Abstract
Scholarly opinion about the attic tragedy almost unanimously accepts that the essence of Greek tragic theatre consists in the representation of a world of tensions, ambiguities, transformations and revelations. In the tragic perspective, the words and actions of heroes are articulated in conjunction with the divine forces, i.e. the words, the will and objectives of gods, and thus they are embedded in a level of perception where they acquire their true meaning a meaning that eludes and transcends the heroes themselves.In Sophoclean drama, the problem of the coexistence of gods and men and especially the issue of the tragic conflict of the hero with the divine prophetic utterance has been examined in its multiple dimensions: epistemological (human knowledge/doksa vs. divine knowledge/gnōsis), psychological (human will/freedom vs. divine necessity/moira), political (tyrant vs. prophet). In contrast to these approaches which are concerned primarily with the function of prophecy and mantic ...
Scholarly opinion about the attic tragedy almost unanimously accepts that the essence of Greek tragic theatre consists in the representation of a world of tensions, ambiguities, transformations and revelations. In the tragic perspective, the words and actions of heroes are articulated in conjunction with the divine forces, i.e. the words, the will and objectives of gods, and thus they are embedded in a level of perception where they acquire their true meaning a meaning that eludes and transcends the heroes themselves.In Sophoclean drama, the problem of the coexistence of gods and men and especially the issue of the tragic conflict of the hero with the divine prophetic utterance has been examined in its multiple dimensions: epistemological (human knowledge/doksa vs. divine knowledge/gnōsis), psychological (human will/freedom vs. divine necessity/moira), political (tyrant vs. prophet). In contrast to these approaches which are concerned primarily with the function of prophecy and mantic discourse as either a means of communication between humans and gods or simply as a repeated pattern or motif of divine warning, the focus of the present study is on the function of prophecy as a decisive discourse exemplified by human homilia, i.e. the individual’s interactive discourse and dialectic communication. This study: The Mantic Discourse and the Limits of Human Knowledge and Action in Sophoclean Drama, examines the ways in which Sophocles utilizes prophecy and mantic discourse, in order to create a series of verbal and/or silent «resonances-coincidences» in the dialogues of the dramatic characters. It is precisely through these «resonances» that the dramatist displays a deeper, inner dimension of communication of his heroes —especially the protagonists—, as he imparts to their speech, thoughts and actions psychological depth that creates an ambiguity and elusiveness somewhat similar to the ambiguity and elusiveness of the prophetic word/sign. The methodological principles of this study on the mantic discourse and prophecy as a dramatic tool in Sophoclean characterization greatly benefited from rich scholarly work on the interactive and inextricable relationship and continuity of the dramatic characters with the other two components of tragic play, namely language and plot. As noted by scholars (Garton, Gould, Easterling, Goldhill), dramatic actors —their speech and actions, and their psychological motivation— cannot be understood outside of the discourse and action of the play itself. In the tragedies examined, Trachiniae, Oedipus Rex and Philoctetes, Sophocles employs prophecy and mantic discourse in order to create an inextricable connection between the divine prophetic utterance, the human speech and action of heroes, and the plot of the play. In these plays, it is remarkable that prophecies are not just fulfilled but are redefined, in order to be identified with the plot of the entire tragedy in which they are embedded (Trachiniae); or in order to be transcribed, as the tragedy develops, either into a new oracle (Oedipus Rex) or into a new divine and mantic utterance (Hercules’ mythos, in Philoctetes). In other words, in these tragedies the oracles do not just reveal their true meaning but, as they become part of both human communication and their interpretation by the heroes, they are gradually transformed and transcribed into a new divine speech and mantic utterance within the discourse of the tragedy that contains them.Through this close articulation of the language of actors, of the prophetic and divine language, and of the language of his own play, Sophocles raises the issue of tragic «late-learning», which admittedly characterizes his theater, and at the same time, he creates a deeper, inner and (in this sense) often enigmatic (to the audience) dimension of human communication and action of his dramatic characters.Thus, prophecy and mantic discourse in Sophoclean tragedy is far more significant in that it is not a mere repetitive pattern and/or motif of the gods warning the human heroes. Sophocles uses prophecy and mantic discourse to place his dramatic persons —especially his protagonists— on an intermediary, marginal space: on the one hand, there is the public and visible «outside» space of their dialogue, where the heroes understand and express themselves through words or deeds with absolute clarity and transparency; and, on the other hand, there is a concurrent deeper, more personal «inner» space that shelters the heroes’ thoughts and emotions, without ever being fully revealed to others, their interlocutors or the audience.
show more
