Scan barcode
charliew_23's review
dark
emotional
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
lanceschaubert's review against another edition
4.0
Onward through Sophocles! As THE SUPPLIANT MAIDENS by Aeschylus was a "Me Too" play for our time, so too it felt remarkably providential to read OEDIPUS AT COLONUS while our nation — and world — confronts the dark heart of police brutality. For indeed Creon — Oedipus's uncle and brother — comes to take away those he has no right to take.
We also have the seedbed of Antigone here: the worry over her father living out his days in peace while her brothers — his sons — squabble over the realm. We see a sort of sacred grace to her posture: to see the lesson of suffering as the virtue of patience, to have — generally — a hopeful disposition for everything that has happened.
One of the most remarkable things we discover is just how WISE Ed's become since the arrogance of his beginning: now, for him, the wise speech _is_ sight. And for a man who clawed himself to blindness in shame, that's saying something. But even the wise speech foretells of foresight itself: of the ways that he may close his weary life far from the strifes of power. In shelter and succor for such a vexed man.
But his sons won't leave him alone and come — those who betrayed him, their father — to appeal for his ruling in their squabbles. He abstains and, still penitent from the regret of the shames he could not control or know, he grows wiser still in the quests for power, money, pleasure, fame that men so foolishly seek. And rid of all, he becomes something like a Obiwan character (or, honestly, vice versa considering the Star Wars mythos) — taken like Enosh in Genesis for his deference (not my will, but thine), in his yearning to be cast away from the secondary desires of men, who wants not the boons of Creon and others all too late in his exile, "As if a man should give thee no gift, bring thee no aid, when thou was fain of the boon; but after thy soul's desire was sated, should grant it then, when the grace could be gracious no more: wouldst thou not find that pleasure vain? Yet such are thine own offers unto me — good in name, but in their substance evil."
And in refusing to accept evil offer after evil offer, he affirms the negative introverted side of the transformation he began in the positive extroverted side of him.
Antigone is seized, unjustly, by Creon and Theseus of Athens shows up in force. And even when Creon tries to show Oedipus's patricide in the prior book as just cause for the kidnapping, Oedipus calls him out: would you stop and ask for a genealogy of a man who attacked you? Oedipus points out that these proximate goods (not even great gains by his post-fall assessment) gotten by wrongful arts are soon lost anyways. So he has no need of them and basically calls down curses on his uncle.
In the end, we find even his faults — his FATAL FLAW — can be healed, subverting Aristotle and many besides. No one should crave to live longer than they do, we find, but rather seek a "fitting" span of life as opposed to, say, a Bilbo who ends up feeling like butter spread over too much bread. Oedipus is taken not in tragedy, not swallowed by the earth or stricken by lightening, but whisked off so gently and wonderfully by the gods that we in modern times might well call him a saint by the end: one who walked with God.
OTHER QUICK NOTES:
1. The women, his daughters, are called "men, not women, in true service" and the sons are called "aliens, not sons of mine." It's yet another instance in antiquity of the word "man" being genderless and of "woman" being specific — mankind is always a diverse and inclusive term, womankind is always a restrictive term. And therefore daughters can rise to the virtue of manfulness and men can fall short. Because manfulness is a virtue and manliness is an aesthetic. This is repeated over and over again. And recalls the line from [b:Walking on Water: Reflections on Faith and Art|136814|Walking on Water Reflections on Faith and Art|Madeleine L'Engle|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1320404692l/136814._SX50_.jpg|1136355]:
Reminds me of St. Catherine of Siena:
2. The phrase "shalt thou hold this city unscathed from the side of the Dragon's blood" is so evocative.
3. We meet the watcher — the hound of hell.
4. Antigone leaves to go to her homeland, setting up the retaliatory killing and burial rights of the next play.
Enjoyable, but hard at times. Having trouble focusing, but the crepuscular sleep patterns is making for a solid hour of focus between first and second sleep at about 3am - 4am by candlelight. Gets me in the mood.
Call me a romantic, if you'd like, and I'll just nod. Cheers folks.
We also have the seedbed of Antigone here: the worry over her father living out his days in peace while her brothers — his sons — squabble over the realm. We see a sort of sacred grace to her posture: to see the lesson of suffering as the virtue of patience, to have — generally — a hopeful disposition for everything that has happened.
One of the most remarkable things we discover is just how WISE Ed's become since the arrogance of his beginning: now, for him, the wise speech _is_ sight. And for a man who clawed himself to blindness in shame, that's saying something. But even the wise speech foretells of foresight itself: of the ways that he may close his weary life far from the strifes of power. In shelter and succor for such a vexed man.
