Introduction
Through the centuries, from deep antiquity, heroes of mythological stories come to us, preserving their morals, customs, and identity. But, passing through the prism of time and distance, their basic ideas, partly their characters, views and the very essence of their actions change. There is no exception to the plot in which Phaedra, the wife of the Athenian king Theseus (Theseus), fell in love with her stepson Hippolytus. Rejected by him, she commits suicide, discrediting Hippolytus and accusing him of an attempt on her honor. So this plot was used by the great Greek tragedian Euripides, Seneca, the Roman master of the “new style”, and Racine in his work “Phaedra”, written in the best traditions of French classicism (1677).
Of course, every work is the brainchild not only of its author, but also of the people, social status in society, the political system that existed at that time, and, often, just emerging new thoughts and trends, as was the case with the work of Euripides “Hippolytus”.
So, find the differences and differences in the works of Euripides and Seneli, the reasons for their occurrence and the degree of influence public opinion And surrounding reality our task is on them.
In my opinion, the roots of the theme, the ideas of each work and the reasons that prompt the author to do so should be sought in his origin, education, way of thinking and action, and the surrounding reality.
Isolation of personality and a critical attitude towards thym - both of these trends in the new worldview were in sharp contradiction with the ideological foundations of the tragedy of Aeschylus and Sophocles; nevertheless, they received their first literary embodiment within the tragic genre, which remained the leading branch of Attic literature of the 5th century.
New trends in Greek social thought found a response in the works of Euripides, the third great poet of Athens.
The dramatic creativity of Euripides proceeded almost simultaneously with the activities of Sophocles. Euripides was born around 406. His first plays were staged in 455, and from that time on, for almost half a century, he was the most prominent rival of Sophocles on the Athenian stage. He did not achieve success with his contemporaries soon; success was not lasting. The ideological content and dramatic innovations of his tragedies met with sharp condemnation among the conservative part of the Athenians and served as the subject of constant ridicule of the comedy
V century Over twenty times he performed his works at tragic competitions, but the Athenian jury awarded him only five prizes during all this time, the last time posthumously. But later, during the period of decomposition of the polis and in the Eliistic era, Euripides became the favorite tragic poet of the Greeks.
The most reliable biographical sources portray Euripides as a solitary thinker - a book lover. He was the owner of a fairly significant book collection. IN political life He did not take an active part in Athens, preferring leisure time devoted to philosophical and literary pursuits. This way of life, unusual for citizens of the polis, was often attributed by Euripides even to mythological heroes.
The crisis of traditional polis ideology and the search for new foundations and ways of worldview were very clearly and completely reflected in the tragedy of Euripides.
A solitary poet and thinker, he sensitively responded to pressing issues of social and political life. His theater is a kind of encyclopedia of the mental movement of Greece in the second half of the 5th century.
In the works of Euripides, various problems were posed that interested Greek social thought, new theories were presented and discussed, ancient criticism called Euripides a philosopher on stage..
However, he was not a supporter of any philosophical doctrine, and his own views were neither consistent nor constant.
It is important for us that Eripidas’ aggressive attitude causes a negative attitude. foreign policy democracy. He is an Athenian patriot and enemy
Sparta. Euripides is alien to the philosophical views of Roman society.
Seneca, like Euripides, was a son of his state, and this influenced the character of his work “Phaedra”, as well as all of his work. The structure of the empire created by Augustus (“Principate”) lasted over 200 years after the death of its founder, until the crisis of the 3rd century. Military dictatorship turned out to be the only state form in which ancient society, corroded by the contradictions of slavery, could continue to exist after the collapse of the polis system.
Despite all the appearance of prosperity, symptoms of the approaching decomposition of the slave system soon began to appear. It is in Italy that the signs of economic decline are most clearly revealed, but while the economic decline was only approaching, the social and moral decline of Roman society was already evident. General lack of rights and loss of hope for the possibility of a better order corresponded to general apathy and demoralization.
The bulk of the population demanded only “bread” and “circuses”. And the state considered it its direct responsibility to satisfy this need.
Subservience, open pursuit of material wealth, weakening social feelings, fragility of family ties, celibacy and falling birth rates
- characteristic features of Roman society in the 1st century.
On this ground, the level of Roman literature declines, and individual brilliant exceptions do not change big picture. Characteristic
“Silver Age” – the emergence of a large number of provincials among literary figures. In particular, Spain, the oldest and most culturally mature of the Romanized western provinces, produced a number of significant writers - Seneca, Lucan, Quintilian and others. The style, created by the “reciters” of the time of Augustus, became most widespread in the middle of the 1st century. Writers of the 1st century they call it a “new” style, in contrast to the “ancient” style of Cicero, whose long speeches, philosophical discussions, strictly balanced periods now seemed sluggish and boring. The literary traditions of “Asianism” found fertile soil in Rome at the beginning of the 1st century. with his thirst for brilliance, the desire for a proud pose and the pursuit of sensually vivid impressions. the best master of the “new” style in the middle of the 1st century. – Lucius Annaeus Senela. Born in Spain, in the city of Corduba, but grew up in Rome. Seneca received an education in the spirit of new rhetoric and expanded it with philosophical knowledge. In his youth, he was interested in fresh philosophical trends, and in the 30s he became a lawyer and entered the Senate. But, having gone through the hellish circles of political intrigue, ups and downs, he moved away from the court and took up literary and philosophical activities.
The philosophical views of Seneca, like Euripides, are neither consistent nor constant. His thoughts are centered around issues of mental life and practical morality. Philosophy is medicine for the soul; knowledge of the environment interests Seneca primarily from the religious and ethical side, as a means of knowing the deity merged by nature (“What is God? the soul of the universe”) and to cleanse the soul from false fears, and in logical research he sees only fruitless reasoning.
Like most of his contemporaries, Seneca loves bright colors, and he is best at painting pictures of vices, strong affects, and pathological conditions. He relentlessly adheres to the slogans of the “new” style -
“passion”, “impetuousness”, “impetuousness”. In Seneca's short, pointed phrases, rich in figurative oppositions, the “new” style received its most legitimate expression. Seneca's enormous literary popularity was based on this stylistic art, and it was these characteristics can be traced in his tragedy “Phaedra”.
Thus, the great time division, life in states of different political systems, different social philosophies surrounding the Greek and Roman tragedians, their lives had a great influence on their approaches to the plot, theme and idea ancient myth. the main task this work
- answer the questions:
— comparative analysis tragedies of Seneca and Euripides;
- interpretation of gods and religion as philosophical views on existence;
— Phaedra is the main character, the tragedy of her fate;
- Hippolytus is the fate of man in the hands of the gods;
- the main questions of the works “Hippolytus” and “Phaedra” - “What is evil?”,
“What are its reasons?”
comparative analysis of tragedies
Along with criticism of the traditional worldview, the work of Euripides reflects the enormous interest in the individual and his subjective aspirations characteristic of the period of crisis of the polis; monumental images, elevated above the ordinary level, as the embodiment of generally binding norms, are alien to him. He depicts people with individual drives and impulses, passions and internal struggles. The display of the dynamics of feeling and passion is especially characteristic of Euripides. For the first time in ancient literature, he clearly puts psychological problems, especially revealing female psychology. The significance of Euripides’ work for world literature lies primarily in the creation of female characters. Euripides finds useful material for depicting passions using the theme of love. The tragedy “Hippolytus” is especially interesting in this regard. The myth of Hippolyta is one of the Greek versions of the plot about an insidious wife who slanderes her chaste stepson to her husband, who did not want to share her love. Phaedra, wife of the Athenian king
Theseya is in love with the young man Hippolytus, a passionate hunter and admirer of the virgin goddess Artemis, who avoids love and women. Rejected
Hippolytus, Phaedra unfairly accuses him of trying to dishonor her.
Fulfilling the request of his angry father, the god Poseidon sends a monstrous bull, which strikes fear into the horses of Hippolytus, and he dies, crashing against the rocks.
In Seneca’s work, the external forms of the old Greek tragedy remained unchanged - monologues and dialogues in the usual verse forms for tragedy alternate with lyrical parts of the chorus, more than three characters do not take part in the dialogue, the parts of the chorus divide the tragedy into five acts. But the structure of the drama, the images of the heroes, the very nature of the tragic become completely different. Seneca's tragedy seems more simplified. The ideological side of the Greek play was not relevant to Seneca. These questions have been eliminated, but not replaced by any other problems. Where Euripides makes one feel the complex drama of a rejected woman. The struggle between the temptation of passion and the preservation of honor:
And my cheeks burn with shame...to return
It hurts so much that it seems better
If only I could die without waking up.
(Phaedra, “Hippolytus”)
Seneca shifts his focus to the vengeful rage of a rejected woman. The image became more monochromatic, but the moments of conscious, strong-willed purposefulness intensified in it:
“Shame has not left the noble soul.
I obey. Love cannot be directed
But you can win. I won't stain
You, oh glory. There is a way out of troubles: I’ll go
Married. Death will prevent disaster."
(Phaedra, "Phaedra")
Seneca's tragedy is rhetorical: the role of the directly affecting word increases in them due to the indirectly affecting image of the action. The poverty of external dramatic action and even internal psychological action is striking, everything is expressed, behind the words of the hero there is no residue that requires a different, non-verbal expression, while
Euripides expresses himself in hints, obviously afraid of incurring a threat.
The tragedy was written according to ancient custom, on a mythological theme; Seneca interestingly uses only one mythological allusion, which creates an association rich in meaning, directly related to the plot of the drama. IN
“Phaedre” – between the heroine’s criminal love for her stepson and her mother’s love for a bull. This creates additional meaning, makes the details of the plot more intense - but, of course, slows down the overall movement.
Another reason for the static nature of Seneca’s tragedy is the nature of its execution. Apparently it was never intended to be staged. And it was performed only in the form of recitation—public reading aloud.
The intensification of cruel details was supposed to compensate for the weakened sense of tragedy of the usual plot. Everyone knew how Hippolytus would die, but if in Euripides the description of his death takes up less than 4 lines, then Seneca devotes 20 lines to this, in which “torn flesh” (in Euripides) turns into “a face tormented by sharp stones”, “a body torn by piercing in the groin with a sharp branch”, “thorn thorns tearing apart the half-living flesh, so that bloody shreds hang on all the bushes.”
The third reason for the “ineffectiveness” of the tragedy is its philosophical attitude.
Offering us your mythological story, he tries to ascend as quickly as possible from a particular event to a general instructive rule. Each situation in Seneca's tragedy is either discussed in general terms or gives rise to a general idea.
Like Euripides, Seneca tried to bring his own vision of the problem into the work. He wrote this way not for the sake of fashion, but because it allowed him to create a feeling of extraliteraryness, conversationality, intimacy, and lively interest. This brought him closer to the reader.
poets' views on modern problems
Euripides takes a clear position in relation to traditional religion and mythology. The criticism of the mythological system, begun by the Ionian philosophers, finds a decisive follower in Euripides. He often emphasizes the crude features of mythological giving and accompanies with critical remarks. So in the tragedy “Electra” he puts the following statements into the mouth of the choir:
“That’s what they say, but it’s hard for me to believe it...
Myths that instill fear in people
Profitable for the cult of the gods.”
He raises numerous objections to the moral content of myths. Depicting traditional gods, he emphasizes their base passions, whims, arbitrariness, cruelty towards people. In “Hippolytus” Aphrodite clearly expresses her attitude towards people and confirms the thought of Euripides:
“The one who meekly takes over my power,
I cherish, but if in front of me
Whoever plans to be proud will perish.”
