What do you think?
Rate this book
Euripides V: Bacchae/Iphigenia in Aulis/The Cyclops/Rhesus
Series edited by David Grene & Richmond Lattimore.
314 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 19, 2013
50 people are currently reading
355 people want to read
About the author
Euripides
2,823 books1,975 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 - 30 of 33 reviews
June 15, 2025
As has been the case for each of the volumes I've read, I highly recommend the University of Chicago versions of the Greek playwrights. The general introduction to Euripides, plus the play-specific introductions are very useful. I continue to like Euripides, but this volume was more of a mixed bag. I really like the Bacchae, and each time I read it get more out of it. I also like Iphiginia in Aulis (although I like the alternative version where she lives better). The Cyclops, a satyr play, was interesting. However, I just couldn't get into Rhesus (a bit of the Trojan war told from the Trojan perspective). The editors acknowledge that scholars are divided over whether Rhesus was even written by Euripides, with some suggesting an alternative version (listed in the festival records as being produced by Euripides), was actually lost, and somehow this one was associated with Euripoides name.
March 18, 2017
yup Euripides is for sure my favourite Greek playwright, based on the plays I've read so far
My Ranking
1. Bacchae
2. Iphigenia in Aulis (a very close second)
3. The Cyclops
4. Rhesus
This was a very interesting set of plays that contained a nice variety of subgenres, and it for sure started off very strong. The first play, Bacchae I had been looking forward to reading for a long time and it had a really great representation of religious mania and the power of Dionysus, and Iphigenia in Aulis which was dramatic, tragic, and full of noble choices and sacrifices that kept me completely caught up in the storyline. As expected, The Cyclops had the standard humour of a satyr play.
But the last play was just so unfortunate and not entertaining whatsoever? I see the tragic elements of it but it seems to be just a couple of war deaths that you never get invested in the characters. If this play had been first, or you know just not included in the collection, I would've been so much more satisfied and given it 5 stars because it started off so good, but the ending just kind of... plunked
My Ranking
1. Bacchae
2. Iphigenia in Aulis (a very close second)
3. The Cyclops
4. Rhesus
This was a very interesting set of plays that contained a nice variety of subgenres, and it for sure started off very strong. The first play, Bacchae I had been looking forward to reading for a long time and it had a really great representation of religious mania and the power of Dionysus, and Iphigenia in Aulis which was dramatic, tragic, and full of noble choices and sacrifices that kept me completely caught up in the storyline. As expected, The Cyclops had the standard humour of a satyr play.
But the last play was just so unfortunate and not entertaining whatsoever? I see the tragic elements of it but it seems to be just a couple of war deaths that you never get invested in the characters. If this play had been first, or you know just not included in the collection, I would've been so much more satisfied and given it 5 stars because it started off so good, but the ending just kind of... plunked
November 16, 2022
im a euripides stan he's my fave tragedian so i love reading his work for class
March 19, 2022
I was only assigned 2/4 plays in this book, (The Bacchae and The Cyclops,) but they were both great. I might read the other two in the future, but I'm booked(!) with all my reading commitments. The Bacchae was a wild ride. It's the coming out party for the god Dionysus. He seems to be a new god on the block and is punishing the blasphemers who say he's not. It's really fitting that he punishes the city by making it to where they don't see reality clearly. The Cyclops was a slave to his desires and offered a lot of good spiritual insight.
November 12, 2018
Not bad!
Bacchae was my favorite, followed closely by Iphigenia in Aulis. I didn't get much from Rhesus, honestly, so that was just meh. The Cyclops was interesting mainly to see what other types of plays they watched back then.
Quick reads, though.
Bacchae was my favorite, followed closely by Iphigenia in Aulis. I didn't get much from Rhesus, honestly, so that was just meh. The Cyclops was interesting mainly to see what other types of plays they watched back then.
Quick reads, though.
