When the Gods and the Poets Enter the Argument

Opening: A different kind of trial

Alex: Last week we asked whether the judgments at the end of The Eumenides and Antigone resolve the suffering that precedes them. Volume VIII gives us two Euripidean tragedies, Hippolytus and The Bacchae, and Aristophanes’ comedy The Frogs. Each puts an authority on trial: a god, a ruler, or a poet.

Peter: But gods do not submit to trials.

Eric: That may be the problem. In Hippolytus, Aphrodite explains her case before anyone can cross-examine her.

Gwen: And Phaedra and Hippolytus bear the sentence.

Alex: Let us begin there. The familiar summary says Euripides reveals the danger of repressed passion. Does it describe the whole play?

Gwen: It lets Aphrodite off too easily.

Hippolytus: who gets to control the story?

Eric: In the prologue Aphrodite declares that Hippolytus honors Artemis and despises her. She announces his destruction, knows Phaedra will suffer, and treats that suffering as an acceptable cost of revenge. The audience is given the causal story before the characters are.

Peter: Hippolytus is arrogant. The huntsman warns him against offending a god; he dismisses the warning. Is he innocent?

Gwen: Innocent of the charge that kills him, yes. Not innocent of contempt for desire or for women. We should not use one judgment to erase the other.

Alex: That distinction matters. He is not merely a victim of sexual feeling. His fierce purity is also a social posture, expressed in the way he talks about women after the Nurse reveals Phaedra’s secret. Still, his misogynistic outburst cannot make Phaedra’s later accusation true.

Eric: Nor is Phaedra simply a villain. She first resists the desire Aphrodite has imposed on her. Her speech to the Nurse separates experiencing a destructive impulse from endorsing it. She worries about her children and the shame that will follow her death.

Peter: Then why leave the tablet accusing Hippolytus?

Gwen: Because she wants to protect her name, and perhaps her children’s position, when secrecy has failed. That motive is intelligible without being just. Her attempt to survive dishonor after death transfers it to someone else.

Alex: The play is alert to the means by which a story becomes authoritative. The Nurse promises help, breaches Phaedra’s confidence, and obtains an oath of secrecy from Hippolytus. Phaedra’s written accusation then speaks when she no longer can. Theseus trusts the tablet and calls down Poseidon’s curse before the accused can clear himself. A chain of speech acts becomes a chain of injuries.

Eric: The oath is especially cruel. Hippolytus knows the accusation is false, but believes that breaking the oath would itself dishonor him. He cannot fully defend himself in the terms his father demands.

Peter: But Theseus has a dead wife and a written statement. He is wrong, yet not absurd to believe it.

Alex: Exactly. Euripides asks us to see how a reasonable demand for evidence can be defeated by the order in which evidence arrives. The audience’s knowledge from Aphrodite’s prologue makes Theseus’ confidence unbearable.

Gwen: And Artemis’ late revelation repairs the record only when it cannot save the life. Truth arrives, but not justice.

Eric: Artemis also says gods do not intervene against one another’s designs. That offers an explanation of divine restraint, not much consolation to a dying human being.

Peter: Does the play criticize religion, then?

Alex: It certainly makes divine action available to criticism. Aphrodite and Artemis are not interchangeable forces of “human psychology.” They appear, speak, and explain their limits. The question is what kind of justice the human characters may expect from powers whose rivalries precede them.

The Bacchae: recognition under coercion

Peter: In The Bacchae, the god appears in person from the beginning. Pentheus refuses to acknowledge Dionysus; surely that is the same offense as Hippolytus’ refusal of Aphrodite.

Eric: The pattern resembles it. Yet Dionysus is more than a lesson about accepting one’s instincts. He plans the punishment and manipulates the king into carrying it out.

Gwen: Pentheus is hardly a model of rational government. He treats the women who worship Dionysus as a police problem, threatens force, and seems drawn to the spectacle he condemns.

Alex: Watch the turn when Dionysus persuades Pentheus to dress as a woman so that he can spy on the Bacchants. Is this a ruler recognizing the limitations of his viewpoint?

Peter: It is a trap. His curiosity and wish to control the women make him susceptible to it.

Eric: But calling it only hypocrisy is too easy. The god alters what Pentheus sees. The play asks how responsible someone remains when a stronger power engineers both his temptation and his delusion.