Direct denial of popular religion was impossible in the conditions of the Athenian theater: the play would not have been staged and would have exposed the author to a dangerous charge of impiety. Euripides therefore limits himself to hints and expressions of doubt. His tragedy is structured in such a way that the external course of the action seems to lead to the triumph of the gods, but the viewer is instilled with doubt about their moral correctness. “If gods do shameful things, then they are not gods.” This is already emphasized in the prologue, from which the viewer learns that the disaster of Phaedra and Hippolytus is the revenge of Aphrodite.
The goddess hates Hippolyta because he does not honor her. But in this case, the innocent Phaedra must die.
“I don’t feel sorry for her that much,
So as not to satiate the heart
By the fall of my haters...” says Aphrodite in the prologue. This vindictiveness, attributed to Aphrodite, is one of Euripides’ usual attacks against the traditional gods.
Artemis, who patronizes Hippolytus, appears at the end of the tragedy to reveal the truth to Theseus and console Hippolytus before his death; It turns out that she could not come to the aid of her admirer in a timely manner, since “the custom among gods is not to go against each other.”
In the works of Seneca, first of all, the moment of will, that is, the responsible choice of life's providence, came into conflict with Stoic fatalism - the doctrine of fate as an irresistible chain of cause and effect relationships. Therefore, Seneca prefers another Stoic understanding of fate - as the will of the world-creating divine mind. Unlike human will, this divine will can only be good: God cares about people, and his will is providence. But if providence is good, then why is human life so full of suffering? Seneca answers: God sends suffering in order to strengthen a person of goodness in trials - only in trials can one reveal oneself, and therefore prove to people the insignificance of adversity
“You will endure...You will overcome death...
And for me, alas! Cypris
Suffering left a mark..."
- Theseus says in Euripides' work "Hippolytus". And this unites the views of the authors of the works. The best choice is to accept the will of the deity, even if it is harsh: “...great people rejoice in adversity, like brave warriors in battle”[i].
A person of goodness also perceives death as part of the divine will.
Death is predetermined by world law and therefore cannot be an unconditional evil. But life is not an unconditional good: it is valuable insofar as it contains moral basis. When it disappears, the person has the right to commit suicide. This happens when a person finds himself under the yoke of coercion and is deprived of freedom of choice. He points out that one should not leave life under the influence of passion, but reason and moral sense should tell when suicide is the best way out. And the criterion turns out to be the ethical value of life - the ability to fulfill one’s moral duty. This is Seneca's view.
Thus, on the issue of suicide, Seneca diverges from orthodox Stoicism because, along with a person’s duty to himself, he puts a duty to others. At the same time, love, affection, and other emotions are taken into account - those that a consistent Stoic would reject as “passions.”
Euripides' desire for maximum verisimilitude of the tragic action is visible in the psychologically natural motivations for the characters' behavior. It seems that the poet is disgusted by any stage convention. Even the very form of monologues, speeches without interlocutors. With such “everydayism” of tragedies
For Euripides, the participation in their actions of gods, demigods and all sorts of miraculous powers not subject to earthly laws seems especially inappropriate. But already
Aristophanes condemned Euripides for the inharmonious confusion of the high with the low,
Aristotle reproached him for his addiction to the “god ex machina” technique, which consisted in the fact that the denouement did not follow from the plot, but was achieved by the appearance of God.
Showing in “Hippolytus” the death of a hero who self-confidently resists the blind power of love, he warned about the danger that the irrational principle in human nature poses for the norms established by civilization. And if to resolve the conflict he so often needed the unexpected appearance of supernatural forces, then the point here is not simply the inability to find a more convincing compositional move, but the fact that the poet did not see the resolution of many complicated human affairs in the real conditions of his time.
Seneca's central images are people enormous power and passions, with the will to action and suffering, tormentors and martyrs. If they died bravely, we should not be sad, but wish for ourselves the same firmness; if they have not shown courage in their grief, they are not so valuable as to grieve over them: “I mourn neither the joyful nor the weeping; The first one himself wiped away my tears, the second one achieved with tears that he was not worthy of tears.” In tragic aesthetics
For Seneca, compassion recedes into the background. And this is a derivative of the public morality of the Romans of this era.
Comparing the images of Euripides and Seneca, we come to the conclusion that the images of the latter have become more monotonous, but on the other hand, moments of passion and conscious willful determination have intensified in them.
“What can the mind do? Passion rules, conquering,
And the whole soul is in the power of the mighty God..."
– Seneca’s Phaedra exclaims in her monologue.
The number of actors has decreased, and the action itself has become simpler.
Pathetic monologues and exacerbation of terrible images are the main means for creating a tragic impression. Seneca's tragedy does not pose problems, does not solve the conflict. The playwright of the time of the Roman Empire, he is a stoic philosopher, feels the world as a field of action of inexorable fate, to which a person can only oppose the greatness of subjective self-affirmation, the readiness to endure everything and, if necessary, to die. The result of the struggle is indifferent and does not change its significance: with such an attitude, the course of the dramatic action plays only minor role and it usually proceeds in a straight line, without any interruptions.
Unlike the Roman Euripides great attention pays attention to family issues. In the Athenian family, the woman was almost a recluse. “For an Athenian,” says Engels, “she really was, in addition to childbearing, nothing more than a senior servant. The husband was engaged in his gymnastic exercises, his social affairs, from participation in which the wife was excluded.” Under such conditions, marriage was a burden, a duty towards the gods, the state and one's own ancestors. With the decomposition of the polis and the growth of individualistic tendencies, this burden began to be felt very acutely. Euripides’ characters reflect on whether they should get married or have children at all. The Greek marriage system is especially harshly criticized by women who complain about their secluded existence, about the fact that marriages are carried out by agreement of parents, without meeting the future spouse, about the impossibility of leaving a hateful husband. On the question of the place of w in the family, Euripides repeatedly returns to tragedy, putting a wide variety of opinions into the mouths of the characters. The image of Ferda was used by conservative opponents of Euripides in order to create a reputation for him as a “misogynist”. However, he treats his heroine with obvious sympathy, and, moreover, female images his tragedies are by no means limited to figures like Phaedra.
The conflict between the late passion of Phaedra and the strict chastity of Hippolytus
Euripides depicted twice. In the first edition, after the death of Hippolytus, his innocence was revealed, Phaedra committed suicide. This tragedy seemed immoral to the public. Euripides considered it necessary to have a new edition of Hippolytus, in which the image of the heroine was softened. Only the second edition (428) has reached us in its entirety. The picture of Phaedra's love torments is painted with great force. The new Phaedra languishes from passion, which she carefully tries to overcome: to save her honor; she is ready to sacrifice her life:
“And my cheeks burn with shame... to return
To consciousness it hurts so much that it seems better,
If only I could die without waking up.”
It is only against her will that the old nurse, having extorted the secret of her mistress, reveals this secret to Hippolytus. The refusal of the indignant Hippolytus forces Phaedra to carry out the suicide plan, but now to preserve her good name with the help of dying slander against her stepson. Phaedra the seductress of the first tragedy turns into Phaedra the victim. Euripides pities the woman: she has become a hostage to her own position as the wife of a conquering husband, a hostage to her own feelings and mental illness, which turns into a physical one. Whereas
Seneca's Phaedra only mentions her powerlessness in the face of “mental illness”:
“No, love alone rules over me...” and fights his situation with decisive methods; Phaedra Euripides is forced to bear the burden of a martyr even after death. Artemis promises this to Theseus:
I will take revenge with one of my arrows,
Which don’t fly away in vain.”
In antiquity, both editions of Hippolytus were very popular.
The Roman Seneca in his Phaedrus relied on the first edition of Euripides. This was natural for the needs of contemporary readers. And this is precisely what explains some of the cruelty of the work.
You collect a torn corpse in the field, -
(about the body of Hippolytus)
And dig a deep hole for this:
Let the earth oppress the head of the criminal.
(Theseus, Phaedra)
It was Seneca's Phèdre, with the surviving second edition of Hippolytus, that served as material for Racine's Phèdre, one of the best tragedies of French classicism (1677).
As we see, the difference between the image of Phaedra in Euripides and Seneca lies in the dynamics of the heroine’s feelings, the depth of her image, strength of character and will; Euripides showed the depth and ambiguity of feelings, gentleness and fear.
The Roman painted the woman as purposeful; attributed her illness to family inclinations. This is explained by contemporary views and approaches.
The image of Hippolytus was used by both authors to reveal the attitude of the gods towards mortals. And even though the Euripides goddess still appears to the young man to console him, however, she cannot help him in any way, because against
The gods do not go “their own”. And be that as it may, both tragedians reveal the true meaning of religion and the worship of gods.
Thus, Seneca, like Euripides, avoids a direct answer to the question of where evil in the world comes from, but even more decisively, he answers the question of where evil in man comes from: from passions. Everything is generally good, but only human “rabies” and “madness” turn into evil. Phaedra calls her hatred and her love “disease.” The worst of passions is anger, from which comes insolence, cruelty, and rage; love also becomes passion and leads to shamelessness. Passions must be eradicated from the soul by the power of reason, otherwise passion will completely take possession of the soul, blind it, and plunge it into madness. Phaedra's monologue of affect is an attempt to understand herself. Changes in feelings are replaced by introspection and introspection, emotional influence - so characteristic of Seneca’s interest in the psychology of passion. But there is only one outcome: “What can the mind do?” - Phaedra exclaims, and in this exclamation is the entire depth of the failure between the doctrine of moralizing rationalism and the reality of life, where “passions” determine the fate of not only individual people, but the entire Roman world.
The Romans always took a practical approach to poetry. From poetic word demanded benefit, and Seneca was in this sense a true Roman. Euripides was stronger in criticism than in the field of positive conclusions. He is always searching, hesitating, getting confused in contradictions. When posing problems, he often limits himself to pitting opposing points of view against each other, and he himself avoids giving a direct answer. Euripides is prone to pessimism.
His faith in the strength of man is shaken, and life sometimes seems to him like a capricious game of chance, in the face of which one can only resign himself.
With the depiction of strong affects, with the pathos of torment we encounter in artistic creativity Seneca. Features that distinguish it from the Attic tragedies of the 5th century. BC e., should not always be considered as innovations belonging exclusively to Seneca or his time; the entire later history of tragedy in Greek and Roman literature was deposited in them. But at that time, the views of Lucius Annaeus Seneca changed the very concept of Roman tragedy compared to Greek. Greek tragedy was not a tragedy of characters, but a tragedy of situations: its hero “is not distinguished by either virtue or righteousness, and falls into misfortune not because of depravity and meanness, but because of some mistake.” In Roman tragedy, the place of “mistake” is taken by crime (the death of Hippolytus as an example). The reason for this crime is passion that has conquered reason, and main point– the struggle between reason and passion.
One and a half thousand years will pass, and this struggle between reason and passion will become the main motive of the new European tragedy of the Renaissance and classicism.
Thus, comparing the works of Euripides “Hippolytus” and “Phaedra”
Seneca, having examined their philosophical views, contemporary schools and movements, we came to the conclusion that works written on the same subject have different ideas, and therefore different approaches of the authors to the general issue. From the examples presented in the work it is clear that each work reflects the political and social situation of the country at a given stage and fully characterizes the author’s attitude towards this. The poet’s education and upbringing leave an imprint on his style and attitude towards the heroes and their actions.
This work helped us discover the depth of issues revealed by the poets of the ancient world, the attitude of the Romans and Greeks to such issues as attitudes towards religion and the worship of gods, attitudes towards family and moral issues, as well as the cause of evil and the role of fate in the destinies of people. It was interesting to learn about the unique approach of the poets of antiquity to some issues of the intimate life of their contemporaries and the moral standards established by ancient society. The author tried to fully cover issues related to this topic and express his own opinion on this topic.