But his sons won't leave him alone and come — those who betrayed him, their father — to appeal for his ruling in their squabbles. He abstains and, still penitent from the regret of the shames he could not control or know, he grows wiser still in the quests for power, money, pleasure, fame that men so foolishly seek. And rid of all, he becomes something like a Obiwan character (or, honestly, vice versa considering the Star Wars mythos) — taken like Enosh in Genesis for his deference (not my will, but thine), in his yearning to be cast away from the secondary desires of men, who wants not the boons of Creon and others all too late in his exile, "As if a man should give thee no gift, bring thee no aid, when thou was fain of the boon; but after thy soul's desire was sated, should grant it then, when the grace could be gracious no more: wouldst thou not find that pleasure vain? Yet such are thine own offers unto me — good in name, but in their substance evil."
And in refusing to accept evil offer after evil offer, he affirms the negative introverted side of the transformation he began in the positive extroverted side of him.
Antigone is seized, unjustly, by Creon and Theseus of Athens shows up in force. And even when Creon tries to show Oedipus's patricide in the prior book as just cause for the kidnapping, Oedipus calls him out: would you stop and ask for a genealogy of a man who attacked you? Oedipus points out that these proximate goods (not even great gains by his post-fall assessment) gotten by wrongful arts are soon lost anyways. So he has no need of them and basically calls down curses on his uncle.
In the end, we find even his faults — his FATAL FLAW — can be healed, subverting Aristotle and many besides. No one should crave to live longer than they do, we find, but rather seek a "fitting" span of life as opposed to, say, a Bilbo who ends up feeling like butter spread over too much bread. Oedipus is taken not in tragedy, not swallowed by the earth or stricken by lightening, but whisked off so gently and wonderfully by the gods that we in modern times might well call him a saint by the end: one who walked with God.
OTHER QUICK NOTES:
1. The women, his daughters, are called "men, not women, in true service" and the sons are called "aliens, not sons of mine." It's yet another instance in antiquity of the word "man" being genderless and of "woman" being specific — mankind is always a diverse and inclusive term, womankind is always a restrictive term. And therefore daughters can rise to the virtue of manfulness and men can fall short. Because manfulness is a virtue and manliness is an aesthetic. This is repeated over and over again. And recalls the line from [b:Walking on Water: Reflections on Faith and Art|136814|Walking on Water Reflections on Faith and Art|Madeleine L'Engle|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1320404692l/136814._SX50_.jpg|1136355]:
Nor do I want to be stuck in the vague androidism which has resulted from the attempts to avoid the masculine pronoun. We are in a state of intense sexual confusion, both in life and language, but the social manipulation is not working. Language is a living thing; it does not stay the same; it is hard for me to read the language of Piers Plowman, for instance, so radical have the changes been. But language is its own creature. It evolves on its own. It follows the language of its great artists, such as Chaucer. It does not do well when suffering from arbitrary control. Our attempts to change the words which have long been part of a society dominated by males have not been successful; instead of making language less sexist they have made it more so. Indeed, we are in a bind. For thousands of years we have lived in a paternalistic society, where women have allowed men to make God over in their own masculine image. But that's anthropomorphism. To think of God in terms of sex at all is a dead end. To substitute person for man has ruined what used to be a good theological word, calling up the glory of God's image within us. Now, at best, it's a joke. There's something humiliating and embarrassing about being a chairperson. Or a chair. A group of earnest women have put together a volume of desexed hymns, and one of my old favourites now begins: “Dear Mother-Father of personkind.” No. It won't do. This is not equality. Perhaps we should drop the word woman altogether and use man, recognizing that we need both male and female to be whole. And perhaps if we ever have real equality with all our glorious differences, the language itself will make the appropriate changes. For language, like a story or a painting, is alive. Ultimately it will be the artists who will change the language (as Chaucer did, as Dante did, as Joyce did), not the committees. For an artist is not a consumer, as our commercials urge us to be. An artist is a nourisher and a creator who knows that during the act of creation there is collaboration. We do not create alone."
Reminds me of St. Catherine of Siena:
"What made you establish man in so great a dignity? Certainly, the incalculable love by which you have looked on your creature in yourself! You are taken with love for her; for by love indeed you created her; by love you have given her a being capable of tasting your eternal Good."
