Epilogue

Judging from its migration in the early fourth century to southern Italy, Thesmo (if, following our editor's lead, I may be permitted this short form) was evidently successful in its own time; its exportability was perhaps due to its relative atopicality, its parodies of a tragic poet whose international celebrity (despite Aristophanes' prediction in Frogs) only increased after his death, and its setting at a festival celebrated all over the Greek world, to say nothing of its sheer comic exuberance. And yet of Aristophanes' extant plays, Thesmo is the most precariously attested (one medieval manuscript and its apograph; four papyrus fragments) and least explored by scholars, editors, and translators. Before Sommerstein's edition of 1994, no separate scholarly edition or commentary had appeared for ninety years. Recently, however, Thesmo has been attracting lively interest: some new translations, fresh consideration of its portrayal of gender, genre, and cult, one new critical edition (with Italian translation) by Carlo Prato (2001) and another by Colin Austin (forthcoming) in preparation for the Oxford series edited by K. J. Dover. And so conditions are ripe for an evaluation of Thesmo as a play for the stage, even as a play that can speak to our times.

Mary-Kay Gamel's conference and dramatic festival in February 2001 brought together scholars and students, performers, and local audiences to examine and experience the play's theatrical vitality past and present and succeeded not only in stimulating fresh consideration of its original character, but also in revealing the limitations of approaching an ancient comedy solely as a fixed reader's text, the document of a time long past. I was invited to the conference to play the role not of critic or respondent but rather of informal and freeform commentator, a role that with the reader's indulgence I will continue to play as this selection of papers is presented to a wider audience.

It may seem self-evident that not everything worth knowing about a play can be conveyed by the words of its script alone; drama, after all, means enaction. Yet that is the assumption, implicit or explicit, on which classical drama has been studied, with Aristotle's blessing, since Hellenistic times. In classical Athens, art and education had been based primarily on mousike: the performance of poetry, music, and dance, especially in drama, the primary musical enterprise of Athens; and drama had been judged and interpreted, as by Aristophanes and Plato, in terms of its effects—moral, civic, and spiritual no less than aesthetic—on the theatrical public. But by the time of Aristotle's Poetics, the rise of prose and of narrowly text- or language-based analytical systems divorced from communal contexts was fast removing performance and spectators from the evaluative study of drama.

In traditional classical scholarship, formed in the Hellenistic schools and libraries, drama has been important chiefly as a corpus of fixed inherited texts. The fact that performance is intrinsically unstable, evanescent, and difficult to recreate in academic settings and that original performances are impossible to recapture, unacceptably complicated the construction of a stable "classical tradition" of literary interpretation and imitation. And so classicists have not until recently tried to develop performance-based approaches that could provide insights into our extant scripts that textual and formal analysis alone cannot.

But the effort to develop performance-based approaches is well justified. In play scripts, like musical scores and song lyrics, the potential for ever different and ever-changing performance styles and contexts is a vital dimension of their meaning, and all the more powerful for being indeterminate. Thus watching a classical play performed is always different from reading it and always enlarges our response to it as a work of art, however remote our response may be from the original audience's. That each restaging of a play produces a different reading and a different experience for the audience may disturb text-bound readers, but this sort of dynamic instability is intrinsic to the play's theatricality, which cannot be fully apprehended in...