Aristophanes and the Carnival of Genres

5 The Return of Telephus: Acharnians, Thesmophoriazusae, and the Dialogic Background

143 Nothing “recurs”; the same word over again might accumulate, reinforce, perhaps parody what came before it, but it cannot be the same word if it is in a different place. Repetitiveness is not repetitiousness.—Caryl Emerson Bakhtin characterizes the “epic” mentality, which tragedy embodies, as favoring the construction of literary works that represent themselves as fully independent cultural products neither requiring supplementation to bolster their authority nor needing to explain themselves or respond to other genres. Aristophanic comedy, on the other hand, constructs itself largely in opposition to its surroundings (Cleon, war, Athenian litigiousness, bad comedy, Euripides), and consistently presents itself as a hybrid. This trait is not merely the result of the intense flowering of the high literary consciousness of the late fifth century, it is a continuing development of comedy’s traditional features. Indeed, comedy’s double heritage of iambic psogos, “abuse,” and mythological burlesque (shown in the plays attributed to Epicharmus,1 in Athenian comedies featuring Odysseus by Cratinus and Theopompus, as well as in the continued popularity of the comic Heracles2 ) suggests a form that is actively conscious of its position in literary history. Previous chapters have attempted to describe the complex interactions that result from this engagement with the extradramatic world: Dikaiopolis’ reflections on his own spectatorship at various artistic performances; Clouds’ dependence on Socrates, with the influence of tragedy in the background; Wasps’ reprise of the reception of Clouds; and the treatment of epic-oracular speech as it appears in Lysistrata, Knights, Peace, The Return of Telephus Acharnians, Thesmophoriazusae, and the Dialogic Background 5 144 Aristophanes and the Carnival of Genres and Birds. One theme that links these readings is comedy’s aggressive engagement with other competitive genres and its determination to displace them from their positions of prominence. I would like to turn now to several passages in Acharnians and Thesmophoriazusae3 where Aristophanic comedy makes explicit use of tragedy , use that goes far beyond the assumption of a tragic tone or allusions to specific plays. Tragedy is itself brought on stage and, thus dialogized, becomes the object of an intense metatheatrical critique. Indeed, the degree to which tragedy and comedy interpenetrate in these plays is so great that space does not permit a comprehensive examination of the subject.4 I shall concentrate instead on the representation of Euripides’ Telephus, to which I have already made reference in Chapter 1 (see also Handley and Rea 1957 and Preiser 2000). Telephus is a thread that links the plays and is also important as an icon for Aristophanes’ relationship with Euripidean tragedy in general. In Acharnians, Dikaiopolis assumes the role of Telephus, whose costume and props he borrows from the workshop of Euripides. In Thesmophoriazusae, the Relative reprises the role of Telephus, albeit less successfully than Dikaiopolis, when he attempts to defend Euripidean tragedy before the ecclesia of women celebrating the festival of Demeter and Persephone.5 This presence of Euripides’ Telephus in the plays of Aristophanes over a twenty-year period testifies to various continuities in the work of Aristophanes: his continuing juxtaposition of comedy, tragedy, and alternative models of dramatic mimesis; his analysis of Euripides’ polemical relationship with the traditions of tragic representation; as well as his fascination with Euripides as a rival innovator, a relationship noted also by Cratinus with his neologism eÈripidaristofan¤zein, “EuripidAristophanize .”6 Yet despite this evident continuity, the appearances of Telephus express a difference as well. They are, of course, adapted to their particular dramatic contexts. For example, in Acharnians and Thesmophoriazusae, the Telephus motif is introduced in the service of comic ends. In Acharnians , Telephus’s appearance furthers Dikaiopolis’ scheme to establish a separate peace with the Spartans, while in Thesmophoriazusae, he is the accomplice of the Relative. In contrast, the brief mentions of Telephus in Clouds (891, 921–24; see Chapter 2) and Frogs (955, 960–64) do not significantly advance the action but are iconic expressions of tragedy’s compromised dignity as a result of the influence of Euripides. Beyond anomalies that result from the specific dramatic conditions of the individual plays, however, there are additional differences that result from the position of each representation in literary history. Acharnians engages only with Euripides’ play of 438. Telephus’s second major appearance in Thesmophoriazusae, however, must be seen not only in terms of Euripides’ “original” play (now some twenty-seven years in the past) but also in terms of the intervening Acharnians parody...