List of used literature
1. Ancient drama / Edited by I.V.Abashidze, I.Aitmatov and others - M.:
Fiction, 1970. – 765 s.
2. Ancient Greece. Problems of the policy / Edited by E.S. Golubtsov and others - M.: Nauka, 1983. - 383 p.
3. Moral letters to Lucilius. Tragedies / Edited by
S. Averintseva, S. Apta and others - M.: Fiction, 1986. -
4. Tronsky I.M. Story ancient literature. – M.: Higher School,
1988. – 867 p.
5. Chistyakova N.A., Vulikh N.V. History of ancient literature. – M.:
Higher school, 1971. – 454 p.
6. Ancient antiquity and the Middle Ages. Problems of ideology and culture /
Collection of scientific treatises / Edited by M.A. Polyakovskaya and others -
Sverdlovsk: UrSU, 1987. – 152 p.
7. Losev A.F., Sonkina G.A., Taho-Godi A.A.. Ancient literature. –
M.: Fiction, 1980. – 492 p.
Racine defines the purpose of writing his tragedy, as well as its main difference from the works of his predecessors, already in the preface to Phaedre. Thus, he writes: “Indeed, Phaedra is neither completely criminal nor completely innocent. Fate and the wrath of the gods aroused in her a sinful passion, which terrifies herself first of all. She makes every effort to overcome this passion." In his opinion, Phaedra’s sin “is rather a divine punishment than an act of her of one's own will».
It turns out that Racine, unlike Euripides (on whose tragedy he relied when creating his own “Phaedra”), and even more so Seneca, considered Phaedra innocent of her own passion, and therefore, when creating her image, he did everything possible to make her “less evocative.” hostility than in the tragedies of ancient authors, where she herself dares to accuse Hippolytus.”
Here Racine considers it important to show from the very beginning that the cause of Phaedra’s illness is her love for Hippolytus, but at the same time he manages to maintain the intrigue (rather conventional, since the story of Hippolyte, like many other ancient myths, was well known to Racine’s target audience - the educated classes population). Thus, the heroes of the tragedy think that Phaedra suffers not because of love for her stepson, but because of hatred. Moreover, Phaedra’s feelings towards the “Scythian brat” are understandable to those around her, for example, the nurse. This is explained by the fact that Racine deliberately “lowered” the image of Hippolytus, who in the tragedies of Euripides and Seneca was “free from any imperfections.”
Here the hero is endowed with a significant weakness - love for Arikia, the sister of her father’s sworn enemies. This makes Hippolytus largely guilty of Theseus. Moreover, the young man’s love for Arikia is consonant with the love that Phaedra feels for him: it is forbidden and brings suffering. Hippolytus, in love, even begins to behave like Phaedra. So, Arikia, turning to her confidante, similarly characterizes the strange behavior of Hippolytus: “You saw more than once how he walked away, barely noticing us.” Later, the hero himself confirms this: “I’ve been living for six months with an arrow in my chest... You’re here - I’m running away; If not, I’m looking for you.” Hippolyta is also related to Phaedra by the fact that he cannot find a logical explanation for his love (“the language of love is an alien language to me”).
In general, the new features that Racine endowed with Hippolyte now present Phaedra from a slightly different angle. So, for example, Phaedra directly tells Oenone that she will not denigrate the young man in the eyes of his father (“Oh no, I will not slander!”). Moreover, unlike, say, Seneca's Phaedra, she did not allow the maid to do this for her. On the contrary, she herself admits to Theseus what she told Hippolytus (another thing is that her husband does not understand her). The nobility shown by Phaedra can be considered a kind of gratitude to Hippolytus for the fact that after the confession he not only did not fly into rage (Hippolytus of Seneca, as we remember, at that moment was ready to kill his stepmother), but, on the contrary, having heard someone’s steps, calls her run. This way he saves her reputation.
At the same time, it would be wrong to call Phaedra obviously positive hero. No matter how Racine tries to “smooth out” the shortcomings of her image, they still appear at key moments. So, having learned that the young man is infatuated with another, she, despite her love for him, wants to separate them:
Oh no! And one thought about the happiness of their love
I greet you with rage and gnashing of teeth!
Death of Arikia!.. Death!.. I’ll whisper to my husband, -
He will give the sister of his enemies to the executioner.
The sister is even more dangerous than the brothers were!
Later, she takes out her anger on the maid (“I was already ready to die, you prevented me. Why did you interfere?”), which actually drove her to suicide.
And yet, Racine’s Phaedra manages to pass the last “test” with dignity - a conversation with Theseus. Unlike the heroines of Euripides and Seneca, she has the courage to confess her actions to her husband and return Hippolytus’s honorable name:
Theseus, I will break the criminal silence.
Untruth has long burdened my soul.
Your son was innocent.
Your son was pure in soul. The blame lies with me.
By the will of higher powers I was lit
Incestuous irresistible passion.
Thus, Phaedra from Racine’s drama is, as it were, a “compromise” between the heroine of Euripides (she does not have the strength to admit to slander) and the heroine of Seneca (she admits to it, but without repentance). And Phaedrus also chooses a “compromise” death - not through “passive” hanging, but also not with the help of a sword, which causes incredible suffering. She drinks the poison beforehand, indicating her acceptance of the fact that she will no longer have any means of escape and will inevitably die. Her decision to die was not impulsive, but thoughtful.
CHAPTER I. BIOGRAPHY OF J. RACINE AND THE PLOT ORIGINALITY OF THE TRAGEDY “PHAEDRA”
1.1 short biography J.Racina……………………………………………………6
1.2 Plot originality of Racine’s “Phaedra”…………………………...9
Conclusion to Chapter I…………………………………………………………….16
CHAPTER II THE IMAGE OF PHAEDRA FROM THE WORK OF JEAN RACINE “PHAEDRA”
2.1 Racine’s creation of the image of Phaedra……………………………………17
Conclusion to Chapter II……………………………………………………………23
CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………24
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………...26
INTRODUCTION
Relevance of the topic. "Phaedra" is the pinnacle of Racine's dramaturgy. It surpasses all his other plays in the beauty of its verse and its deep penetration into the recesses of the human soul. As before, there is no conflict between rational principles and the inclinations of the heart. Phaedra is shown as a woman in highest degree sensual, but love for Hippolytus is poisoned for her by the consciousness of her sinfulness. The production of Phaedra became a turning point in Racine's creative destiny.
To see what the changes were made by Racine, and most importantly, what their artistic function, it is necessary to recall those ancient tragedies that were written on the same mythological plot and which became the direct source of this work. It must be said that the popularity of "Phaedra" among readers, viewers and philologists does not eliminate, but multiplies the controversy surrounding it.
Noting the fatal predetermination of Phaedra’s fate, many contemporaries connected the philosophical content of the tragedy with the Jansenist concept of man, repeating the formulation of the ideological leader of Jansenism, Antoine Arnault: “Phaedra is a Christian who has not been overshadowed by grace.” But predestination should be understood in more in a broad sense, as a consequence of the logic built by Racine art world, fundamentally researched by R. Barth. Racine deprives the motif of the dispute between Artemis and Aphrodite, which served as the source of the conflict, of decisive importance. The basis of the passion of Racine’s heroine is fascination with the past (Phaedra tells Hippolytus that she is captivated by those of his features that remind her of the young Theseus). Characters are essentially functions of the situation. Their individual differences are subordinated in Racine to relations of power (force): if she is personified by a woman, she is equal to a man in her plot role.
The inability to act is the essence of tragedy. What happens unfolds not so much in action as in story. Pictures of important events for the hero - Phaedra's memories of the young Theseus, about her relationship with Hippolytus, Teramen's story about the death of Hippolytus, etc., reproduced in monologues - are equivalent to reality, and the inability to speak is death.
Racine's artistic perception of the world was formed in conditions when the political resistance of the feudal aristocracy was suppressed and it turned into a court nobility submissive to the will of the monarch, devoid of creative life goals. In Racine's tragedies, images of people corrupted by power, engulfed in the flames of unbridled passions, people wavering and tossing about, come to the fore. Racine's dramaturgy is dominated not so much by the political as by the moral criterion. The analysis of the devastating passions raging in the hearts of the crowned heroes is illuminated in Racine's tragedies by the light of all-pervading reason and a sublime humanistic ideal.
The art of classicism is often perceived one-sidedly and superficially as if it were rational, static and cold in its ideal harmony. The truth is more complicated. Behind the balance and refinement of the form of Racine's tragedies, behind the images of people - carriers of refined civilization, behind the poet's impulse towards beautiful and pure spiritual harmony, at the same time hides the intensity of burning passions, the depiction of acutely dramatic conflicts, irreconcilable spiritual clashes.
Herzen points out the enormous role of Racine in the spiritual formation of subsequent generations, resolutely opposing those who would like to forcibly limit the playwright to the framework of a conventional and gallant court civilization. Herzen notes: “Racine is found at every turn from 1665 until the Restoration. All these strong people of the 18th century were brought up on it. Were they all wrong? - and among these strong people XVIII century calls Robespierre.
The great playwright embodied in his work many remarkable features of the national artistic genius of France. Although Racine’s posthumous fate alternated between periods of ebb and flow of fame (the critical attitude towards the playwright’s work reached its limit in the era of romanticism), humanity will never stop turning to the images he created, trying to penetrate deeper into the mystery of beauty, to better understand the secrets of the human soul.
^ The purpose of the work is most fully consider the image of Phaedra in the work of J. Racine “Phaedra”.
Tasks, set when writing the work and helping to reveal the goal:
1. Consider a brief biography of J. Racine and the plot originality of “Phaedra” by J. Racine;
2. Analyze the image of Phaedra in the work of J. Racine “Phaedra”
^
CHAPTER I. BIOGRAPHY OF J. RACINE AND THE PLOT ORIGINALITY OF THE TRAGEDY “PHAEDRA”
1.1 Brief biography of J. Racine
Jean Racine (December 21, 1639, Ferté-Milon, County of Valois, now the department of Ain, - April 21, 1699, Paris), French playwright, member of the French Academy (1673). The son of an official. Having moved away from the Jansenists, in whose schools he received his education, he composed odes and was brought closer to the court. Early tragedy "Thebaid, or Brothers-enemies" (constructed and published 1664). Racine's only comedy, "The Fussers" (post. 1668, published 1669), satirizes the French court. New page into history French drama and the theater included the tragedy "Andromache" (post. 1667, published 1668). Coming after Pierre Corneille, Racine created a classicist tragedy of love passions, which highlighted moral issues and was distinguished by a heartfelt portrayal of a suffering person.
Subtle and precise psychologism reveals the drama of an internally divided personality, torn between duty and passion, love and hatred. Racine most deeply and poetically depicts the spiritual world of women - the leading characters of his works.
The poet's tragedies are constructed naturally and simply, obeying the internal logic of the characters' feelings. Therefore, characters and words acquire from Racine especially great importance, while external action is reduced to almost nothing and easily fits into the framework of three unities. At the same time, this strictly organized form is extremely saturated with passions raging within its framework, blinding a person, turning him, contrary to his own will and reason, into a criminal and a tyrant, a victim of his unbridledness. Ideal heroines Racine, on the contrary, steadfastly resist blind passions and arbitrariness, are ready to sacrifice themselves in order to remain faithful moral duty and save your spiritual purity.
The state usually appears in Racine as a despotic principle, close to Eastern tyranny, under the yoke of which everything bright and virtuous perishes. The poet's striking political tragedy "Britannicus" (post. 1669, published 1670) depicts the birth of a tyrant. Noble nature absolute monarchy appears especially clearly here.