June 25, 2024
Happy I finally read Iphigenia in Aulis. And to everyone on the internet--and Wikipedia!--who cites this play when explaining The Killing of a Sacred Deer, I am compelled to say: nowhere in Euripedes' version of the myth does he say why Artemis demands Iphigenia as a sacrifice. In fact, the killing of a sacred deer is not mentioned in either this play, nor in Euripedes' other Iphigenia. The part about the sacred deer is only mentioned in Sophocles' Electra. Just thought I'd clear that up for anyone who was as confused as I was after finishing the play and seeing nothing about a sacred deer 🤠
November 29, 2016
I used two hours to finish Bacchae. Comparing to Antigone, Clouds, I like Bacchae most. Antigone's suicide makes it a tragedy but not a good ending to me. She cares about her dead brothers' dignity but she deserts her sister alive. Her husband's death is also too abrupt. I know the death is the punishment to Cleon. But he could be a good king. He seems to be the most innocent characters among the play. I feel helpless instead of empathetic after finishing the play. Clouds is too dramatic. Socrates is described as an amusement park clown who is always here to take photos with visitors. That helps me to understand how people from that period saw Socrates. It's good amusement but I can hardly accept this form. Bacchae depicts how a god is denied at first and later avenges on people who once slander him. It reminds me of how people always negate our potentials for all kinds of cliches or stereotypes and suppress our growth. I feel emphatic to Dionysus. If I have the power, I would also do what he does but in a mild way.
Mortals can never challenge gods. This is the eternal them for ancient greek tragedies. Except that, both Antigone and Bacchae are centered on family conflicts. Antigone insists on burying her brother and uses the divine law to defy the mortal laws. Agave and Pentheus slanders Dionysus's mother and his own god blood and they are relatives. Why the two plays are centered among family members instead of friends, neighbors? Does it imply that belief to gods overpower families? Is the purpose to alienate relationships among family members so that gods can be the absolute power, which is later applies by Socrates, who claim to separate children and their mothers?
Gender is the second biggest topic, according to most people. Some may argue that Dionysus uses women as targets because they are vulnerable and negligible. But, in my perspective, woman is the only explainable reason for the play. Not because their gender is woman but because only woman owns those characters.
Firstly, woman is jealous. And that's maybe the reason why Agave is more willing to believe her sister is having an affair with a mortal instead of the most powerful god Zeus and later also gives a birth to Zeus's son. Since her sister takes up those credits, she chooses to slander, humiliate and shame her. Among the same species, women are not vulnerable at all. Their jealousy can be the sharpest weapons.
Secondly, woman is primal. Compared to men, women are more animal like. They protect their children, and families. When women smell the scent of danger, they can be as ferocious as beasts. That't why they are chosen for the target to attack people. Men are trained to kill because of the honors that the society grows in their hearts. Women are born to kill people who attack their children. That's the instinct.
In conclusion, it's not that they are women so that they are chose to finish this tragedy. It's because what they have for being women that is destined what will have.
Moreover, I really like this paragraph:
Dionysus:
You and you alone will labor for your city.
A great ordeal awaits you, the one that you're allotted
as your fate. I shall lead you safely there;
someone else shall bring you back..
Pentheus:
Yes, my mother
Dionysus
...conspicuous to all men
Pentheus:
It is for that I go.
Dionysus
You will be carries home..
Pentheus:
O luxury!
Dionysus:
...cradled in your mother's arms
Pentheus:
You will spoil me!
Whne Pentheus says "It's for that I go", I first thinks that he has Oedipus complex. And "luxury" implies that he whether has a peculiar relationship to his mom or that he is always mom's boy. (this point can be arguable) I can't wait to laugh out when Pentheus says "spoil me". This is really an endearing way to express one's emotions. It's really girlish. Dionysus is calculated. He first strips off Dionysus man's appearance, (helps him to dress as a woman), and later strips off his man's soul, (the change of his words). Even though he is not killed by his mother, he will not be Pentheus, the king of the country at all. In his heart, he has already became a neighbor girl.
It seems that Pentheus does have an Oedipus complex through his mother, which is first implied by
Dionysus:
And I say, Don't chain me up! I am sane but you are not
Pentheus:
But I say: chain him. And I'm the ruler here.
Dionysus:
You do not know what is the life you live. You do not know what you do. You do not know who you are.
Pentheus:
I am Pentheus, the son of Echion and Agave.
Dionysus:
Pentheus: you shall repent that name.
When I first read the passage, I thought it was insane instead of "sane". And the explanation would be that both of them are insane, but Dionysus knows his insanity so he is sane for he acknowledges it. But Pentheus denies his insanity and claims he is sane so he, on the contrary, is mad indeed. When Dionysus says he is insane, he actually means he is sane.
Dionysus is the god of wine and theater, which can act as both catharsis and poison. He knows himself through them. While Pentheus knows himself through power "And I'm the ruler here" and mortal standards "I'm the son of Echion and Agave". He is culturally captivated. He sees himself through different social rules instead of his own need. That's why Dionysus says "You do not know what is the life you live. You do not know what you do. You do not know who you are." He never knows himself clearly. His opinions about his life or himself always come from others.
Mortals can never challenge gods. This is the eternal them for ancient greek tragedies. Except that, both Antigone and Bacchae are centered on family conflicts. Antigone insists on burying her brother and uses the divine law to defy the mortal laws. Agave and Pentheus slanders Dionysus's mother and his own god blood and they are relatives. Why the two plays are centered among family members instead of friends, neighbors? Does it imply that belief to gods overpower families? Is the purpose to alienate relationships among family members so that gods can be the absolute power, which is later applies by Socrates, who claim to separate children and their mothers?
Gender is the second biggest topic, according to most people. Some may argue that Dionysus uses women as targets because they are vulnerable and negligible. But, in my perspective, woman is the only explainable reason for the play. Not because their gender is woman but because only woman owns those characters.
Firstly, woman is jealous. And that's maybe the reason why Agave is more willing to believe her sister is having an affair with a mortal instead of the most powerful god Zeus and later also gives a birth to Zeus's son. Since her sister takes up those credits, she chooses to slander, humiliate and shame her. Among the same species, women are not vulnerable at all. Their jealousy can be the sharpest weapons.
Secondly, woman is primal. Compared to men, women are more animal like. They protect their children, and families. When women smell the scent of danger, they can be as ferocious as beasts. That't why they are chosen for the target to attack people. Men are trained to kill because of the honors that the society grows in their hearts. Women are born to kill people who attack their children. That's the instinct.
In conclusion, it's not that they are women so that they are chose to finish this tragedy. It's because what they have for being women that is destined what will have.
Moreover, I really like this paragraph:
Dionysus:
You and you alone will labor for your city.
A great ordeal awaits you, the one that you're allotted
as your fate. I shall lead you safely there;
someone else shall bring you back..
Pentheus:
Yes, my mother
Dionysus
...conspicuous to all men
Pentheus:
It is for that I go.
Dionysus
You will be carries home..
Pentheus:
O luxury!
Dionysus:
...cradled in your mother's arms
Pentheus:
You will spoil me!
Whne Pentheus says "It's for that I go", I first thinks that he has Oedipus complex. And "luxury" implies that he whether has a peculiar relationship to his mom or that he is always mom's boy. (this point can be arguable) I can't wait to laugh out when Pentheus says "spoil me". This is really an endearing way to express one's emotions. It's really girlish. Dionysus is calculated. He first strips off Dionysus man's appearance, (helps him to dress as a woman), and later strips off his man's soul, (the change of his words). Even though he is not killed by his mother, he will not be Pentheus, the king of the country at all. In his heart, he has already became a neighbor girl.
It seems that Pentheus does have an Oedipus complex through his mother, which is first implied by
Dionysus:
And I say, Don't chain me up! I am sane but you are not
Pentheus:
But I say: chain him. And I'm the ruler here.
Dionysus:
You do not know what is the life you live. You do not know what you do. You do not know who you are.
Pentheus:
I am Pentheus, the son of Echion and Agave.
Dionysus:
Pentheus: you shall repent that name.
When I first read the passage, I thought it was insane instead of "sane". And the explanation would be that both of them are insane, but Dionysus knows his insanity so he is sane for he acknowledges it. But Pentheus denies his insanity and claims he is sane so he, on the contrary, is mad indeed. When Dionysus says he is insane, he actually means he is sane.
Dionysus is the god of wine and theater, which can act as both catharsis and poison. He knows himself through them. While Pentheus knows himself through power "And I'm the ruler here" and mortal standards "I'm the son of Echion and Agave". He is culturally captivated. He sees himself through different social rules instead of his own need. That's why Dionysus says "You do not know what is the life you live. You do not know what you do. You do not know who you are." He never knows himself clearly. His opinions about his life or himself always come from others.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 31, 2024
I adore the Bacchae so much, but each reread really highlights how cruel it is. Dionysus is decidedly queer in the play, and there's no word other than monstrous that fits how he uses Pentheus' (extremely) latent queerness against him and inflicts madness to make his own family suffer.
Iphigenia in Aulis was very new to me, and so uncharacteristically (from the Iliad) chaste/prudish/proper in how it depicts social relations. Loved the Menelaus/Agamemnon interactions, not sure how much I cared for the rest.
I've never liked the cyclops and don't intend to start now.
Iphigenia in Aulis was very new to me, and so uncharacteristically (from the Iliad) chaste/prudish/proper in how it depicts social relations. Loved the Menelaus/Agamemnon interactions, not sure how much I cared for the rest.
I've never liked the cyclops and don't intend to start now.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Read
August 19, 2020The Bacchae
- Lines! 58 “ten thousand men posses ten thousand hopes” 62 “yes in a certain way” 71 “you are proud?” 73 “proud and happy”
- Hellas - Greece
- 52 “you will all be routed, shamefully defeated,/ when their sands of ivy turn back your shields/ of bronze” anti-epic? Anti-military? Phallic wording applied to women bc power?
- Men becoming women - 12th Night Shakespeare at it again
- nets
- “To accept the gods, to act as a mortal—/ that is a life free from pain” ie shut up and believe
- Lines! 58 “ten thousand men posses ten thousand hopes” 62 “yes in a certain way” 71 “you are proud?” 73 “proud and happy”
- Hellas - Greece
- 52 “you will all be routed, shamefully defeated,/ when their sands of ivy turn back your shields/ of bronze” anti-epic? Anti-military? Phallic wording applied to women bc power?
- Men becoming women - 12th Night Shakespeare at it again
- nets
- “To accept the gods, to act as a mortal—/ that is a life free from pain” ie shut up and believe
January 5, 2024
I wrote reviews for each but lost them due to a careless mis-swipe. I will only rehash that I read this book because Michael Surgue, a public historian and philosopher, announced that he would use the Bacchae as reference for one of his special lectures for medical professionals, particularly doctors. Nevertheless I’ll put my rating for each piece below and then average them for the final rating.
The Bacchae - 5/5
Iphigenia in Aulis - 4/5
The Cyclops - 3/5
Rhesus - 3/5
The Bacchae - 5/5
Iphigenia in Aulis - 4/5
The Cyclops - 3/5
Rhesus - 3/5
February 7, 2019
Bacchae was great, and had surprisingly strong parallels to the Gospels. Imagine, a story about a man who loves to drink and celebrate claiming to be immaculately conceived and a god, and others rejecting him and claiming that his mother was simply unfaithful. Who knew!
'Cyclops" was so similar to that in the Odyssey that I barely cared. Same with "Rhesus" and the Iliad. Iphigenia in Aulis was good; I enjoyed seeing her willingness to die for her country.
'Cyclops" was so similar to that in the Odyssey that I barely cared. Same with "Rhesus" and the Iliad. Iphigenia in Aulis was good; I enjoyed seeing her willingness to die for her country.
March 29, 2022
The Revised edition of Euripides plays are wonderfully done, though this one was a mixed bag for me. It has one of my favorites - 'Iphigenia in Aulis' - and another great one - 'The Bacchae' - but it ends with two uninspiring plays, 'The Cyclops' and 'Rhesus'. Still, a worthy volume for what it includes and what it tells. Again, a future purchase candidate.
December 22, 2021
Bacchae is HANDS DOWN my favorite Greek Tragedy. I love seeing Dionysus in the stage between pre-Greek Dionysus and post-acceptance Dionysus. It reminds us of why he is a god. This play just has it all for me and now I might just go get possessed by mad or something idk
Read
November 26, 2024... only read "Iphigenia in Aulis" not all four of these.
... no proper review, because I read it aloud with a family member, which was a very enjoyable experience, but not due to the text.
... best part was Iphigenia near the play's end.
... some of the speeches did seem quite unnecessarily long.
... no proper review, because I read it aloud with a family member, which was a very enjoyable experience, but not due to the text.
... best part was Iphigenia near the play's end.
