Sarah Kane: Phaedra's Love

To avoid the risk of any awkward citation, I'm going to stray from quoting this story in my workbook solely because this is out for the whole world to see, I will work on quotes in my final paper. I found this version to be very stark, miserable, and depressing. But it felt real to me. This Hippolytus was certainly different from the other two in the sense that he was despicable and impure in any sexual sense. In my opinion, though, he was still strikingly similar to both Seneca and Racine's Phaedra. They all were trying to abstain from love in some form and although Kane's Hippolytus had seemingly everyone in the kingdom in his pants, he did not show a flicker of love except for two specific places. One would be where Phaedra mentions Lena and he immediately shuts her down, thus shutting off those emotions. The second is the brief embrace he shares with Strophe. It is a small stage direction that really stood out to me.

I think it is certainly legitimate to say that Hippolytus abstained from love and it is certainly not a good argument to say he was intimate with others. Prostitutes likewise give and receive sex on a large scale and you cannot tell me that they love every person they give favors to. The same is in Hippolytus' case. I think Sarah Kane made him more realistic by making him sexual. He is creepy and so unfeeling, almost like Kane herself put many of her depressive qualities in him.

Phédre by Jean Racine

Hippolytus is so different! He actually falls in love with a woman, which I saw as a complete turnaround from Seneca's Phaedra. However, I could still see his hesitation in such an endeavor (falling in love) because he was still the same pure, virtuous character. He still abstained from women initially, but was swept away with Aricia. I found that to be the start of beautiful love story, but maybe that is just the romantic in me. After all, Hippolytus still gets ripped to shreds by the sea monster, so it doesn't end well. I found this Phaedra to be very knowingly selfish, yet I liked her more than Seneca's representation. She seemed to know that she was not fully all there as far as her conscious decision-making went, and she absolutely understood the complications of loving her son-in-law. She was very pettily jealous and seemed extremely human in the sense that her flaws were normal. I liked this Theseus a lot more because he seemed a lot more dedicated to Phaedra, as Hippolytus mentions in the beginning by saying Theseus has not done adulterous acts since "his youth" and since "Phaedra". However, that makes Phaedra's deeds that much more despicable. It is one thing to want to cheat on an unloving husband, but to cheat on the opposite seems so selfish and heinous.

On an interesting little side note, the following comes from http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/theatre_journal/v055/55.1cody.html

Jean Racine's Ph�dre et Hippolyte was first performed in 1677, with Racine's mistress, La Champmel�e, in the title role. It was a terrible flop. Pradon, a mediocre writer loyal to Racine's neo-classical nemesis, Corneille, had simultaneously produced his own version of the play and momentarily triumphed. Racine left Paris and the stage for twelve years. During this time, he became the king's historiographer, married, and devoted himself to religious practice. But when the Comedie Fran�aise was first founded in 1680, Ph�dre was the first play to be produced. Long considered the masterpiece of French classical literature, Ph�dre, along with Racine's other eleven plays have not fared well outside of France. The neo-classical Alexandrine is a near-impossible poetic convention to translate.

Bertolt Brecht's Antigone

This version of Antigone was much more political. It seemed like Antigone was not trying to bury her brother for the sake of family ties. Instead, she was doing in more in defiance of Creon. Creon, in this version, is much more powerful and seems to understand a great deal more about the politics of his kingdom than that of the Creon in Seamus Heaney's The Burial at Thebes.

Antigone seems more concerned about making a statement and standing up against what is wrong. Whereas previously she was more concerned with the afterlife, she was more consumed with this life in this version.

Seneca's Phaedra

Men are despicable. But then again, so are women. I found it detestable that Phaedra had such a love for her son-in-law, Hippolytus. Then, throughout the text, I felt like Phaedra was not so much in love with Hippolytus as she was lonely. Her husband was off getting into the dresses of every woman he found to be desirable and she was left at home, alone. Women have desires too. I think her hunger for these desires overtook her and created in her a sort of madness. She then transferred this madness into a sort of maniac-like love for Hippolytus.

In my opinion, Theseus did indeed love Phaedra a great deal. I feel like he slept with the other women because it fulfilled his carnal desires, not because he did not love Phaedra. I do not think he thought of his affairs as anything despicable or geared towards Phaedra. This does not change the action, but still, the motive was not entirely bad. He was willing to kill his son for Phaedra when she lied to him about Hippolytus trying to rape her. This was also about honor and loyalty, but I feel like he was still passionate towards his wife; that is to say that he still loved her a great deal. The greatest hatred comes from great love. That is shown in the ending when he finds out his wife lied to him and wishes her body just be dumped into the ground with earth laid on top of it. His trust in her was vanished, he watcher her take her own life over her own wrongdoings and I believe that mixed with his grief over the loss of his son (at his own hand) created in him a very broken man.

http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/sen/sen.phaedra.shtml

The Burial at Thebes

The first is an awesome trailer done by a playgroup and the second is a humorous adaptation of Antigone.

I identified with Antigone in this because I felt like no matter what, family is family. It would be a different story if it was her that a heinous act was done on. But he is her blood. I feel the same way about my brother. If someone were to leave my brother's body out to be eaten by every kind of disgusting creature, I'd be a little pissed. Creon is ridiculously tyrannical in this and his tyranny proves to be false. Antigone defied the laws of man to obey the laws of the Gods. If anyone claims to be devoutly religious in any way, they would do the exact same thing. But it goes beyond religion, as I have already said, because he was her brother! Blood is thicker than water.
In the end, Creon pays for his wrongdoings and loses everything that was ever dear to him. Also, he has lost all respect of the people. I was glad. Maybe it is wicked of me but it made me lighthearted to see Creon fall to such lows. He deserved it, every single bit.