Racine's ideal of self-denial, which expressed the poet's faith in the moral and social need for a person to limit his personal aspirations, is most clearly embodied in the tragedy "Berenice" (post. 1670, published 1671), glorifying the renunciation of all its heroes from passion. But here, too, the center is the suffering that the fulfillment of the demands of the state entails, and Racine’s subsequent tragedies are again built on the conflict between monarchical despotism and its victims (Bayazet, post. and ed. 1672; Mithridates, post. and ed. . 1673; "Iphigenia in Aulis", post. 1674). In "Phaedrus" (constructed and published 1677)
The vital truth and power of the passions depicted by Racine had shocked court circles before. They were especially outraged by "Phaedra". Racine was accused of immorality and the first productions of the play failed. He stopped writing for the theater. This was also connected with the poet’s new appeal to Jansenism. Racine returned to dramaturgy after a 12-year break, composing the tragedy "Esther" (constructed and published 1689) for the pupils of the Saint-Cyr monastery. The poet appealed for religious tolerance. New genre religious and political drama was clearly defined in the tragedy on biblical story"Athaliah" (post. 1690, published 1691), ending with an armed uprising of the people against the despot ruler. Here the love theme is completely supplanted by relevant social content. Anticipating the Enlightenment tragedy of the 18th century, Racine remained faithful to the basic principles of his poetics in his biblical dramas: verisimilitude, economy artistic means etc. Racine’s language is also distinguished by its noble simplicity. Complete literary activity Racine's "Spiritual Songs" (1694) and " Short story Port-Royal" (ed. 1742). The greatest poet classicism, Racine had a huge influence on all representatives of this movement in his homeland and abroad. His work retained all its significance during the Great Patriotic War. french revolution.
At the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries, most of Racine's tragedies were translated into Russian. The role of Phaedra became one of the signature roles of E. S. Semenova. Alexander Pushkin and Alexander Herzen highly appreciated Racine's tragedies. In 1921, in a new translation by Valery Bryusov, “Phaedra” was staged by the Moscow Chamber Theater with A. G. Koonen in the title role.
Racine's creative heritage is quite diverse. He also wrote the comedy "Sutyagi" (1668), a witty mockery of judicial procedures and a passion for litigation, a work largely inspired by Aristophanes' Wasps and originally intended for use by actors Italian comedy masks; And poetic works(here we must mention the cantata “Idyll of the World,” created in 1685), and various works and sketches are the fruit of the writer’s activity as a royal historiographer; and A Brief History of Port-Royal, written in 1693 in defense of the oppressed Jansenists; and translations from Greek and Latin. However, Racine's immortality was brought by his tragedies.
One of the Soviet specialists in the field of literary theory, S. G. Bocharov, defined as follows and very successfully ideological originality tragedies of French classicism: “The great works of classicism were not court art, they did not contain figurative design of state policy, but reflection and knowledge of collisions historical era". What were these collisions? Their content was “not the simple subordination of the personal to the general passion and duty (which would fully satisfy official requirements),” that is, not a moralizing sermon, “but the irreconcilable antagonism of these principles,” their irreparable discord. This may well be attributed to Racine.
The theme of almost all of Racine's great tragedies is blind passion, which sweeps away any moral barriers and leads to inevitable disaster. In Corneille, the characters emerge from the conflict renewed and purified, while in Racine they suffer complete collapse. The dagger or poison that ends their earthly existence is, on the physical plane, a consequence of the collapse that has already occurred on the psychological plane.
^
1.2 Plot peculiarity of Racine’s “Phaedra”
Racine's most famous tragedy, Phaedra (1677), was written at a time when Racine's theatrical success seemed to reach its apogee. And it became a turning point in his fate, in fact, it drew a line under his work as a theatrical author.
Over the past years, a network of intrigue and gossip has thickened around him; his privileged position and the favor of the court towards him were regarded in aristocratic circles as an encroachment on the social hierarchy established for centuries. Indirectly, this reflected the dissatisfaction of the old aristocracy with the new orders emanating from the king and implanted by his bourgeois minister Colbert. Racine and Boileau were viewed as bourgeois upstarts, “Colbert’s people,” and they did not miss an opportunity to show them their disdain and “put them in their place.” When, at the end of 1676, it became known that Racine was working on Phèdre, the minor playwright Pradon, who attributed Racine’s failure to his last play, in a short time wrote a tragedy on the same plot, which he offered to Moliere’s former troupe (Moliere himself was no longer alive). In the 18th century Racine's biographers put forward a version that the play was commissioned from Pradon by Racine's main enemies - the Duchess of Bouillon, the niece of Cardinal Mazarin, and her brother the Duke of Nevers. There is no documentary evidence of this, but even if Pradon acted independently, he could well count on the support of these influential persons. Both premieres took place within two days of each other in two competing theaters. Although the leading actresses of Moliere's troupe (including his widow Armande) refused to play in Pradon's play, it was a wild success: the Duchess of Bouillon bought a large number of seats in the hall; her claque applauded Pradon enthusiastically. The failure of Racine's Phèdre at the Burgundy Hotel was organized in a similar way. Very little time passed, and criticism unanimously paid tribute to Racine’s Phèdre. Pradon entered the history of literature in the unsightly role of an insignificant intriguer and a puppet in his hands powerful of the world this.
In its own way moral issues"Phaedra" is closest to "Andromache". The strength and weakness of man, criminal passion and at the same time the consciousness of his guilt appear here in extreme form. The theme of self-judgment and the highest judgment carried out by the deity runs through the entire tragedy. Mythological motifs and images that serve as its embodiment are closely intertwined with Christian teaching in its Jansenist interpretation. Phaedra's criminal passion for her stepson Hippolytus bears the stamp of doom from the very beginning. The motive of death permeates the entire tragedy, starting from the first scene - the news of the imaginary death of Theseus until the tragic denouement - the death of Hippolytus and the suicide of Phaedra. Death and the kingdom of the dead are constantly present in the consciousness and fate of the characters as an integral part of their actions, their family, their home world: Minos, the father of Phaedra, is a judge in the kingdom of the dead; Theseus descends into Hades to kidnap the wife of the ruler of the underworld, etc. In the mythologized world of Phaedra, the line between the earthly and other worlds, which was clearly present in Iphigenia, is erased, and the divine origin of her family, originating from the sun god Helios is no longer recognized as the high honor and mercy of the gods, but as a curse that brings death, as a legacy of enmity and revenge of the gods, as a great moral test that is beyond the power of a weak mortal. The diverse repertoire of mythological motifs with which the monologues of Phaedra and other characters are saturated here performs not a plot-organizing, but rather a philosophical and psychological function: it creates a cosmic picture of the world in which the fate of people, their sufferings and impulses, the inexorable will of the gods are intertwined into one tragic ball .
A comparison of “Phaedra” with its source - “Hippolytus” by Euripides - shows that Racine rethought in a rationalistic spirit only its initial premise - the rivalry between Aphrodite and Artemis, of which Phaedra and Hippolytus become victims. Racine shifts the center of gravity to the internal, psychological side of the tragic conflict, but for him this conflict turns out to be determined by circumstances that lie beyond the limits of human will. The Jansenist idea of predestination, “grace” here receives a generalized mythological form, through which, nevertheless, Christian phraseology clearly emerges: the father-judge, waiting for a criminal daughter in the kingdom of the dead (IV, 6), is interpreted as the image of a god punishing sinners.
Hippolytus, the son of the Athenian king Theseus, goes in search of his father, who has been wandering somewhere for six months. Hippolytus is the son of an Amazon, new wife Theseus Phaedra disliked him, as everyone thinks, and he wants to leave Athens. Phaedra is sick with an incomprehensible disease and “wants to die.” She talks about her suffering, which the gods sent her, about the fact that there is a conspiracy around her and they “decided to kill her.” Fate and the wrath of the gods aroused in her some kind of sinful feeling that terrifies her and which she is afraid to speak about openly. She makes every effort to overcome her dark passion, but in vain. Phaedra thinks about death and waits for it, not wanting to reveal her secret to anyone.
Oenon's nurse fears that the queen's mind is clouded, for Phaedra herself does not know what she is saying. Oenone reproaches her for the fact that Phaedra wants to offend the gods by interrupting her “thread of life,” and calls on the queen to think about the future of her own children, that the “arrogant Hippolytus” born of the Amazon will quickly take away their power. In response, Phaedra declares that her “sinful life already lasts too long,” but her sin is not in her actions, the heart is to blame for everything - it is the cause of torment. However, Phaedra refuses to say what her sin is and wants to take her secret to the grave. But he can’t stand it and admits to Oenone that he loves Hippolytus. She's terrified. As soon as Phaedra became the wife of Theseus and saw Hippolytus, “now flames, now chills” tormented her body. This is the “fire of the all-powerful Aphrodite,” the goddess of love. Phaedra tried to appease the goddess - “she erected a temple for her, decorated it,” made sacrifices, but in vain, neither incense nor blood helped. Then Phaedra began to avoid Hippolytus and play the role of an evil stepmother, forcing her son to leave his father’s house. But everything is in vain.
The maid Panope reports that news has been received that Phaedra's husband Theseus has died. Therefore, Athens is worried about who should be king: the son of Phaedra or the son of Theseus, Hippolytus, born of a captive Amazon. Oenone reminds Phaedra that the burden of power now falls on her and she has no right to die, since then her son will die.
Arikia, a princess from the Athenian royal family of the Pallantes, whom Theseus deprived of power, learns of his death. She is worried about her fate. Theseus kept her captive in a palace in the city of Troezen. Hippolytus is elected ruler of Troezen, and Yemena, Arikia's confidante, believes that he will free the princess, since Hippolytus is not indifferent to her. Arikia was captivated by Hippolyte’s spiritual nobility. While maintaining a high resemblance to his illustrious father, he did not inherit his father’s low traits.” Theseus became notorious for seducing many women.
Hippolytus comes to Arikia and announces to her that he is canceling his father’s decree about her captivity and giving her freedom. The Athenians need a king, and the people nominate three candidates: Hippolytus, Arikia and the son of Phaedra. However, Hippolytus, according to ancient law, if he was not born a Hellenic woman, cannot own the Athenian throne. Arikia belongs to the ancient Athenian family and has all the rights to power. And the son of Phaedra will be the king of Crete - this is what Hippolytus decides, remaining the ruler of Troezen. He decides to go to Athens to convince the people of Arikia's right to the throne. Arikia cannot believe that the son of her enemy is giving her the throne. Hippolyte tells her that he never knew what love was before, but when he saw her, he “humbled himself and put on love shackles.” He thinks about the princess all the time.
Phaedra, meeting with Hippolytus, says that she is afraid of him: now that Theseus is gone, he can bring down his anger on her and her son, taking revenge for the fact that he was expelled from Athens. Hippolytus is indignant - he could not have acted so low. Additionally, the rumor of Theseus' death may be false. Phaedra, unable to control her feeling, says that if Hippolytus had been older when Theseus arrived in Crete, then he, too, could have accomplished the same feats - kill the Minotaur and become a hero, and she, like Ariadne, would have given him a thread so as not to get lost in the Labyrinth, and would link her fate with it. Hippolytus is perplexed; it seems to him that Phaedra is daydreaming, mistaking him for Theseus. Phaedra reinterprets his words and says that she loves not the current Theseus, but the young one, like Hippolytus, loves him, Hippolytus, but does not see her guilt in this, since she has no power over herself. She is a victim of divine wrath; it is the gods who sent her love that torments her. Phaedra asks Hippolytus to punish her for her criminal passion and take the sword out of its sheath. Hippolyte runs in horror; no one should know about the terrible secret, not even his mentor Teramen.
A messenger arrives from Athens to hand Phaedra the reins of government. But the queen does not want power, she does not need honors. She cannot rule the country when her own mind is not under her control, when she has no control over her feelings. She had already revealed her secret to Hippolytus, and the hope of a reciprocal feeling awakened in her.
