural state of humanity?
Also shows the morality of the gods. Zeus is Heracles' father and yet allows Hera to act on her anger towards him for Zeus' actions. It makes Amphitryon his true father (questions of chosen family vs blood). Also observing the moralities of gods such as Madness who sees the misery in this decision and still goes on with it to serve Hera. Just such an interesting mythological tale.
October 2, 2024
It's fascinating seeing Euripides develop (and then recant) his disdain for the Greek pantheon; so far, that is most explicit in Heracles, with some really great dialogue critical of, and possibly disbelieving in, Zeus.
December 3, 2018
myeh. heracles and theseus aren't my cup of tea
August 4, 2022
heracles (Hercules lol) always been my least fav Greek myth hero and this did nothing to change that soooo sorry bout it
January 30, 2025
Another one 😀
February 4, 2025
Thought it was Hercules the whole time
March 25, 2012
Some of Euripides least read work but very interesting for anyone studying how people interact with their myths.
August 23, 2014
starting to find Euripides hard going now, so this took me ages to finish. Still good stuff but probably need to have a break with something modern.
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews