都是关于我的母亲,西丽莎,阿波罗和奥瑞斯泰亚的统一

Q1 Arts and Humanities Studia Litteraria et Historica Pub Date : 2022-12-29 DOI:10.4467/20843933st.22.020.17186
Joanna Pypłacz
{"title":"都是关于我的母亲,西丽莎,阿波罗和奥瑞斯泰亚的统一","authors":"Joanna Pypłacz","doi":"10.4467/20843933st.22.020.17186","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to reveal the connection between Cilissa’s speech in the Choephoroi and the infamous speech made by Apollo in the Eumenides. The analysis shows that if these two passages are treated separately, the former would seem to be a comic interlude that has been randomly inserted into the text, while the latter would seem to be weird, convoluted and even downright outrageous. However, if they are juxtaposed and analysed together as two chapters of Aeschylus’ explanation of the nature of motherhood, they become one sensible statement about the fact that mother is much more than a parent in the technical sense of the term.\n\nWhile the speeches of Cilissa and Apollo simply cast light on the issue of responsible motherhood and also on the harmful effects of ‘outsourcing’ the care of newborn children in ancient Greece, the fact that the link between these two speeches has been overlooked makes their interpretation very problematic, as do the failings of contemporary criticism, these being the anachronic approach and also the fact that translations are treated on a par with (or, sadly, given preference to) the original text, thus giving Aeschylus the undeserved reputation of being a ‘sexist’ or ‘misogynistic’ poet.","PeriodicalId":30881,"journal":{"name":"Studia Litteraria et Historica","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"All about My Mother… Cilissa, Apollo and the Unity of the Oresteia\",\"authors\":\"Joanna Pypłacz\",\"doi\":\"10.4467/20843933st.22.020.17186\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this article is to reveal the connection between Cilissa’s speech in the Choephoroi and the infamous speech made by Apollo in the Eumenides. The analysis shows that if these two passages are treated separately, the former would seem to be a comic interlude that has been randomly inserted into the text, while the latter would seem to be weird, convoluted and even downright outrageous. However, if they are juxtaposed and analysed together as two chapters of Aeschylus’ explanation of the nature of motherhood, they become one sensible statement about the fact that mother is much more than a parent in the technical sense of the term.\\n\\nWhile the speeches of Cilissa and Apollo simply cast light on the issue of responsible motherhood and also on the harmful effects of ‘outsourcing’ the care of newborn children in ancient Greece, the fact that the link between these two speeches has been overlooked makes their interpretation very problematic, as do the failings of contemporary criticism, these being the anachronic approach and also the fact that translations are treated on a par with (or, sadly, given preference to) the original text, thus giving Aeschylus the undeserved reputation of being a ‘sexist’ or ‘misogynistic’ poet.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30881,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studia Litteraria et Historica\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studia Litteraria et Historica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4467/20843933st.22.020.17186\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Litteraria et Historica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4467/20843933st.22.020.17186","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的目的是揭示西莉萨在《丘弗罗里》中的演讲与阿波罗在《欧门尼德斯》中臭名昭著的演讲之间的联系。分析表明,如果把这两段分开处理,前者似乎是一个随机插入文本的喜剧插曲,而后者似乎是奇怪的,令人费解的,甚至是彻头彻尾的无耻。然而,如果把这两章作为埃斯库罗斯对母性的解释的两章并置和分析,它们就会成为一个有意义的陈述,即在术语的技术意义上,母亲远不止父母。虽然西丽莎和阿波罗的演讲只是简单地阐明了负责任的母亲的问题以及在古希腊“外包”照顾新生儿的有害影响,但这两个演讲之间的联系被忽视的事实使他们的解释非常有问题,就像当代批评的失败一样,这些都是错误的方法,而且翻译被视为与(或者可悲的是,因此,埃斯库罗斯被冠以“性别歧视”或“厌恶女性”诗人的名头。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
All about My Mother… Cilissa, Apollo and the Unity of the Oresteia
The aim of this article is to reveal the connection between Cilissa’s speech in the Choephoroi and the infamous speech made by Apollo in the Eumenides. The analysis shows that if these two passages are treated separately, the former would seem to be a comic interlude that has been randomly inserted into the text, while the latter would seem to be weird, convoluted and even downright outrageous. However, if they are juxtaposed and analysed together as two chapters of Aeschylus’ explanation of the nature of motherhood, they become one sensible statement about the fact that mother is much more than a parent in the technical sense of the term. While the speeches of Cilissa and Apollo simply cast light on the issue of responsible motherhood and also on the harmful effects of ‘outsourcing’ the care of newborn children in ancient Greece, the fact that the link between these two speeches has been overlooked makes their interpretation very problematic, as do the failings of contemporary criticism, these being the anachronic approach and also the fact that translations are treated on a par with (or, sadly, given preference to) the original text, thus giving Aeschylus the undeserved reputation of being a ‘sexist’ or ‘misogynistic’ poet.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Studia Litteraria et Historica
Studia Litteraria et Historica Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Környezet és humántudomány Fürjek és akácok Táj és ember viszonya Az egerek népétől a geometriai progresszióig Földút haza?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1