Oenone returns with the news that Theseus is alive and will soon be in the palace. Phaedra is seized with horror, for she is afraid that Hippolytus will reveal her secret and expose her deception to her father, saying that her stepmother is dishonoring the royal throne. She thinks of death as salvation, but fears for the fate of her children. Oenone offers to protect Phaedra from dishonor and slander Hippolytus before his father, saying that he desired Phaedra. She undertakes to arrange everything herself in order to save the honor of the lady “in spite of her conscience,” for “so that honor is... without a spot for everyone, and it is not a sin to sacrifice virtue.”
Oenone slandered Hippolytus, and Theseus believed, remembering how pale, embarrassed and evasive his son was in conversation with him. He drives Hippolytus away and asks the god of the sea Poseidon, who promised him to fulfill his first will, to punish his son. Hippolytus is so amazed that Phaedra accuses him of criminal passion that he cannot find words to justify himself - his “tongue has become ossified.” Although he admits that he loves Arikia, his father does not believe him.
Phaedra tries to persuade Theseus not to harm her son. When he tells her that Hippolytus is supposedly in love with Arikia, Phaedra is shocked and offended that she has a rival. She did not imagine that anyone else could awaken love in Hippolyte. The queen sees the only way out for herself - to die. She curses Oenone for denigrating Hippolytus.
Meanwhile, Hippolytus and Arikia decide to flee the country together. Theseus tries to assure Arikia that Hippolytus is a liar and she listened to him in vain. He wants to interrogate Oenone again, but finds out that the queen drove her away and she threw herself into the sea. Phaedra herself rushes about in madness. Theseus orders his son to be called and prays to Poseidon not to fulfill his wish.
However, it is too late - Teramen brings the terrible news that Hippolytus has died. He was riding a chariot along the shore, when suddenly an unprecedented monster appeared from the sea, “a beast with the face of a bull, forehead and horns, and with a body covered with yellowish scales.” Everyone rushed to run, and Hippolytus threw a spear at the monster and pierced the scales. The dragon fell at the feet of the horses, and they bolted out of fear. Hippolytus could not hold them back; they rushed without a road, along the rocks. Suddenly the axle of the chariot broke, the prince became entangled in the reins, and the horses dragged him along the ground strewn with stones. His body turned into a continuous wound, and he died in the arms of Teramen. Before his death, Ippolit said that his father had in vain brought accusations against him.
Theseus is horrified; he blames Phaedra for the death of his son. She admits that Hippolytus is innocent, that she was “by the will of higher powers... kindled by an incestuous, irresistible passion.” Oenone, saving her honor, slandered Hippolytus. Oenone is now gone, and Phaedra, having removed suspicion from her innocent stepson, ends her earthly torment by taking poison.
Conclusion to Chapter I
In “Phaedrus” the author contrasts the strength and weakness of man, criminal passion and at the same time the consciousness of his guilt. In Racine's tragedy there is a theme of self-judgment and the highest court created by the deity.
Racine with great force revealed the tragedy of a highly moral woman waging a difficult struggle against the criminal passion that overcomes her. The poet's greatest tragedy testified to the crisis of Racine's ideal of self-denial and concealed within itself a premonition of the crisis of the entire old world order.
^ CHAPTER II THE IMAGE OF PHAEDRA FROM THE WORK OF JEAN RACINE “PHAEDRA”
2.1 Racine’s creation of the image of Phaedra
Jean Racine writes about Phèdre this way: “Here is another tragedy. Phaedra is neither completely criminal nor completely innocent. Fate and the wrath of the gods aroused in her a criminal passion that terrifies, first of all, herself. She makes every effort to overcome this passion:
“But everything was in vain - both incense and blood:
Incurable love has come to me!
I, offering prayers to the goddess Aphrodite,
She was immersed in dreams of Hippolyta.
And not hers - oh no! - idolizing him,
She carried her gifts to the foot of the altar.
I started avoiding him. But everything is one:
In the features of the father - alas! “I found my son!”
She prefers to die rather than reveal her secret:
“What a criminal, what a fiend of evil
I became my own person! I cursed
Both passion and life. I knew: only a grave
Can hide my shame; I decided to die.
Having heeded your requests and tears, you in everything
I confessed now. And I don’t repent of that.
But knowing that I am condemned to death by fate,
Don't bother me with a groan or a reproach,
Don't dissuade, don't try to interfere
And don’t try to fan the dying fire again.”
Perhaps this will reconcile with the theater many persons renowned for their piety and the firmness of their convictions, who condemn the tragedy in our days.”
Racine made sure that Phaedra was less disliked than in
Hippolyta. Racine believed that there was something too base and too disgusting in slander to be put into the mouth of the queen, whose feelings were also so noble and so sublime. And when Oenone says:
“You know - he is your enemy. And this enemy is dangerous.
Why would you cede triumph to the enemy?
No, attack him first and blame him
In my own, such a grave sin...”
Phaedra answers her: “Oh no, I won’t slander!”
It seemed to Racine that this baseness was more in the character of the nurse, who was more likely to have vile inclinations and who, however, decided to slander only in the name of saving the life and honor of her mistress:
“I’ll tell you everything myself, and you keep quiet... To deception
I will resort, in defiance of my conscience.
Oh, it would be easier for me to face a thousand deaths!
But how can I save you? There is no other way!
Enona will do anything for you, she’s ready for anything.”
Phaedra turns out to be involved in this only because of her mental confusion, due to which she does not control herself.
She soon returns to acquit the innocent and declare the truth.
Racine placed Phaedra at the center of his tragedy, showing the painful struggle of a woman with the sinful passion that burns her.
There are at least two interpretations of this conflict - “pagan” and “Christian”. On the one hand, Racine shows a world inhabited by monsters (one of them destroys Hippolytus) and ruled by evil gods. At the same time, here one can discover the existence of the “hidden God” of the Jansenists: he does not give people any “signs,” but only in him can salvation be found. It is no coincidence that the play was enthusiastically received by Racine’s teacher Antoine Arnault, who wrote the famous definition: “Phaedra is a Christian woman on whom grace has not descended.” The heroine of the tragedy finds “salvation” by dooming herself to death and saving Hippolytus’ honor in the eyes of her father. In this play, Racine managed to fuse together the concept of pagan fate with the Calvinist idea of predestination.
In Racine, a woman, in the person of Phaedra, for the first time appears as a person who is completely independent in her feelings and responsible for her actions. In the person of Phaedra, the struggle of a woman with the fatal and criminal passion that has gripped her is depicted with such artistic truthfulness.
Racine's Phaedra is noble: she only succumbs to the persuasion of her confidante, however, having experienced severe moral suffering, she reveals the truth to Theseus:
“Oh, listen, Theseus! Moments are precious to me.
Your son was pure in soul. The blame lies with me.
By the will of higher powers I was lit
Incestuous irresistible passion.
Unfortunately, the vile Oenone intervened here.
Fearing that Hippolytus rejected my passion
He won’t keep silent about the secret that was revealed to him,
She dared (by persuading skillfully
She shouldn’t bother me) to lie. And she succeeded."
But it's not just these external changes. Rasinovskaya Phaedra is a suffering woman, not a criminal.
The intense burning passion of the heroine is conveyed thanks to the honed artistic form. Racine easily and organically accepts the strict rules of classicist “unities”, without resorting to external stage effects; the action of the play unfolds clearly, consistently and accurately. Her heroine constantly analyzes her feelings, although she cannot curb her passion. Thus, Racine comprehends and embodies in his tragedy not only the moral and psychological conflicts of his era, but also discovers the universal laws of psychology. “Phaedra,” along with Racine’s tragedies, is not just a legacy of 17th-century literature, but a truly eternal heritage of world culture.
^ 1.2 Criticism of the image of Phaedra by various authors
Vipper Yu. B. in the book “Creative Fates and History” writes about Phaedra like this: “Racine’s Phaedra, for all her emotional drama“, a man of clear self-awareness, a man in whom the heart-corroding poison of instincts is combined with an irresistible desire for truth, purity and moral dignity.”
Phaedra, constantly betrayed by Theseus, who is mired in vices, feels lonely and abandoned, and a destructive passion for her stepson Hippolytus arises in her soul. Phaedra fell in love with Hippolytus to some extent because in his appearance the former, once valiant and beautiful Theseus seemed to be resurrected. But Phaedra also admits that a terrible fate weighs down on her and her family, that the tendency towards corrupting passions is in her blood, inherited from her ancestors. Hippolytus is also convinced of the moral depravity of those around him. Addressing his beloved Aricia, Hippolytus declares that they are all “engulfed in the terrible flames of vice” and calls on her to leave “the fatal and defiled place where virtue is called upon to breathe polluted air.”
But Phaedra, who seeks reciprocity from her stepson and slanderes him, appears in Racine not only as a typical representative of her corrupt environment. She simultaneously rises above this environment. It was in this direction that Racine made the most significant changes to the image inherited from antiquity, from Euripides and Seneca. In Seneca, for example, Phaedra is depicted as a characteristic product of the unbridled palace morals of the era of Nero, as a sensual and primitive nature. Racine's Phaedra, for all her spiritual drama, is a person of clear self-awareness, a person in whom the heart-corroding poison of instincts is combined with an irresistible desire for truth, purity and moral dignity. Moreover, she does not forget for a moment that she is not a private person, but a queen, a bearer state power that her behavior is intended to serve as a model for society, that the glory of the name doubles the torment. The culmination of development ideological content tragedy - Phaedra's slander and the victory that is then won in the heroine's mind by a sense of moral justice over the egoistic instinct of self-preservation. Phaedra restores the truth, but life is no longer bearable for her, and she destroys herself.
In "Phaedrus" due to its universal human depth poetic images, gleaned from antiquity, are especially organically intertwined with ideological and artistic motifs suggested to the writer by modernity. As already mentioned, the artistic traditions of the Renaissance continue to live in the work of Racine. When a writer, for example, makes Phaedra address the sun as her progenitor, for him this is not a conventional rhetorical decoration. For Racine, the creator of Phaedra, as well as for his predecessors - the French poets of the Renaissance, ancient images, concepts and names turn out to be their native element. The legends and myths of hoary antiquity come to life here under the pen of the playwright, giving even greater majesty and monumentality to the life drama that plays out before the eyes of the audience.
From Boileau’s point of view, “Phaedra” was the ideal embodiment of the basic principle and purpose of the tragedy - to evoke compassion for the hero, “a criminal against his will,” by presenting his guilt as a manifestation of universal human weakness. The same concept underlies Racine's understanding of tragedy.
In foreign science of image interpretation main character range from recognizing her as an unconditional “pagan” (by the nature of the heroine’s moral world, of course, for in the literal “biographical” sense Phaedra is the heroine of a pagan ancient myth), like the famous French writer M. Butor, to the conviction that she is not only a “Christian” ", but also an exponent of a certain religious worldview - Jansenism, with which, as you know, Racine himself was associated.
S. Artamonov attributes a “chain of crimes” to Phaedra, D. Oblomievsky considers her negative character, and Yu.B. Whipper - "a typical representative of his corrupt environment." A much more accurate and flexible understanding of Phaedra’s character and the main conflict of the play is available in V. Kadyshev’s monograph “Racine”.
Conclusion to Chapter II
Who is Phaedra? Did she commit moral crime or is she just a sincerely loving woman who became a victim of circumstances? The author believes that she is completely independent in her feelings and responsible for her actions. I also believe that Phaedra became dependent on her love. Her mind doesn't listen. Although Phaedra constantly analyzes her feelings, she cannot curb her passion. Phaedra calls her love “incurable,” that is, it is not in her power to change anything in her feelings.