... some of the speeches did seem quite unnecessarily long.
October 30, 2018
Just read the Bacchae from this collection. Fascinating story. Read along with Leithart’s *Heroes of the City of Man* which is very insightful.
March 21, 2020
The Bacchae! alright Dionysus
April 13, 2020
The Bacchae.... those gods and their rites!
June 26, 2021
all excellent except Rhesus
Read
March 19, 2024Only read Iphigenia In Aulis for school
June 19, 2024
Iphigenia was a masterpiece.
March 7, 2025
The Bacchae might be my new favourite Greek play (with Antigone). Cyclops was fantastic, Iphigenia was solid, didn’t care for Rhesus.
March 18, 2025
why does hector act so stupid here? he's not some meathead. cmon.
August 8, 2025
Just read “The Bacchae”
March 19, 2025
pentheus is such a loser if he wasn’t so damn nosy this could’ve all been avoided
January 20, 2016
An interesting mix of plays, displaying variety even while working within the limits and conventions of Greek drama. Bacchae and Iphigenia in Aulis are two of the last plays Euripides wrote—Bacchae has strong horror elements to it, while Iphigenia in Aulis is more of a traditional tragedy in which noble figures face agonizing choices. Cyclops is the only extant Greek satyr play, a burlesque of the episode in The Odyssey where Odysseus must save his men from a man-eating cyclops. And Rhesus is a wartime tragedy set in Troy, which may or may not have actually been written by Euripides.
I found Iphigenia in Aulis the most well-plotted, psychologically penetrating, and downright tragic of these plays, as the characters go back and forth on whether to sacrifice Iphigenia. Bacchae is also great, especially its choral hymns in praise of Dionysus' mountainside cult and wild rites. Euripides makes clear why so many people are drawn to Dionysus, as well as the terrible costs of denying his energies.
Rhesus did not hold my attention nearly so well, perhaps because its stakes are lower. It's the story of a noble prince of Thrace, who comes to aid the Trojans, but is ambushed and killed by Greek spies before he can do anything. Sure, that's not a happy story, but it's not nearly so tragic as tearing your son limb from limb while under the influence of religious mania (Bacchae) or being forced to kill your daughter in order to ensure a favorable wind to sail to Troy (Iphigenia in Aulis).
As this was my first time reading all of these plays, I cannot comment much on the translations, though I did find the Rhesus translation a bit awkward—it refers several times to a soldiers' "bivouac," and that word took me right out of the play.
I found Iphigenia in Aulis the most well-plotted, psychologically penetrating, and downright tragic of these plays, as the characters go back and forth on whether to sacrifice Iphigenia. Bacchae is also great, especially its choral hymns in praise of Dionysus' mountainside cult and wild rites. Euripides makes clear why so many people are drawn to Dionysus, as well as the terrible costs of denying his energies.
Rhesus did not hold my attention nearly so well, perhaps because its stakes are lower. It's the story of a noble prince of Thrace, who comes to aid the Trojans, but is ambushed and killed by Greek spies before he can do anything. Sure, that's not a happy story, but it's not nearly so tragic as tearing your son limb from limb while under the influence of religious mania (Bacchae) or being forced to kill your daughter in order to ensure a favorable wind to sail to Troy (Iphigenia in Aulis).
As this was my first time reading all of these plays, I cannot comment much on the translations, though I did find the Rhesus translation a bit awkward—it refers several times to a soldiers' "bivouac," and that word took me right out of the play.
November 19, 2021
Volume 5, 3rd edition of the U of Chicago Press' Eurpides. Started decades ago with Lattimore's translations and editing. 4 plays, 3 translators - including one by Lattimore (the spurious "Rhesus") and 2 by William Arrowsmith.
I used this volume as a backup to the Hackett edition, particularly for "Iphigenia".
Notes are textual, and at the back of the volume. As is a Glossary - which identifies various geographic locations, gods, and mortals. Cumbersome, but works well when these appear througout the multiple plays.
The best part is it includes "The Cyclops" - the only existing example of a complete "satyr play". Despite the requirement that one of this genre be included in the 4 plays submitted by each of the chosen 3 playwrights for the annual Athenian Great Dionysian Festival. Shorter, bawdy and comic, maybe later generations did not feel they were worthy of being preserved.
