Achilles in Greek Tragedy (review)

The idea that fifth-century Greek tragedies engaged their audiences in a societal discourse has been a guiding principle of recent generations of dramatic literary criticism. The analytical approach of Pantelis Michelakis's Achilles in Greek Tragedy both accepts and furthers this theoretical principle by mapping "[t]he representations of one of the most popular and glamorous heroes of classical mythology in the tragedy of fifth-century Athens" (1). The mystique of the tradition of Achilles was considered a rich source of thematic possibilities by fifth-century Athenian dramatists. Achilles in Greek Tragedy insightfully demonstrates that as fifth-century tragedians variously appropriated the character of Achilles both in his Homeric and other mythological forms to address concerns of their day, the character of Achilles became progressively deconstructed and thereby demystified. Michelakis presents a methodically structured, three-part examination of the appropriated Achilles: as a problematic hero, as a dead hero, and as a hero-to-be. With meticulous detail, this study frames its arguments within a larger cultural context, demonstrating similarities and dissimilarities with representations of Achilles in other cultural forms such as visual art, poetry, and philosophical writings. While seemingly written for classicists, theatre scholars can also find valuable material in Michelakis's book for their particular scholarly pursuits.

In what is perhaps the most uniquely insightful and clearly argued chapter of his book, Michelakis examines Achilles as a problematic hero in Aeschylus' Myrmidons, the first play of a lost trilogy. The text of Myrmidons survives today only in fragments, while the remainder of what is known or surmised about this trilogy is to be found in summaries and references in other ancient writings. Gleaning what he can from such sources, Michelakis provides a carefully reconstructed thematic outline of Myrmidons. More specifically, Michelakis demonstrates how Aeschylus problematizes his representation of Achilles, the hero of epic, so that he may serve as an example of fifth-century political power struggles and as a site of tension regarding contemporary homosexual practices. Of particular insight for the theatre scholar is Michelakis's analysis of Aeschylus' experimentation with silent stillness of a major character onstage for both thematic and theatrical effect. To assist in his inquiry, Michelakis turns to ancient artistic depictions of Achilles (examples of which are provided in his book) as a silent, immobile figure, almost entirely obscured by a cloak, being confronted by Odysseus. From these visual works he persuasively draws conclusions as to Aeschylus' use of a similar theatrical motif for his withdrawn Achilles being confronted by the Myrmidons.

Closely argued chapters dealing with Euripides' much studied Hecuba and Iphigenia at Aulis tend to assume an all-too-thorough familiarity with these and other ancient texts, and therefore can be difficult to follow. For the theatre scholar, however, Michelakis's thematic analysis of the dead Achilles as a virtual character who "interacts," so to speak, with the actual characters in the play is particularly interesting. Michelakis effectively demonstrates that Euripides' construction of Hecuba is in fact built upon a number of individual personal dramas, including the dead Achilles' drama, each of which serves to explore different "ways in which the past [his heroism] may be understood and effaced" (83). And, while Michelakis's analysis of Hecuba explores the representation of a less-than-glamorous future potentially awaiting a fallen hero, his analysis of Iphigenia at Aulis explores the potentially humbling representation of Achilles as a youthful hero-to-be. With meticulous attention to cultural expectations regarding Achilles' heroic future, Michelakis demonstrates that the narrative of this play "scrutinises" (sic) the youthful development of familiar aspects associated with Achilles' character, such as his anger and swiftness, and ultimately "deprives" (84) him of his heroic qualities. An example of this deprivation is the gendered role exchange that occurs between Achilles and Iphigenia as "the notion of heroism is transposed from the male to the female" (112). And, though he arrives at a similar conclusion with respect to Polyxena's assuming the role of hero in Hecuba, he chooses not to pursue in depth...