S. Artamonov, D. Oblomievsky, and Yu.B. Whippers consider Phaedra a negative character, but for me the image of Phaedra evokes sympathy. In my opinion, Phaedra is simply a woman with a heart capable of love. A heart that does not listen to common sense.
CONCLUSION
So, I studied Racine’s work “Phaedra”. Phaedra is the main heroine of the tragedy. What is her image? The author depicts the great, immeasurable power of feelings that have taken possession of the heroine, and with which she cannot cope. In Phaedrus, the heroes love madly, disinterestedly, free from any utilitarian intentions. Hippolytus is “humanized” by love. Phaedra's mad love is her weakness, her free will is expressed in the fact that she is aware of it. Racine's man has no control over himself, and above all over his feelings. Phaedra is first of all a victim of circumstances, and then a person who still understands what consequences can result from the fact that by indulging in weakness, she brings harm to other people.
Phaedra is the wife of Theseus, daughter of Minos and Pasiphae, stepmother of Hippolytus. Phaedra burns with passion for her stepson and opens up to him, but when her husband Theseus returns home, whom she considered dead, saving herself and her children from shame, she allows the nurse Oenon to slander Hippolytus in an attack on her honor before the truth is revealed. Cursed by his father, Hippolytus dies, and Phaedra, full of remorse, is poisoned, before her death confessing to Theseus her guilt and Hippolytus’s innocence. Developing the character of Phaedra, Racine relied on the tragedies of Euripides “Hippolytus Crowned” (428 BC) and Seneca’s “Phaedra” (1st century AD). Seneca made Phaedra the main character, which Racine accepted, but his version of this character (Phaedra from the very beginning is overwhelmed by insane passion and is ready for any crime) contradicted the desire of the French playwright to choose a heroine who, in accordance with Aristotle's Poetics, could evoke compassion and horror . Therefore, in the preface to the tragedy, Racine indicates that it is to Euripides that he owes “the general idea of Phaedra’s character,” noting: “Phaedra is neither completely criminal nor completely innocent.” Although the creation of the image of Phaedra was not a goal for Racine, but a means of revealing the idea of virtue, he gained a new understanding of the tasks of reproducing character in literature, becoming one of the founders of psychologism in France. He showed one day (the last day) of her life. The passion that had tormented her for many years reached its highest tension on that day, from being hidden for the first time it became obvious and led to a tragic denouement.
Racine with great force revealed the tragedy of a highly moral woman waging a difficult struggle against the criminal passion that overcomes her. The poet's greatest tragedy testified to the crisis of Racine's ideal of self-denial and concealed within itself a premonition of the crisis of the entire old world order.
^ BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Artamonov S.D. Story foreign literature XVII-XVIII centuries, - M., 1978
2.Vipper Yu. B. Creative destinies and history. (ABOUT Western European literatures XVI - first half of the 19th century century). - M., 1990.
3. Grib V.R., Racine, Moliere. Selected works. –M., 1956.
4. Jean Racine. Phaedra. "Science", Siberian branch, Novosibirsk, 1977
5. History of foreign literature of the 17th century. /Ed. Z.I. Plavskina. - M., 1987
6.Kadyshev V.S. Racine. M., 1990
7. Mokulsky S.S. Racine: For the 300th anniversary of his birth. L., 1940
8. Oblomievsky D.D. French classicism. -M., 1968.
9. Racine J. Works, vols. 1–2. M., 1984
10. Theory of literature. The main problems in historical coverage. Image, method, character. M., 1962
11. Reader on Western European literature of the 17th century / Comp. B.I.Purishev.-M., 1949.
12. Shafarenko I. Jean Racine. – In the book: Writers of France. M., 1964
13. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron in 82 volumes. and 4 additional vol. - M.: Terra, 2001
L.A. Lukov. French literature (XVII century - turn of the XVIII century)
Phaedra (character from J. Racine’s tragedy “Phaedra”)
Phaedra (Phèdre) is a character in J. Racine’s tragedy “Phaedre” (“Phèdre”, 1677), wife of Theseus, daughter of Minos and Pasiphae, stepmother of Hippolyta. Racine does not indicate her age, but if we take into account that the outstanding actress of the Burgundian Hotel Marie Chanmele, for whom he wrote and with whom he prepared this role, was a little less than 35 years old, then Phèdre, according to the author, was about 30 (taking into account the rejuvenation of the actors , created stage means). Phaedra burns with passion for her stepson Hippolytus and opens up to him, but when her husband Theseus, whom she considered dead, returns home, then, saving herself and her children from shame, she allows her nurse Oenone to slander Hippolytus in an attack on her honor before the truth will be revealed. Cursed by his father, Hippolytus dies, and Phaedra, full of remorse, is poisoned, before her death confessing to Theseus her guilt and Hippolytus’s innocence.
Developing the character of Phaedra, Racine relied on the tragedies of Euripides “Hippolytus Crowned” (428 BC) and Seneca’s “Phaedra” (1st century AD). Seneca made Phaedra the main character, which Racine accepted, but his version of this character (Phaedra from the very beginning is overwhelmed by mad passion and is ready for any crime) contradicted the desire of the French playwright to choose a heroine who, in accordance with Aristotle’s Poetics, could cause compassion and horror. Therefore, in the preface to the tragedy, Racine indicates that it is to Euripides that he owes “the general idea of Phaedra’s character,” noting: “In fact, Phaedra is neither completely criminal nor completely innocent. Fate and the wrath of the gods aroused in her a sinful passion, which terrifies herself first of all. She makes every effort to overcome this passion. She prefers to die rather than reveal her secret. And when she is forced to open up, she experiences a confusion that shows quite clearly that her sin is more a divine punishment than an act of her own will.” Racine departs from the primary sources, trying to mitigate the heroine’s guilt: “I even took care,” he writes in the preface, “so that Phaedra would be less disliked than in the tragedies of ancient authors, where she herself dares to accuse Hippolytus. I believed that there was something too base and too disgusting in slander to be put into the mouth of the queen, whose feelings were also so noble and so sublime. It seemed to me that this baseness was more in the character of the nurse, who was more likely to have vile inclinations and who, however, decided to slander only in the name of saving the life and honor of her mistress. Phaedra turns out to be involved in this only because of her mental confusion, due to which she does not control herself. Soon she returns to acquit the innocent and declare the truth.” This remark emphasizes that Racine does not study the inner world real person, but models it in accordance with a certain setting. The playwright creates a philosophical tragedy; it is no coincidence that in the preface he puts theater and the philosophy of ancient authors side by side: “Their theater was a school, and virtue was taught there with no less success than in the schools of philosophers. That is why Aristotle wanted to establish rules for dramatic writing, and Socrates, the wisest of thinkers, did not disdain to have a hand in the tragedies of Euripides.” In philosophical tragedy, characters are important not in themselves, but as illustrations of certain ideas. In Phaedrus, the image of the main character is intended to illuminate the idea of virtue, which Racine reveals as follows: “...In none of my tragedies is virtue displayed as clearly as in this one. Here the slightest mistakes are punished with all severity; the mere criminal thought is as terrifying as the crime itself; weakness loving soul equates to weakness; passions are depicted for the sole purpose of showing what confusion they generate, and vice is painted with colors that allow its ugliness to be immediately recognized and hated.” But although the creation of the image of Phaedra was not a goal for Racine, but a means of revealing the idea of virtue, he gained a new understanding of the tasks of reproducing character in literature, becoming one of the founders of psychologism in France. He showed one day (the last day) of her life. The passion that had tormented her for many years reached its highest tension on that day, from being hidden for the first time it became obvious and led to a tragic denouement.
The first mention of Phaedra appears in the second tirade of Hippolytus (Act I, App. 1), it is respectful towards the missing father and Phaedra (“He has long since finished with his sins youth, / And Phaedra has no need to fear her rivals”; Per. M. A. Donskoy). But in the next tirade, Hippolytus, who expressed a desire to leave Troezen, explains it by saying that “the world changed its face” when “the daughter of Minos and Pasiphae” reigned here. Phaedra is not named, but her parents are. Minos is the son of Zeus and Europe, the king of Crete, who collected tribute from Athens once every nine years - seven young men and seven girls who were eaten by the Minotaur (Theseus killed the Minotaur), Minos administers justice in Hades. Pasiphae is the daughter of Helios, who was inflamed with passion for the bull sent by Poseidon, and gave birth to the monstrous man-bull Minotaur. The playwright reminded the audience who knew ancient mythology well that Phaedra was not just a suffering woman, she was the granddaughter of the gods, her parents carried within themselves the primitive chaos of desires, they passed on to their daughter dark, uncontrollable passions, irrationality and cruelty, but at the same time, maybe be, an understanding of justice and a bright beginning (Pasiphae - lat. all luminous). Hippolytus and his mentor Theramenes talk about Phaedra's hatred of her stepson. At her insistence, Theseus expelled Hippolytus from Athens.
In the next apparition, Oenone reports that the queen is on the verge of death, “a mysterious illness is depriving her of sleep.” Here Phaedra herself appears, her first words confirm everything that was said about the disease: “I will stop here, Oenone, on the threshold, / I am exhausted. My legs can't support me. / And the eyes cannot bear the bright light” (Act I, Rev. 3). She says goodbye to life, wanting to take some secret to the grave. And, unexpectedly for himself, Oenone confesses his destructive passion for the “son of the Amazon” (not Phaedra, but Oenone calls him by name for the first time). This passion arose a long time ago, when Phaedra, having become the wife of Theseus, saw her stepson for the first time in Athens. Phaedra describes her state as follows: “Looking at him, I blushed and turned pale, / Now flames, now chills tormented my body, / Both sight and hearing left me, / My spirit trembled in painful confusion” (Act I, Rev. 3 ). Racine was a great master of psychologism, but it is not in these descriptions that one should look for his signs. Psychologism is the principle of artistic description of a person’s inner world; it becomes necessary in literature when the inner world is opposed to the outer world, and a character’s double life arises. So far, everything that Phaedra experiences is completely consistent with the external expression of her feelings. But then she informs Oenone that, trying to hide her criminal passion from others and herself, she began to pursue her “beloved enemy” - and Racine creates a situation that requires deep psychological analysis. Phaedra achieved the expulsion of Hippolytus from her father’s house - “and then relief came.” Phaedra carefully hides from Theseus that their marriage is unhappy, raises her children - and for some time the passion subsides. But the move of Theseus and Phaedra to Troezen, where Hippolytus was exiled, opens the wound again. Now, says Phaedra, only death can hide the shame. That’s why she confessed to Oenone that she was determined to die. This is how she explains her actions. But then the news comes about the death of Theseus. Phaedra decides to stay alive for the sake of her eldest son, who can rightfully become the ruler of Athens.
The rationalism of Racine's psychological analysis has been repeatedly noted in the critical literature. Phaedra accurately formulates her experiences, and her formulations fit into measured Alexandrian verse. But Racine actually goes further and reveals such movements of the soul that are not expressed. Why does Phaedra confess to Oenone? Why is she exhausted, almost dying? Why did her confession come before the news of Theseus's death, giving her more rights to make it? Because she wants, longs to confess her love for Hippolytus, although this desire is never expressed. And an explanation with Hippolytus becomes inevitable, this is an internal decision that does not depend on an external circumstance - the news of the death of her husband, making Phaedra more free to express her feelings.