2. The phrase "shalt thou hold this city unscathed from the side of the Dragon's blood" is so evocative.
3. We meet the watcher — the hound of hell.
4. Antigone leaves to go to her homeland, setting up the retaliatory killing and burial rights of the next play.
Enjoyable, but hard at times. Having trouble focusing, but the crepuscular sleep patterns is making for a solid hour of focus between first and second sleep at about 3am - 4am by candlelight. Gets me in the mood.
Call me a romantic, if you'd like, and I'll just nod. Cheers folks.
lay_kone's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
medium-paced
3.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Suicide, War, Violence, and Animal death
shirin_mandi's review
3.0
هیچکس جز مردم جبان و ترسو آرزومند عمری دراز نیست که سراسر آن برنج و فرومایگی گذرد. چه فایده آدمی بیکار نشیند و بشامرش ایام وقت بگذراند و در مسیر نیستی گام گذارد؟ یا چه فایده که انسان با آتش نیم مرده آمال و آرزوها خویشتن را گرم کند؟...
یا باید با افتخار زیست یا بسر بلندی هلاک شد...
I start the alphabet challenge on 1 October to finish by the end of the year, hope so...
Ajax
the Banshees of inisherin
Catfish rolling
the Dogs of Athens
Elder Race
the Fire Next Time
A Game of Gods (Hades Saga, #3) /or Geneva...
یا باید با افتخار زیست یا بسر بلندی هلاک شد...
I start the alphabet challenge on 1 October to finish by the end of the year, hope so...
Ajax
the Banshees of inisherin
Catfish rolling
the Dogs of Athens
Elder Race
the Fire Next Time
A Game of Gods (Hades Saga, #3) /or Geneva...
kesogago's review
5.0
One of the earliest ones from Sophocles, and probably one of the rawest as well. Loved it
სოფოკლეს პიესებიდან ალბათ ყველაზე მეტად ამით ვისიამოვნე. ზოგადად, ძალიან მიყვარს სოფოკლეს პანაშვიდისებდი ამბები :დ ეს პიესა ერთ-ერთი პირველია მისი შემოქმედებიდან, და ალბათ ყველაზე კარგად ასახავს სოფოკლეს სტილს. კაცი მოკვდა, და მის თავზე ხალხი ბჭობს. ამაზე მეტად რამ შეიძლება გაგართოს?!
სოფოკლეს პიესებიდან ალბათ ყველაზე მეტად ამით ვისიამოვნე. ზოგადად, ძალიან მიყვარს სოფოკლეს პანაშვიდისებდი ამბები :დ ეს პიესა ერთ-ერთი პირველია მისი შემოქმედებიდან, და ალბათ ყველაზე კარგად ასახავს სოფოკლეს სტილს. კაცი მოკვდა, და მის თავზე ხალხი ბჭობს. ამაზე მეტად რამ შეიძლება გაგართოს?!
vudemn's review
5.0
Kada sam konačno završio seminarski na temu Ajantove tragike, pokušaću da tih 14 strana (isprva beše 17, no moralo se to skratiti) da ovde u vidu nekoliko crta predstavim. So, let's get down to business...
Αἴας
Vredi li šta drugo reći? U samom imenu sadržano je čitavo biće Ajantovo, taj urlik koji je na nekom nivou jači od Ahilejevog urlika hiljada grla dok se spušta na Trojance. Ajant je biće koje ide u krajnost, on se gubi u njima, ne može podneti onu aristotelovsku sredinu, stalno šeta po toj osi žudeći za najboljim. Dokazao se kao izvrstan heroj u Trojanskom ratu, naravno. Ne najbolji, ali njegova aristija paralelno raste kao veliko dostignuće i opravdanje porekla. Eugenija je zajebana stvar, od vas se uvek očekuje mnogo. No, i tada Ajant uspeva, u njemu nema straha niti strepnje čak ni kada se suočava sa najboljim herojem Troje. Postoje brojne paralele mnogih homerskih junaka i Ajanta, isprva sa Ahilom, kao najboljim pod Trojom. Njegova srdžba u neku ruku nalikuje Ajantovoj, ali vremenom dolazi do pomirenja kod Ahileja kada je shvatio bezizlaznost situacije i krhkost života. i Ajant se na neki način miri sa sudbinom, ali on ipak krivi Bogove, oseća se potpuno odbačen od svih ljudi, prijatelja i neprijatelja. Samoubistvo je jedini izlaz, jedini način da se i dalje pokaže kao dostojan svog imena. Može se napraviti sličnost sa osramoćenim samurajima i seppuku postupkom. Drugi homerski junak koji čvrste veze pravi sa Ajantom, jeste Hektor. Njih dvojica se donekle i ravnaju po snazi, što je pokazao onaj dvoboj u Ilijadi gde su obojica izašli kao pobednici. I još jedna scena odatle je bitna - razmena darova.