It also is one of the few places a reader can find "Rhesus" - a play attributed to Eurpides, but most scholars question if it actually was written by him. If he did write it, they suspect it wasrly in his career - and it does read like that.
Good scholalrly edition, although I do prefer Hackett's footnotes at the bottom of the page, rather than having us thumb to the back of the book looking under the Notes and the Glossary.
I used this volume as a backup to the Hackett edition, particularly for "Iphigenia".
Notes are textual, and at the back of the volume. As is a Glossary - which identifies various geographic locations, gods, and mortals. Cumbersome, but works well when these appear througout the multiple plays.
The best part is it includes "The Cyclops" - the only existing example of a complete "satyr play". Despite the requirement that one of this genre be included in the 4 plays submitted by each of the chosen 3 playwrights for the annual Athenian Great Dionysian Festival. Shorter, bawdy and comic, maybe later generations did not feel they were worthy of being preserved.
It also is one of the few places a reader can find "Rhesus" - a play attributed to Eurpides, but most scholars question if it actually was written by him. If he did write it, they suspect it wasrly in his career - and it does read like that.
Good scholalrly edition, although I do prefer Hackett's footnotes at the bottom of the page, rather than having us thumb to the back of the book looking under the Notes and the Glossary.
Read
January 5, 2016개인적으로 Euripides는 참 mixed opinion을 갖게 하는 poet다.
The Poet라는 호칭만으로도 알려질 정도로 그의 비극들은 Aeschylus와 Sophocles에 비해 훨씬 더 poetic하다.
이 작가는 Penguin사가 아니라 University of Chicago Press (잘 알려지지 않았지만 고전은 얘네가 괜찮은 듯하다)
거로 봤다. Stanford의 introduction이 너무 장황했다면 이 책의 introduction은 공허할 정도로 부족하다.
하지만 어느 정도 체계를 갖고 썼고 내 개인적 생각으로는 introduction은 대학교 강의도 cliff note도 commentary도 아니므로 이 정도로 만족한다. 게다가 각 작품들이 각각 다른 번역가가 했고 lyrical한 대사와 speech로 치는 대사가 다른 글자체로 구분되어 있어서 연극을 실제로 접해보지 못한 독자가 읽기에 아주 좋다.
물론 각각 다른 번역가여서 번역가에 따라 질이 많이 틀린 것도 보이는데
Bacchae는 원래 작품의 문제도 있고 (안타깝게도 정말 복원되지 않은 부분이 많다;;)
번역가의 문제도 있고 이것이 Euripides의 작품인지도 확실하지않을 정도로 나는 이 작품이 가장 마음에 들지 않았다.
연극으로 보면 뭔가 으시시하고 원시적인 분위기에 심취되어 재미있긴 하지만..
내용 그 자체는 아무리 다시 읽어도 그다지 공감이나 identify할 수 없는 내용이다.
그래서 내가 Donna Tartt의 Secret History도 그다지 공감이 안 갔던 것일까?
반면 Medea와 Hippolytus는 정말 명작인 듯하다.
특히 Euripides는 도대체 어떤 여자들을 사랑(또는 두려워)했을까?하는 생각이 들 정도로
여성의 관점에서 보기에 참 짜릿할 정도로 재미있고 공감가는 비극이다.
대사도 내가 보기에는 Aeschylus나 Sophocles에 비해 훨씬더 아름다우면서도 파워를 갖고 있다.
특히 Medea같은 경우는 번역가인 Oliver Taplin이 lyric을 일부러 운까지 맞추면서 번역한 노력이 돋보이고
이는 더욱더 그리스 비극이 chorus에서부터 비롯된 것을 실감하게 한다.
다만 선입견이라는 게 무서워서 자꾸 메데아를 읽으며 마리아 칼라스 얼굴과 목소리가 떠오르고
Hippolytus를 보며 앤소니 퍼킨스 얼굴이 떠오른다. ^^;;; 뭐 그 두 작품들도 나름 명작이긴 하니까..
The Poet라는 호칭만으로도 알려질 정도로 그의 비극들은 Aeschylus와 Sophocles에 비해 훨씬 더 poetic하다.