In Act II, Phaedra is first mentioned in a conversation between Arikia and Ismene, who see in her only a frightened mother, afraid for the fate of her children, and in the past, a narrow-minded wife who boasted about Theseus, who cheated on her. So, neither men (Hippolytus, Theramenes) nor women (Aricia, Ismene) unraveled Phaedra’s double life. In yavl. 5 Phaedra meets Hippolytus for the first time in the tragedy. She cannot hide her excitement (“Here he is!.. All the blood stopped for a moment in the veins - / And gushed to the heart...”). But she speaks to Hippolytus only about the fate of her son, who, after the death of his father and the possible imminent death of her own, will be able to find protection only in Hippolyte. And suddenly Phaedra makes a confession, outwardly almost accidental, but made because she passionately wants to confess her love to Hippolytus. This is one of the most powerful parts of the tragedy. Phaedra speaks of her love for Theseus, but what she loves is “not the present Theseus, / A tired flighty, a slave of his own passions (...) No, my Theseus is younger! / A little unsociable, he is full of purity, / He is proud, beautiful, brave... like a young god!.. Like you! She had previously told Oenone that she saw a son in her father’s features. The most important feature of Phaedra becomes clear: she sees the world and people not as they are. She loves not Hippolytus, but his image, created by her imagination, in which individual features of Hippolytus merged with the best qualities of Theseus. It is interesting that in Racine’s time the theater had a purely external opportunity to emphasize the similarities between Theseus and Hippolytus. Both of them, like other heroes of tragedies, were dressed in the same costumes. This type of costume (habit a la romaine - “Roman”) repeated the attire in which King Louis XIV performed in Versailles in 1662 at the performance of the “Great Rest” (a helmet with a plume or cocked hat, a large wig, a brocade cuirass with long sleeves, puffs and ribbons on the shoulders, a tunnel - a short skirt supported by hoops, flesh-colored stockings, high boots with laces and red heels). The similarity between Theseus and Hippolytus allowed Phaedra to delay the moment of direct recognition for a moment, but when the opportunity arose to interpret it differently hidden meaning her words (Hippolytus: “I didn’t understand you. I’m tormented by shame”), Phaedra (she wants to confess!) pronounces the words (“You understood everything, cruel!”), after which no retreat is possible, and a whole stream pours from the queen’s lips words of love mixed with shame, with the desire to die at the hand of a loved one in order to ease his torment. Only the faithful Oenone manages to interrupt this flow; Phaedra allows her to lead her away.
In Act III, Phaedra repents of what she has done. Although Hippolytus was struck with horror, Phaedra saw only impassivity in him. She does not see or understand the real Hippolytus. For the first time, Phaedra accuses Oenone of encouraging her not to give up her life with the hope of love. But she is sent with the task of seducing him with the crown, giving insidious advice (“Try everything. Look for where the armor is weaker.” - Act III, Rev. 1). And then the news comes that Theseus is alive. Phaedra is tormented by the pangs of shame and fear for her sons, on whom her shame will fall. Oenone offers to slander Hippolytus, and the exhausted Phaedra entrusts herself to her. The queen speaks vague words to Theseus, who has returned home, which can lead to both the right and the wrong trail.
Act IV begins with Theseus’s reaction to Oenone’s earlier slander against Hippolytus, who was allegedly inflamed with a criminal passion for Phaedra. Theseus explains to his son, who confesses his love for him, but not for Phaedra, but for Arikia. Theseus, not believing it, calls on Poseidon to punish his son. Phaedra hears these calls and is ready to confess everything, but learns from Theseus that Hippolytus assured him of his love not for Phaedra, but for Arikia. And insane jealousy awakens in her. Now Hippolytus seems treacherous to her (which is again not true), she is ready to destroy Arikia. The dark power of passion grows, the image of Hades appears in Phaedra’s mind, but her father Minos administers justice there, and the thought that she will have to admit her shame to her father is unbearable for Phaedra. She pours out all the power of hatred on Oenone, blaming her for what happened (which leads the nurse to suicide).
In Act V, Theseus learns the truth from Arikia (only Hippolytus revealed everything to her). But it’s too late: Hippolytus died. Phaedra appears only in the last, 7th appearance to inform Theseus about the innocence of his son, admit his guilt and die. Phaedra took poison once brought by Medea. She chose her own destiny, becoming authentic tragic heroine. Not a word of sympathy was spoken over her body.
This is fully consistent with the philosophical orientation of the work, the rigoristic affirmation of virtue. This aspect of the tragedy was primarily noted by contemporaries. Largest representative Jansenism Arno wrote about Racine’s heroine: “There is no need to correct anything in the character of Phaedra, because with this character he gives us great example the fact that, as punishment for past sins, God leaves us, leaving us to ourselves, the power of our sinful heart, and then there is no such madness into which we would not allow ourselves to be drawn, even hating vice.” And later, for many readers and viewers, the main question was: “Did he not put into the last of his worldly creations, into his “Phaedra,” all the confusion, all the despair of a Christian soul deprived of grace?” (A. France) - a religious-philosophical question. But with the establishment of psychologism in the literature, everything higher value began to give credit to Racine's brilliant insights in the field of psychological analysis. Thus, Balzac, well aware of the philosophical orientation of the tragedy, believing that Phaedra is “the greatest role of the French stage, which Jansenism did not dare to condemn,” emphasized psychologism, classifying Phaedra as one of the characters who “give us the key to almost all positions of the human heart, captured by love."
The main sources of the image of Phaedra are the above-mentioned tragedies of Euripides and Seneca.
The image of Phaedra appears in Pradon's tragedy "Phaedra", which premiered at the Hotel Guenego theater in Paris three days after the premiere of Racine's tragedy. Although Pradon participated in the intrigue of the Duchess of Bouillon to disrupt the success of Racine, his tragedy was popular for some time. Later, the image of Phaedra was turned to in drama by F. Schiller, who reworked Racine’s “Phaedra” for the Weimar Theater, A. Swinburne, G. d’Annunzio, J. Cocteau, in painting by J. J. Lagrene, in poetry by M. Tsvetaeva. Ballets on this plot began to appear from the end of the 18th century. Of particular interest are the ballets “Phaedra and Hippolyte” by K. A. Kavos and P. F. Turik (1821, St. Petersburg, choreographer C. Didelot, Phaedra - E. I. Kolosova, Ippolit - N. O. Goltz), “Phaedra” by J. Auric (1950, Paris, artist J. Cocteau, choreographer and performer of the role of Hippolyte - S. Lifar, Phaedra - T. Tumanova The Greek film “Phaedra” (1962) became famous. , directed by J. Dassin, in the role of Phaedra - M. Mercouri).
The most significant interpretations of the role of Phaedra in France were created in the 17th century by M. Chanmel (the first performer), who emphasized the declamatory, melodic nature of the verse; in the 18th century, by A. Lecouvreur, who emphasized the youth and vulnerability of Phaedra, M. Dumenil and Clairon, who competed with each other , but strengthened the rationalism of Phaedra’s psychology in the spirit of educational aesthetics, in the 19th century C. J. R. Duchesnoy, who defended the classicist tradition in the image of Phaedra under the onslaught of romantic trends, E. Rachel, who strengthened the humanity of the heroine, in the 20th century, S. Bernard, who gave the image traits of frenzy, morbidity, M. Roche, who played Phaedra for a quarter of a century, awakening sympathy and sympathy for the heroine, but who moved away from the image of Phaedra - the ancient statue, emphasizing the non-Greek, barbaric element in her, M. Belle, whose destructive passion of Phaedra does not evoke sympathy , is definitely condemned. The role of Fedra was played by Polish actress Helena Modrzejewska, Croatian actress Maria Ruzicka-Strozzi, Austrian actress Ida Roland and many others.
Of the Russian actresses who played the role of Phaedra, E. S. Semenova (1823), M. N. Ermolova (1890), A. G. Koonen (1921, Moscow, Chamber Theater, trans. V. Ya. Bryusov, director A. Ya. . Tairov).
Phaedra (character from J. Racine’s tragedy “Phaedra”)
Alisa Koonen as Phaedra. Photo 1921
Phaedra (Phèdre) is a character in J. Racine’s tragedy “Phaedre” (“Phèdre”, 1677), wife of Theseus, daughter of Minos and Pasiphae, stepmother of Hippolyta. Racine does not indicate her age, but if we take into account that the outstanding actress of the Burgundian Hotel Marie Chanmele, for whom he wrote and with whom he prepared this role, was a little less than 35 years old, then Phèdre, according to the author, was about 30 (taking into account the rejuvenation of the actors created by stage means). Phaedra burns with passion for her stepson Hippolytus and opens up to him, but when her husband Theseus, whom she considered dead, returns home, then, saving herself and her children from shame, she allows her nurse Oenone to slander Hippolytus in an attack on her honor before the truth will be revealed. Cursed by his father, Hippolytus dies, and Phaedra, full of remorse, is poisoned, before her death confessing to Theseus her guilt and Hippolytus’s innocence.
Developing the character of Phaedra, Racine relied on the tragedies of Euripides “Hippolytus Crowned” (428 BC) and Seneca’s “Phaedra” (1st century AD). Seneca made Phaedra the main character, which Racine accepted, but his version of this character (Phaedra from the very beginning is overwhelmed by mad passion and is ready for any crime) contradicted the desire of the French playwright to choose a heroine who, in accordance with Aristotle’s Poetics, could cause compassion and horror. Therefore, in the preface to the tragedy, Racine indicates that it is to Euripides that he owes “the general idea of Phaedra’s character,” noting: “In fact, Phaedra is neither completely criminal nor completely innocent. Fate and the wrath of the gods aroused in her a sinful passion, which terrifies herself first of all. She makes every effort to overcome this passion. She prefers to die rather than reveal her secret. And when she is forced to open up, she experiences a confusion that shows quite clearly that her sin is more a divine punishment than an act of her own will.” Racine departs from the primary sources, trying to mitigate the heroine’s guilt: “I even took care,” he writes in the preface, “so that Phaedra would be less disliked than in the tragedies of ancient authors, where she herself dares to accuse Hippolytus. I believed that there was something too base and too disgusting in slander to be put into the mouth of the queen, whose feelings were also so noble and so sublime. It seemed to me that this baseness was more in the character of the nurse, who was more likely to have vile inclinations and who, however, decided to slander only in the name of saving the life and honor of her mistress. Phaedra turns out to be involved in this only because of her mental confusion, due to which she does not control herself. Soon she returns to acquit the innocent and declare the truth.” This remark emphasizes that Racine does not study the inner world of a real person, but models it in accordance with a certain attitude. The playwright creates a philosophical tragedy; it is no coincidence that in the preface he puts theater and the philosophy of ancient authors side by side: “Their theater was a school, and virtue was taught there with no less success than in the schools of philosophers. That is why Aristotle wanted to establish rules for dramatic writing, and Socrates, the wisest of thinkers, did not disdain to have a hand in the tragedies of Euripides.” In philosophical tragedy, characters are important not in themselves, but as illustrations of certain ideas. In Phaedrus, the image of the main character is intended to illuminate the idea of virtue, which Racine reveals as follows: “. ..In none of my tragedies is virtue brought out as clearly as in this one. Here the slightest mistakes are punished with all severity; the mere criminal thought is as terrifying as the crime itself; the weakness of a loving soul is equated with weakness; passions are depicted for the sole purpose of showing what confusion they generate, and vice is painted with colors that allow its ugliness to be immediately recognized and hated.” But although the creation of the image of Phaedra was not a goal for Racine, but a means of revealing the idea of virtue, he gained a new understanding of the tasks of reproducing character in literature, becoming one of the founders of psychologism in France. He showed one day (the last day) of her life. The passion that had tormented her for many years reached its highest tension on that day, from being hidden for the first time it became obvious and led to a tragic denouement.