Lars von Trier's Medea

I know we did not have to write an entry in our notebook on this particular version of Medea, however, I felt it was moving enough to mention.

This Medea was portrayed as normal as could be imagined. She was a good mother, despite the end. She was the most tender Medea, by far, and she was visibly heartbroken over killing her children. However, despite it all, she did kill them.




Watch this! It is a moving rendition of Lars von Trier's Medea mixed with a song performed entitled "Sacrifice"

Heiner Muller's Medeaplay

Heiner Muller is weird. I mean that in an opinionated way that is only focused upon his writing. I have no idea what was going on through his head when he was writing Medea play. Furthermore, the phenomenon of watching this would probably be even more strange. How would anyone know what was going on? I found the ties to former Greek tragedies interesting, subtly hinting at Jason's past. Beyond that, I had no idea what to discuss. I had no idea what was occurring, to be honest. It was utter madness and confusion and left me very stupefied.


However, upon researching it, I did find that this performance has indeed been put on!

http://www.freetheatre.org.nz/history/medeamaterial.shtml


This link describes a little about Hamlet Machine and Medea play and includes images of the performance!

Seneca's Medea

In every version of Medea that I have read, I am drawn to the tragic ending. I suppose Don Delillo would say that is human nature. However, I found it captivating and horrifying that Medea was so matter-of-fact about killing her children in this one. She very specifically hopes to avenge her brother's death by the killings and says something along the lines of the children must die because they aren't hers, but then again the are hers so they are doomed. Very interesting point of view, where she takes no blame for their death, rather puts it off on Jason. She was very showy in their deaths and thought the people would be happy:


"Don't hide your deed. The people will applaud" (94)


and then :


"A sense of pleasure subtly penetrates my being, and it grows, constantly grows. It lacked only one thing to be perfect. He should have seen it. So I have achieved nothing as of yet" (95)


She achieved nothing? She took the lives of her children! But nothing has been achieved?! And furthermore, she is not ashamed, rather, she thinks people will applaud? It is one thing to force yourself to believe that taking your children's lives is a good thing, but to think others will be happy in it with you? That is utter madness.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/nov/05/ukcrime.lornamartin


This link is a story of father's in the UK who have brutally murdered their children to seek revenge on the mothers. It is an interesting real-life spin on this tragic story. What drives parents to such hatred towards their once-loved spouse enough to make them hate them? It is a mystery to me.

Euripides' Medea

CHILDREN. Ah! Ah!

CHORUS. D'you hear them? Their cries? Stone heart, cruel fate.

FIRST CHILD. Mummy! No!

SECOND CHILD. Don't kill us!

CHORUS. Should we go inside? We could save their lives.

FIRST CHILD. Gods, help!

SECOND CHILD. The knife. Oh help!(43-44).


This passage thoroughly disgusted me. I could envision my one year old niece screaming because she doesn't want to go to bed, and her shrill little screams always make me get her out of her crib until she is comforted. How much more disturbing could the screams be of a child who is screaming, very literally, for their life? And throughout their screaming, Medea says nothing. She does not quiet them, she does not even attempt to nurture them. Instead, she very brutally endures their screaming and kills them anyways. How cold does one have to be for this to occur? I can only imagine.

Furthermore, I am disgusted with the thought of the chorus debating to save the children's lives but instead of even attempting any action to discourage their slaughtering, they do nothing. They simply discuss going inside to save their lives. It is simple human nature for someone to want to protect children, or so I thought. Apparently, in this telling of Medea, nothing could be further from the truth.

Another interesting facet of this passage is the fact the children are begging the Gods to help them. Ordinarily, upon thinking of Gods someone may think of mercy. If the Gods existed, they showed no mercy upon the children. They very blatantly watched them die. It makes me wonder if right before the children ceased to function, their belief in the Gods vanished.

At approximately 7 minutes and 34 seconds is the very passage I discussed. This is a moving version of Euripides' Medea, with the actors speaking and doing sign language at the same time. Very interesting.

Don Delillo's "Videotape"

Wow. This could explain the scene in many households in America. I am even going to go out on a limb and say this could happen in any household throughout the world that has the ability to watch television and the news. There is some sort of tragic pleasure in all of us. It is why we all take a look at the car wreck we are passing. It is why we further share the information of how bad the wreck was with someone else. Upon reading this I immediately thought of my sister. She is affectionately dubbed the "Debbie Downer" of the family because she always has the most depressing stories to tell. After hearing her stories you either feel like crying or kicking a whole in the wall. They are that extreme. They typically involve children like this story. That was perhaps the most depressing aspect of this whole narration. The little girl whose innocence was obscenely shattered from a simple pleasure that she stumbled upon. I have a fascination with photographs, I snap pictures of perhaps the most innate of objects just because they are there. On that level, I could identify with the girl. However, I might find it fascinating to accidentally snap a photograph of something horrific. That seems sick, but how many of us are willing to admit that same truth? Tragic pleasure is a very real and very puzzling phenomenon. I have a theory, when someone dies and they go see the family at the wake (viewing) and they say "I am so sorry for your loss", really they are saying "I am so glad that I'm not in your place right now". But then again, you have some people that react to people dying as if that person was their best friend, when they probably only said two words to the person in the whole of their lifetime. That angers me. It is like they are infringing on someone else's right to grieve, their right to tragedy. Maybe this a little too broad of a tie-in, but in saying all that he did through the short story of "Videotape" I feel like Don Delillo would agree with my analysis.


This music video is the perfect accompaniment for this work because it speaks of tragedy as being beautiful. It is a crazy idea, but how often do we think of tragedy in such a way? Without realizing it?