Antigone Lecture #2
As I mentioned in class, what I thought was most interesting was the arguments that sparked over the difference in the speaker of one single line. In the scene where it is unclear whether the line should belong to Ismene or Antigone, it really opened my eyes to how important a speaker is in a scene.
The attribution of certain lines to certain characters is absolutely intentional and reveals information not only about the plot, but about that character and their motivations. In the attribution of this line being unclear, it questions the characters of both Antigone and Ismene. While I'm sure we could talk about this line forever, as several scholars have already been inclined to do, this actually makes me wonder about more than just this line.
As the lecture discussed, the play was often spread through oral tradition. The transcriptions on papyrus or scrolls relied on memory and random viewers interpretations. Additionally, the play was performed through different locations and times, where the actors probably made slight changes in each show. I wonder if there were any key parts of the show that are misattributed or largely changed from Sophocles' original idea. I guess this is just something we will never know!
Hi Cassi! I think it's so interesting how much one line can make a difference in a text. It really goes to show how everything in a text contributes to the themes, development of characters, and much more. I wonder what would happen if a line of something like a poem was removed or altered, considering how short poems are compared to a play. I think it is likely that modern day Antigone may be missing things but you are right—we will never know!
ReplyDeleteI also think it's really interesting how important the assignment of a single line is. It shows how difficult and complicated writing a play of this level is—the attention to detail by the writer is so important. Because, as we see with this one line, this small line change can influence the entire play through the motivation and feelings of characters.
ReplyDeleteHey Cassi! I absolutely believe that Sophocles's original is vastly different from the one we read today. Oral history and recording is okay at best, but over the course of around two and a half thousand years- that's enough to make me believe that the play has to be radically different.
ReplyDeleteHi Cassi, I also think that the play changed vastly from the original to what we read today, especially if the play was orally transmitted from Greece all the way to Egypt within over multiple centuries. Improvisation of the play from actors and play writers is also something that most likely happened.
ReplyDeleteHi Cassi, I, too, think it's really interesting how we can't determine who is meant to say that singular line in the play. It's strange to think about how the effectiveness/accuracy of a translation completely alters a reader's understanding of the intention/purpose/themes of the original text.
ReplyDeleteThe idea that there could be a lot of the play that has changed over time for various reasons is super interesting to me. I think that it is totally possible that bits and pieces could have been changed on purpose on or on accident to reflect people's own personal bias. It makes me wonder if the play was originally meant to be perceived as being more or less radical and critical that we see it today.
ReplyDeleteThis interconnection between the oral and print traditions is important, and an often overlooked facet of the history of a text.
ReplyDelete