Gwen: The most terrible recognition belongs to Agave, not Pentheus. In her frenzy she joins the killing of her son, then returns carrying his head as though it were a lion’s. Cadmus brings her slowly back to ordinary perception. Her knowledge is a punishment.

Alex: A stage full of people can acknowledge the god’s reality and still protest the scale of his revenge. Cadmus asks whether divinity ought to resemble human rage. Dionysus answers from a position of power. The play does not require the audience to confuse that answer with moral settlement.

Peter: So neither Pentheus’ suppression nor Dionysus’ release is a simple cure.

Eric: Yes. If we read “let the irrational in” as the moral, we skip the manipulation, dismemberment, and bereaved family. Pentheus’ coercive authority is dangerous; divine coercion is dangerous too. The tragedy is structured so that recognition of one danger does not cancel the other.

Gwen: Nor can we neatly compare Phaedra and Agave as “women overwhelmed by feeling.” Phaedra wrestles with desire and chooses a damaging accusation. Agave acts under a god-induced madness and discovers the act afterward. Different forms of agency, different forms of harm.

The Frogs: can poetry help a city?

Alex: Aristophanes now stages a kind of trial of his own. In The Frogs, Dionysus travels to the underworld to bring back a tragic poet. Euripides challenges Aeschylus for the chair of tragic poetry, and their work is weighed, mocked, and disputed.

Peter: That sounds like a comic version of our seminar.

Eric: With more costumes and worse methods. The contest turns lines of poetry into objects for measurement. The literal scales are funny precisely because no device can settle an artistic judgment.

Gwen: Yet the argument is serious. Euripides claims that his everyday language and recognizable characters teach audiences to examine things closely. Aeschylus charges that his rival’s cleverness and portrayals of vice have damaged the city. Each has a theory of what spectators learn from drama.

Alex: And neither theory can be tested by weighing verses. At the end, the question turns openly political: which poet can offer counsel to Athens in crisis? Dionysus chooses Aeschylus and takes him back to the living.

Peter: Then Aristophanes’ answer is simply “bring back the old poets.”

Eric: His plot makes that choice, but comedy keeps it from becoming a neutral verdict. Dionysus has been a ridiculous judge, switching preferences and enduring humiliation throughout the journey. The debate exposes the criteria by which one might choose; it also exposes the fragility of the chooser.

Gwen: And a city that asks a poet to save it may be avoiding responsibility for its own decisions.

Alex: Or it may be asking a necessary question about civic education. The Frogs does not prove that art can govern. It treats poetry as consequential enough to argue over in public, while laughing at anyone who pretends the argument can be settled mechanically.

Peter: There is a sharper connection to the two tragedies than I expected. In each, someone claims the authority to interpret: Theseus reads the tablet, Pentheus reads the Bacchants as disorder, Dionysus reads the poets as possible remedies.

Eric: And the disasters differ. Theseus acts too quickly on apparently decisive evidence. Pentheus insists on his account even as it collapses. The comic Dionysus asks what standard his choice should serve, though his procedure is hardly exemplary.

Pulling the threads together

Alex: We should not make all three plays say the same thing. Hippolytus makes delayed truth and divine retaliation tragic. The Bacchae makes both royal denial and divine vengeance difficult to defend. The Frogs stages a public quarrel about poetry’s value and refuses to let expertise become a simple measuring instrument.

Gwen: They do share a cost of certainty. Aphrodite knows the offense, Theseus knows the culprit, Pentheus knows what order requires, and the poets know what their art does to an audience. People outside those judgments pay.

Peter: But perhaps the lesson is not to suspend judgment forever. Theseus must respond to a death. A city must decide what it values. If evidence and standards are fallible, we still need them.

Eric: Then the hard question is how to act while remaining answerable to what our judgments miss.

Alex: That is where drama earns its place. It lets us witness confident claims alongside the people those claims cannot fully account for.

Reading note: This dialogue discusses the three plays printed in Harvard Classics Volume VIII: Euripides’ Hippolytus and The Bacchae, translated by Gilbert Murray, and Aristophanes’ The Frogs, translated by B. B. Rogers. The earlier dialogue on this page referred to The Clouds, which is not in the volume; that reference has been corrected. References to scenes are paraphrases rather than quotations, and names and spellings may differ in other translations.

Stay in the Conversation

New dialogues and reading notes, delivered when published.