„Уистину пословица вели: душмана дар је злокобни дар!“ (Ај. 664-665)
Pojas koji je Ajant dao njemu, Ahilej je iskoristio da veže Hektorovo telo za kola dok ga je vukao. A isto tako, mač koji je Hektor Ajantu podario, isti je onaj mač kojim je zaklao goveda misleći da su njegovi neprijatelji, a takođe i isti mač na koji se bacio. Prema jednoj od legendi, Herakle je posetio Telamona jednom prilikom i od Zevsa je zatražio da njegovom tada tek novorođenom sinu podari bezmernu snagu. Po drugoj, Ajant je bio besmrtan svugde osim na jednom mestu ispod pazuha, istom mestu na koje je mač prošao kroz njegovo telo.
I na kraju, junak koji je prisutan i u Ilijadi a i u ovoj tragediji: Odisej. Dodatno razvijanje njegove ličnosti ključno je za razumevanje same tragike Ajanta. Na neki način, Odisej je čak bolji i od same boginje Atene koja na licu ima prezriv osmeh dok posmatra Ajanta u bunilu, a sam Odisej oseća empatiju i sažaljenje čak iako posmatra svog neprijatelja, koji je ubeđen da njega ubija.
„Сви ми, људи, приказе смо само,
несталне сене“ (Ај. 124-125)
Upravo shvatanje krhkosti ljudskog života dovodi Odiseja u to stanje uma. Za razliku od Kreonta u Antigoni, on posle ipak neće da dovede u pitanje božansko pravo sahranjivanja neprijatelja, čak se ponudi da pomogne pri sahrani.
Kao što je Frejdenbergova rekla, svi osim njega su i dalje u svađi jer predstavljaju produžetak besa kojim je Ajant bio obuzet.
Na mnogim mestima u Ilijadi isticao se Ajantov štit, i to je još jedan predmet bitan za samu radnju - on je odlika njega kao vojnika koji nikad nije bio poražen, uvek se odbranio. A ujedno i kao oca koji prepušta deci porodicu, kada svom sinu pruža štit kojim će braniti majku i sebe. Tekmesa je tu kao figura koja dopunjuje Ajantovu ličnost kroz kontrast - tehnika veoma česta u Sofoklovim dramama (kontrastni parovi: Antigona/Ismena, Edip/Jokasta, Elektra/Hrisotemida).
Hor je ovde veoma specifičan. Retko kada se u tragedijama javlja hor sredovečnih muškaraca kao što su ovde predstavljeni mornari, prijatelji Ajantovi. Sofokle savršeno zavara gledaoce koji se uzdaju u univerzalizovanu istinu koja dolazi od hora, kada on počne da radosno peva o izbavljenju iz nevolja i promeni Ajantove odluke. Ali, to je sve varka, jer Ajant je čvršće no ikad odlučio da to uradi ali se pomirio sa sudbinom.
Sama smrt i snaga poslednjih reči ostavlja bez daha, kada kroz lament nad samim sobom i svojom sudbinom Ajant dolazi do pomirenja sa istom:
„Задњи пут Ајант обраћа се вама –
Онима у Хаду остало ћу рећи!“ (Ај. 864-865)
Ali, tragedija se ne završava samim činom ubistva, već sahrane tela. Taj motiv je značajan, još jače prikazan u Antigoni čija fabula se vrti upravo oko toga. Tek nakon pomirenja sa ovostranim u svakom smislu, krunisano činom sahrane, Ajantova psyche može da počiva.
Αἴας
Vredi li šta drugo reći? U samom imenu sadržano je čitavo biće Ajantovo, taj urlik koji je na nekom nivou jači od Ahilejevog urlika hiljada grla dok se spušta na Trojance. Ajant je biće koje ide u krajnost, on se gubi u njima, ne može podneti onu aristotelovsku sredinu, stalno šeta po toj osi žudeći za najboljim. Dokazao se kao izvrstan heroj u Trojanskom ratu, naravno. Ne najbolji, ali njegova aristija paralelno raste kao veliko dostignuće i opravdanje porekla. Eugenija je zajebana stvar, od vas se uvek očekuje mnogo. No, i tada Ajant uspeva, u njemu nema straha niti strepnje čak ni kada se suočava sa najboljim herojem Troje. Postoje brojne paralele mnogih homerskih junaka i Ajanta, isprva sa Ahilom, kao najboljim pod Trojom. Njegova srdžba u neku ruku nalikuje Ajantovoj, ali vremenom dolazi do pomirenja kod Ahileja kada je shvatio bezizlaznost situacije i krhkost života. i Ajant se na neki način miri sa sudbinom, ali on ipak krivi Bogove, oseća se potpuno odbačen od svih ljudi, prijatelja i neprijatelja. Samoubistvo je jedini izlaz, jedini način da se i dalje pokaže kao dostojan svog imena. Može se napraviti sličnost sa osramoćenim samurajima i seppuku postupkom. Drugi homerski junak koji čvrste veze pravi sa Ajantom, jeste Hektor. Njih dvojica se donekle i ravnaju po snazi, što je pokazao onaj dvoboj u Ilijadi gde su obojica izašli kao pobednici. I još jedna scena odatle je bitna - razmena darova.
