Greek drama (Tragedy) -- History and criticism; Mythology, Greek, in literature
It is customary to regard the _Trachiniæ_ as the weakest extant play
of Sophocles. The picture of Heracles’ physical agony near the close
seems wearisomely elaborate; and in the second place we are utterly
dissatisfied with him. He does not seem worthy of the trepidation, awe,
and grief which he has excited throughout the play. All that follows
the suicide of Deianira appears empty or offensive. This objection may
be put[335] thus, that there are two tragedies, that of Deianira and
that of the hero. Now though it is quite true that one can point to a
thought which unifies the play—the passion of Heracles for Iole, or
more fundamentally, the destructive power of love, this does not meet
the difficulty, which will then simply be restated thus, that the poet
has not maintained a due perspective; the story of Deianira’s emotions
and of her plan bulks too largely and impedes what should have been the
climax. But it is a fundamental law in the criticism of Greek Tragedy,
and especially in the study of Sophocles, that we must ponder it until
we find some central thought which accounts for the whole action and for
the perspective in which the details are placed. Such a central thought
is, after all, not lacking in the _Trachiniæ_. It is the character of
Deianira, her instincts, and her actions. This play is in structure very
similar to the _Ajax_. In the earlier work Ajax’ death occurs far from
the end, but the latter portion is no anti-climax. So here: the topic is
not especially the death of Deianira or the end of Heracles; it is the
heroine’s love for her husband and the attempt she makes to win him back.
The poet’s interest in her does not vanish at the moment of her silent
withdrawal. Her act, her love, survive her. What is the result of her
pathetic secret wooing of Heracles? She has longed for two things, his
return and a renewal of his affection. To both these purposes is granted
a dim painful phantom of success. Instead of tarrying in Eubœa Heracles
hastens home, though every movement of his litter is torment; Deianira’s
passion has brought him back, though not as she meant. As for her plan to
regain his love, it is true that when he learns her innocence not a word
of pity or affection falls from him; he never mentions her again. It may
be that he is merely stupid and callous; it may be that he is ashamed to
recant his bitter words; it may be that he is at once engrossed in the
sudden light which is thrown upon his own fortunes. However this may be,
the promise of Nessus on which she relied is fulfilled: “This shall be
to thee a charm for the soul of Heracles, so that he shall never look
upon any woman to love her more than thee!”[336]—the hero’s passion for
Iole is quenched. This conception gives a wonderful beauty to what is
otherwise a mere brutality of the dying man. In forcing his son to marry
Iole he outrages our feelings as well as the heart of Hyllus—unless we
have understood. But this is his reparation to Deianira. The charm of
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account