이 작가는 Penguin사가 아니라 University of Chicago Press (잘 알려지지 않았지만 고전은 얘네가 괜찮은 듯하다)
거로 봤다. Stanford의 introduction이 너무 장황했다면 이 책의 introduction은 공허할 정도로 부족하다.
하지만 어느 정도 체계를 갖고 썼고 내 개인적 생각으로는 introduction은 대학교 강의도 cliff note도 commentary도 아니므로 이 정도로 만족한다. 게다가 각 작품들이 각각 다른 번역가가 했고 lyrical한 대사와 speech로 치는 대사가 다른 글자체로 구분되어 있어서 연극을 실제로 접해보지 못한 독자가 읽기에 아주 좋다.
물론 각각 다른 번역가여서 번역가에 따라 질이 많이 틀린 것도 보이는데
Bacchae는 원래 작품의 문제도 있고 (안타깝게도 정말 복원되지 않은 부분이 많다;;)
번역가의 문제도 있고 이것이 Euripides의 작품인지도 확실하지않을 정도로 나는 이 작품이 가장 마음에 들지 않았다.
연극으로 보면 뭔가 으시시하고 원시적인 분위기에 심취되어 재미있긴 하지만..
내용 그 자체는 아무리 다시 읽어도 그다지 공감이나 identify할 수 없는 내용이다.
그래서 내가 Donna Tartt의 Secret History도 그다지 공감이 안 갔던 것일까?
반면 Medea와 Hippolytus는 정말 명작인 듯하다.
특히 Euripides는 도대체 어떤 여자들을 사랑(또는 두려워)했을까?하는 생각이 들 정도로
여성의 관점에서 보기에 참 짜릿할 정도로 재미있고 공감가는 비극이다.
대사도 내가 보기에는 Aeschylus나 Sophocles에 비해 훨씬더 아름다우면서도 파워를 갖고 있다.
특히 Medea같은 경우는 번역가인 Oliver Taplin이 lyric을 일부러 운까지 맞추면서 번역한 노력이 돋보이고
이는 더욱더 그리스 비극이 chorus에서부터 비롯된 것을 실감하게 한다.
다만 선입견이라는 게 무서워서 자꾸 메데아를 읽으며 마리아 칼라스 얼굴과 목소리가 떠오르고
Hippolytus를 보며 앤소니 퍼킨스 얼굴이 떠오른다. ^^;;; 뭐 그 두 작품들도 나름 명작이긴 하니까..
February 8, 2017
This cyclus (complete Euripides) is really a lovely edition of Euripides' plays. But this, final one contains weaker plays. Iphigenia in Aulis is masterpiece, but Bacchae is for me too barbaric. Cyclops is satyr-play so interesting to read to get to know how satyr-plays looked like but otherwise quite mediocore and it's wrapped up by Rhesus, play so bad that scholars seriosly consider it to be not written by Euripides.
And editor could have at least enough imagination to put The Cyclops at the and as it was habbit in greek with satyr-plays.
Dissapointing finale of cyclus. But hell, Iphigenia in Aulis is must-read.
And editor could have at least enough imagination to put The Cyclops at the and as it was habbit in greek with satyr-plays.
Dissapointing finale of cyclus. But hell, Iphigenia in Aulis is must-read.
April 24, 2016
This is certainly the most interesting and best-written of all five volumes, excluding 'Rhesus,' which would only be interesting to fans of "Iliad" (which I am). I found the Bacchus play to be the most fascinating of all Euripides' works and, consequently, the most well-written. There is plenty to think about in that one. I also felt that this Iphigenia work is also the most dramatic and sad of anything else Euripides wrote. 'Cyclops' is hilarious and I wish we had more satyr plays today -- they certainly seem like fun twists on myths.
While Euripides was my least favorite of the three dramatic Greeks (stylistically, anyway), I felt that he was the most interesting overall, save for his 'deus ex' issue and some very... similar plays. ::eyeballs 'Helen' and 'Iphigenia' angrily::
While Euripides was my least favorite of the three dramatic Greeks (stylistically, anyway), I felt that he was the most interesting overall, save for his 'deus ex' issue and some very... similar plays. ::eyeballs 'Helen' and 'Iphigenia' angrily::
March 30, 2014
I only read Iphigenia in Aulis and The Cylops, both are wonderful and rather funny.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 33 reviews