„Уистину пословица вели: душмана дар је злокобни дар!“ (Ај. 664-665)
Pojas koji je Ajant dao njemu, Ahilej je iskoristio da veže Hektorovo telo za kola dok ga je vukao. A isto tako, mač koji je Hektor Ajantu podario, isti je onaj mač kojim je zaklao goveda misleći da su njegovi neprijatelji, a takođe i isti mač na koji se bacio. Prema jednoj od legendi, Herakle je posetio Telamona jednom prilikom i od Zevsa je zatražio da njegovom tada tek novorođenom sinu podari bezmernu snagu. Po drugoj, Ajant je bio besmrtan svugde osim na jednom mestu ispod pazuha, istom mestu na koje je mač prošao kroz njegovo telo.
I na kraju, junak koji je prisutan i u Ilijadi a i u ovoj tragediji: Odisej. Dodatno razvijanje njegove ličnosti ključno je za razumevanje same tragike Ajanta. Na neki način, Odisej je čak bolji i od same boginje Atene koja na licu ima prezriv osmeh dok posmatra Ajanta u bunilu, a sam Odisej oseća empatiju i sažaljenje čak iako posmatra svog neprijatelja, koji je ubeđen da njega ubija.
„Сви ми, људи, приказе смо само,
несталне сене“ (Ај. 124-125)
Upravo shvatanje krhkosti ljudskog života dovodi Odiseja u to stanje uma. Za razliku od Kreonta u Antigoni, on posle ipak neće da dovede u pitanje božansko pravo sahranjivanja neprijatelja, čak se ponudi da pomogne pri sahrani.
Kao što je Frejdenbergova rekla, svi osim njega su i dalje u svađi jer predstavljaju produžetak besa kojim je Ajant bio obuzet.
Na mnogim mestima u Ilijadi isticao se Ajantov štit, i to je još jedan predmet bitan za samu radnju - on je odlika njega kao vojnika koji nikad nije bio poražen, uvek se odbranio. A ujedno i kao oca koji prepušta deci porodicu, kada svom sinu pruža štit kojim će braniti majku i sebe. Tekmesa je tu kao figura koja dopunjuje Ajantovu ličnost kroz kontrast - tehnika veoma česta u Sofoklovim dramama (kontrastni parovi: Antigona/Ismena, Edip/Jokasta, Elektra/Hrisotemida).
Hor je ovde veoma specifičan. Retko kada se u tragedijama javlja hor sredovečnih muškaraca kao što su ovde predstavljeni mornari, prijatelji Ajantovi. Sofokle savršeno zavara gledaoce koji se uzdaju u univerzalizovanu istinu koja dolazi od hora, kada on počne da radosno peva o izbavljenju iz nevolja i promeni Ajantove odluke. Ali, to je sve varka, jer Ajant je čvršće no ikad odlučio da to uradi ali se pomirio sa sudbinom.
Sama smrt i snaga poslednjih reči ostavlja bez daha, kada kroz lament nad samim sobom i svojom sudbinom Ajant dolazi do pomirenja sa istom:
„Задњи пут Ајант обраћа се вама –
Онима у Хаду остало ћу рећи!“ (Ај. 864-865)
Ali, tragedija se ne završava samim činom ubistva, već sahrane tela. Taj motiv je značajan, još jače prikazan u Antigoni čija fabula se vrti upravo oko toga. Tek nakon pomirenja sa ovostranim u svakom smislu, krunisano činom sahrane, Ajantova psyche može da počiva.
ayyismayo's review
funny
lighthearted
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
superiorweasel's review
5.0
This was an incredible play. Very relatable, unfortunately. But, it is surprising that the pains of war on the mind of a soldier were vividly illustrated roughly 2500 years ago.