The first mention of Phaedra appears in the second tirade of Hippolytus (Act I, App. 1), it is respectful towards the missing father and Phaedra (“He has long since finished with the sins of his youth, / And Phaedra has no need to fear rivals”; Trans. M. A. Donskoy). But in the next tirade, Hippolytus, who expressed a desire to leave Troezen, explains it by saying that “the world changed its face” when “the daughter of Minos and Pasiphae” reigned here. Phaedra is not named, but her parents are. Minos is the son of Zeus and Europe, the king of Crete, who once every nine years collected tribute from Athens - seven young men and seven girls who were eaten by the Minotaur (Theseus killed the Minotaur), Minos administers justice in Hades. Pasiphae is the daughter of Helios, who was inflamed with passion for the bull sent by Poseidon, and gave birth to the monstrous man-bull Minotaur. To the audience who knew ancient mythology well, the playwright reminded that Phaedra was not just a suffering woman, she was the granddaughter of the gods, her parents carried within themselves the primitive chaos of desires, they passed on to their daughter dark, uncontrollable passions, irrationality and cruelty, but at the same time, maybe maybe an understanding of justice and a bright beginning (Pasiphae - lat. all luminous). Hippolytus and his mentor Theramenes talk about Phaedra's hatred of her stepson. At her insistence, Theseus expelled Hippolytus from Athens.
In the next apparition, Oenone reports that the queen is on the verge of death, “a mysterious illness is depriving her of sleep.” Here Phaedra herself appears, her first words confirm everything that was said about the disease: “I will stop here, Oenone, on the threshold, / I am exhausted. My legs can't support me. / And the eyes cannot bear the bright light” (Act I, Rev. 3). She says goodbye to life, wanting to take some secret to the grave. And, unexpectedly for himself, Oenone confesses his destructive passion for the “son of the Amazon” (not Phaedra, but Oenone calls him by name for the first time). This passion arose a long time ago, when Phaedra, having become the wife of Theseus, saw her stepson for the first time in Athens. Phaedra describes her state as follows: “Looking at him, I blushed and turned pale, / Now flames, now chills tormented my body, / Both sight and hearing left me, / My spirit trembled in painful confusion” (Act I, Rev. 3 ). Racine was a great master of psychologism, but it is not in these descriptions that one should look for his signs. Psychologism is the principle of artistic description of a person’s inner world; it becomes necessary in literature when the inner world is opposed to the outer world, and a character’s double life arises. So far, everything that Phaedra experiences is completely consistent with the external expression of her feelings. But then she informs Oenone that, trying to hide her criminal passion from others and herself, she began to pursue her “beloved enemy” - and Racine creates a situation that requires deep psychological analysis. Phaedra achieved the expulsion of Hippolytus from her father’s house - “and then relief came.” Phaedra carefully hides from Theseus that their marriage is unhappy, raises her children - and for a while the passion subsides. But the move of Theseus and Phaedra to Troezen, where Hippolytus was exiled, opens the wound again. Now, says Phaedra, only death can hide the shame. That’s why she confessed to Oenone that she was determined to die. This is how she explains her actions. But then the news comes about the death of Theseus. Phaedra decides to stay alive for the sake of her eldest son, who can rightfully become the ruler of Athens.
The rationalism of Racine's psychological analysis has been repeatedly noted in the critical literature. Phaedra accurately formulates her experiences, and her formulations fit into measured Alexandrian verse. But Racine actually goes further and reveals such movements of the soul that are not expressed. Why does Phaedra confess to Oenone? Why is she exhausted, almost dying? Why did her confession come before the news of Theseus's death, giving her more rights to make it? Because she wants, longs to confess her love for Hippolytus, although this desire is never expressed. And an explanation with Hippolytus becomes inevitable, this is an internal decision that does not depend on an external circumstance - the news of the death of her husband, making Phaedra more free to express her feelings.
In Act II, Phaedra is first mentioned in a conversation between Arikia and Ismene, who see in her only a frightened mother, afraid for the fate of her children, and in the past, a narrow-minded wife who boasted about Theseus, who cheated on her. So, neither men (Hippolytus, Theramenes) nor women (Aricia, Ismene) unraveled Phaedra’s double life. In yavl. 5 Phaedra meets Hippolytus for the first time in the tragedy. She cannot hide her excitement (“Here he is!.. All the blood stopped for a moment in the veins - / And gushed to the heart...”). But she speaks to Hippolytus only about the fate of her son, who, after the death of his father and the possible imminent death of her own, will be able to find protection only in Hippolyte. And suddenly Phaedra makes a confession, outwardly almost accidental, but made because she passionately wants to confess her love to Hippolytus. This is one of the most powerful parts of the tragedy. Phaedra speaks of her love for Theseus, but what she loves is “not the present Theseus, / A tired flighty, a slave of his own passions (...) No, my Theseus is younger! / A little unsociable, he is full of purity, / He is proud, beautiful, brave... like a young god!.. Like you! She had previously told Oenone that she saw a son in her father’s features. The most important feature of Phaedra becomes clear: she sees the world and people not as they are. She loves not Hippolytus, but his image, created by her imagination, in which individual features of Hippolytus merged with the best qualities of Theseus. It is interesting that in Racine’s time the theater had a purely external opportunity to emphasize the similarities between Theseus and Hippolytus. Both of them, like other heroes of tragedies, were dressed in the same costumes. This type of costume (habit à la romaine - “Roman”) repeated the attire in which King Louis XIV performed in Versailles in 1662 at the performance of the “Great Rising” (a helmet with a plume or cocked hat, a large wig, a brocade cuirass with long sleeves, puffs and ribbons on the shoulders, a tunnel - a short skirt supported by hoops, flesh-colored stockings, high boots with laces and red heels). The similarity between Theseus and Hippolytus allowed Phaedra to delay the moment of direct confession for a moment, but when the opportunity arose to interpret the hidden meaning of her words differently (Hippolytus: “I did not understand you. I am tormented by shame”), Phaedra (she wants to confess!) utters the words ( “You understand everything, cruel one!”), after which no retreat is possible, and from the queen’s lips pours a whole stream of words of love, mixed with shame, with the desire to die at the hand of a loved one in order to alleviate her torment. Only the faithful Oenone manages to interrupt this flow; Phaedra allows her to lead her away.
In Act III, Phaedra repents of what she has done. Although Hippolytus was struck with horror, Phaedra saw only impassivity in him. She does not see or understand the real Hippolytus. For the first time, Phaedra accuses Oenone of encouraging her not to give up her life with the hope of love. But she is sent with the task of seducing him with the crown, giving insidious advice (“Try everything. Look for where the armor is weaker.” - Act III, Rev. 1). And then the news comes that Theseus is alive. Phaedra is tormented by the pangs of shame and fear for her sons, on whom her shame will fall. Oenone offers to slander Hippolytus, and the exhausted Phaedra entrusts herself to her. The queen speaks vague words to Theseus, who has returned home, which can lead to both the right and the wrong trail.
Act IV begins with Theseus’s reaction to Oenone’s earlier slander against Hippolytus, who was allegedly inflamed with a criminal passion for Phaedra. Theseus explains to his son, who confesses his love for him, but not for Phaedra, but for Arikia. Theseus, not believing it, calls on Poseidon to punish his son. Phaedra hears these calls and is ready to confess everything, but learns from Theseus that Hippolytus assured him of his love not for Phaedra, but for Arikia. And insane jealousy awakens in her. Now Hippolytus seems treacherous to her (which is again not true), she is ready to destroy Arikia. The dark power of passion grows, the image of Hades appears in Phaedra’s mind, but her father Minos administers justice there, and the thought that she will have to admit her shame to her father is unbearable for Phaedra. She pours out all the power of hatred on Oenone, blaming her for what happened (which leads the nurse to suicide).
In Act V, Theseus learns the truth from Arikia (only Hippolytus revealed everything to her). But it’s too late: Hippolytus died. Phaedra appears only in the last, 7th appearance to inform Theseus about the innocence of his son, admit his guilt and die. Phaedra took poison once brought by Medea. She chose her fate herself, becoming a true tragic heroine. Not a word of sympathy was spoken over her body.
This is fully consistent with the philosophical orientation of the work, the rigoristic affirmation of virtue. This aspect of the tragedy was primarily noted by contemporaries. The largest representative of Jansenism, Arno, wrote about Racine’s heroine: “Nothing needs to be corrected in the character of Phaedra, for with this character he gives us a great example of the fact that, as punishment for past sins, God leaves us, leaving us to ourselves, the power of our sinful heart, and then there is no such madness that we would not allow ourselves to be drawn into, even if we hated vice.” And later, for many readers and viewers, the main question was: “Did he not put into the last of his worldly creations, into his “Phaedra,” all the confusion, all the despair of a Christian soul deprived of grace?” (A. France) - a religious-philosophical question. But with the establishment of psychologism in the literature, more and more importance began to be attached to Racine’s brilliant insights in the field of psychological analysis. Thus, Balzac, well aware of the philosophical orientation of the tragedy, believing that Phaedra is “the greatest role of the French stage, which Jansenism did not dare to condemn,” emphasized psychologism, classifying Phaedra as one of the characters who “give us the key to almost all positions of the human heart, captured by love."
The main sources of the image of Phaedra are the above-mentioned tragedies of Euripides and Seneca.
The image of Phaedra appears in Pradon's tragedy "Phaedra", which premiered at the Hotel Guenego theater in Paris three days after the premiere of Racine's tragedy. Although Pradon participated in the intrigue of the Duchess of Bouillon to disrupt the success of Racine, his tragedy was popular for some time. Later, the image of Phaedra was turned to in drama by F. Schiller, who reworked “Phaedra” by Racine for the Weimar Theatre, A. Swinburne, G. d'Annunzio, J. Cocteau, in painting by J. J. Lagrene, in poetry by M. Tsvetaeva. Ballets on this plot began to appear from the end of the 18th century. Of particular interest are the ballets “Phaedra and Hippolyte” by K. A. Kavos and P. F. Turik (1821, St. Petersburg, choreographer C. Didelot, Phaedra - E. I. Kolosova, Ippolit - N. O. Goltz), "Phaedra" by J. Auric (1950, Paris, artist J. Cocteau, choreographer and performer of the role of Hippolyte - S. Lifar, Phaedra - T. Tumanova The Greek film "Phaedra" (1962) became famous. , directed by J. Dassin, in the role of Phaedra - M. Mercouri).
The most significant interpretations of the role of Phaedra in France were created in the 17th century by M. Chanmel (the first performer), who emphasized the declamatory, melodic nature of the verse; in the 18th century, by A. Lecouvreur, who emphasized the youth and vulnerability of Phaedra, M. Dumenil and Clairon, who competed with each other , but strengthened the rationalism of Phaedra’s psychology in the spirit of educational aesthetics, in the 19th century C. J. R. Duchesnoy, who defended the classicist tradition in the image of Phaedra under the onslaught of romantic trends, E. Rachel, who strengthened the humanity of the heroine, in the 20th century, S. Bernard, who gave the image features of frenzy, morbidity, M. Roche, who played Phaedra for a quarter of a century, awakening sympathy and sympathy for the heroine, but who moved away from the image of Phaedra - the ancient statue, emphasizing the non-Greek, barbaric element in her, M. Belle, whose destructive passion of Phaedra does not evoke sympathy , is definitely condemned. The role of Fedra was played by Polish actress Helena Modrzejewska, Croatian actress Maria Ruzicka-Strozzi, Austrian actress Ida Roland and many others.
Of the Russian actresses who played the role of Phaedra, E. S. Semenova (1823), M. N. Ermolova (1890), A. G. Koonen (1921, Moscow, Chamber Theater, trans. V. Ya. Bryusov, director A. Ya. . Tairov).
Text: Racine J. Tragedies. L., 1977. (Lit. monuments).
Vl. A. Lukov
Works and heroes: Heroes.