Good and Bad Deception in Euripides’ Helen
Nikolsky Boris M.
The article offers an analysis of the central motif in Euripides’ tragedy Helen – the motif of deception and illusion (ἀπάτη). In the course of the play, the meaning of this motif changes from negative to positive: in its first half, deception is the cause of grief and sorrow, whereas in its second half it brings happiness and turns out to be morally good. On the one hand, this structure is close to sophistical argumentation for and against known as “Double Talk”. At the same time, the motif of deception may be related to the historical context of the play. The ruinous deception in the first half of Helen could refer to the audience’s idea of the Sicilian expedition and the causes of its defeat, and the redemptive deception in the second part of the play to the theatrical delusion relieving the audience of the pain of a heavy defeat and loss of the near and dear.
References:
Allan, W. (ed.) 2008: Euripides. Helen. Cambridge–New York.
Alt, K. 1952: Untersuchungen zum Chor bei Euripides. Diss., Frankfurt.
Barlow, S.A. 1971: The Imagery of Euripides. A Study in the Dramatic Use of Pictorial Language. London.
Cornford, F. 1907: Thucydides Mythistoricus. London.
Cropp, M. (ed.) 1988: Euripides. Electra. Warminster.
Csapo, E. 2009: New Music’s Gallery of Images: the ‘Dithyrambic’ First Stasimon of Euripides’ Electra. In: J.R.C. Cousland, J. R. Hume (eds), The Play of Texts and Fragments: Essays in Honour of Martin Cropp. Leiden, 95–109.
Dale, A.M. (ed.) 1967: Euripides. Helen. Oxford.
Downing, E. 1990: Apate, Agon, and Literary Self-Reflexivity in Euripides’ Helen. In: M. Griffith, D. J. Mastronarde (eds), Cabinet of the Muses: Essays on Classical and Comparative Literature in Honor of Thomas G. Rosenmeyer. Atlanta, 1–16.
Grégoire, H. 1950: Introduction. In: H. Grégoire, L. Méridier, F. Chapouthier (eds), Euripide. Tragédies. T. V. Paris, 9–46.
Hose, M. 1995: Drama und Gesellschaft: Studien zur dramatischen Produktion in Athen am Ende des 5 Jahrhunderts. Stuttgart.
Kannicht, R. (ed.) 1969: Euripides. Helena. Bd 1–2. Heidelberg.
Kranz, W. 1933: Stasimon: Untersuchungen zu Form und Gehalt der griechischen Tragödie. Berlin.
Nikolsky, B. 2012: [Double aidos in Euripides’ Hippolytus]. Indoevropejyskoe yazykoznanie i klassicheskaya filologiya [Indoeuropean Linguistics and Classical Philology], 16, 620–649.
Никольский, Б. М. Двойной aidos в Ипполите Еврипида. Индоевропейское языкознание и классическая филология, 16, 620–649.
Nikolsky, B. 2015: Misery and Forgiveness in Euripides: Meaning and Structure in the Hippolytus. Swansea.
Nikolsky, B. 2016: [War Propaganda in Euripides’ Trojan Women]. Vestnik drevney istorii [Journal of Ancient History] 2, 286–314.
Никольский, Б. М. Пропаганда войны в «Троянках» Еврипида. ВДИ 2, 286–314.
Pippin, A.N. 1960: Euripides’s Helen: A Comedy of Ideas. Classical Philology 55, 156–169.
Robinson, T.M. 1979: Contrasting Arguments: An Edition of the Dissoi Logoi. New York.
Segal, C.P. 1971: The Two Worlds of Euripides’ Helen. Transactions of the American Philological Association 102, 553–614.
Smith, D.G. 2004: Thucydides’ Ignorant Athenians and the Drama of the Sicilian Expedition. Syllecta Classica 15, 33–70.
Solmsen, F. 1934: Ὄνομα and πρᾶγμα in Euripides’ Helen. Classical Review 48, 119–121.
Stahl, H.-P. 2003: Thucydides: Man’s Place in History. Swansea.
Whitman, C.H. 1974: Euripides and the Full Circle of Myth. Cambridge (Mass.).
Zuntz G. 1958: On Euripides’ Helena: Theology and Irony. Entretiens sur l’antiquité classique VI. Vandoeuvres–Geneva, 201–227.