Frogs at its surface could quite adequately be described as a collection of poop jokes wrapped in an arguably convoluted plot about bringing somebody back from the dead. But at its core, it is so much more. It is a medium through which Aristophanes, the father of comedy, talks to his audience - both directly and indirectly about the state’s political shortcomings, its cultural shortcomings, and its moral shortcomings.
The play opens as Dionysus and Xanthias (technically his slave, but smarter, stronger, more rational, more prudent, and braver than Dionysus) argue over what kind of complaints Xanthias can use to open the play comically.
Depressed by the state of contemporary Athenian tragedy, Dionysus plans to travel to Hades to bring the great tragedic dramatist Euripides back from the dead. Dressed in a Heracles-style lion-hide and carrying a Heracles-style club, he goes to consult with his half-brother Heracles himself (who had visited Hades when he went to retrieve Cerberus) as to the best way to get there. Bemused at the spectacle of the effeminate Dionysus, Heracles can only suggest the options of hanging himself, drinking poison or jumping off a tower. In the end, Dionysus opts for the long journey across a lake, the same route Heracles himself once took.
They arrive at the Acheron and the ferryman Charon ferries Dionysus across, although Dionysus is obliged to help with the rowing (Xanthias, being a slave, has to walk around). On the crossing, a Chorus of croaking frogs (the frogs of the play’s title) joins them, and Dionysus chants along with them. He meets up with Xanthias again at the far shore, and almost immediately they are confronted by Aeacus, one of the judges of the dead, who is still angry over Heracles‘ theft of Cerberus. Mistaking Dionysus for Heracles due to his attire, Aeacus threatens to unleash several monsters on him in revenge, and the cowardly Dionysus quickly trades clothes with Xanthias.
A beautiful maid of Persephone then arrives, happy to see Heracles (actually Xanthius), and she invites him to a feast with a bunch of dancing girls, to which Xanthias is more than happy to oblige. Dionysus, though, now wants to trade back the clothes, but as soon as he changes back into the Heracles lion skin, he encounters more people angry at Heracles and quickly forces Xanthias to trade a third time. When Aeacus returns once more, Xanthias suggests that he torture Dionysus to obtain the truth, suggesting several brutal options. The terrified Dionysus immediately reveals the truth that he is a god, and is allowed to proceed after a good whipping.
When Dionysus finally finds Euripides (who has only just recently died), he is challenging the great Aeschylus to the seat of “Best Tragic Poet” at the dinner table of Hades, and Dionysus is appointed to judge a contest between them. The two playwrights take turns quoting verses from their plays and making fun of the other. Euripides argues the characters in his plays are better because they are more true to life and logical, whereas Aeschylus believes his idealised characters are better as they are heroic and models for virtue. Aeschylus shows that Euripides ‘ verse is predictable and formulaic, while Euripides counters by setting Aeschylus‘ iambic tetrameter lyric verse to flute music.
Finally, in an attempt to end the stalemated debate, a balance is brought in and the two tragedians are told to put a few of their weightiest lines onto it, to see in whose favour the balance will tip. Aeschylus easily wins, but Dionysus is still unable to decide whom he will revive. He finally decides to take the poet who gives the best advice about how to save the city of Athens. Euripides gives cleverly worded but essentially meaningless answers while Aeschylus provides more practical advice, and Dionysus decides to take Aeschylus back instead of Euripides. Before leaving, Aeschylus proclaims that the recently deceased Sophocles should have his chair at the dinner table while he is gone, not Euripides.
Now before diving into some of the deeper meaning within the play, it is first crucial to understand the social and political context in which it was performed. Frogs was written and produced at a time of extreme uncertainty. Months before their victory at Arginusae, Athens had suffered severe defeats at the hand of the Spartan Commanders Lysander and Callicratidas and had been ford to take extreme measures to make good the losses: for the first time slaves were recruited as rowers and possibly rewarded with citizenship, gold and silver from dedications on the Acropolis were melted down to make coins for a new navy and the metal content was adulterated. References to both these controversial policies are to be found in this play with the metaphor of coinage being used. The play states that we ignore gold-quality men (the aristocratic elite) in favour of the lower class (old copper metal). The parabasis (when the chorus addresses the audience directly) is quite reactionary, showing a preference for the old ways and stating that change is bad. We should be careful in assuming these are Aristophanes’ own real views.
They also make a point about the fact that slaves who fought at Arginusae were being granted freedom, but on the other hand, fully-fledged citizens were being punished for a “small” oligarchic uprising. They are essentially saying that they have no problem with raising up people from lower social classes but not if you punish the elite. The upheaval after Arginuse and the oligarchic coup is a definite source of anxiety. And there is a sense of the correct, proper social hierarchy with slaves at the bottom and aristocrats at the top being under threat.
The tragic contest near the end of the play is about the old vs the new and in that way is similar to the parabasis which compares the old aristocrat with the new populist democracy. Euripedes insists his plays gave ordinary people a voice by not constantly focusing on unrelatable characters like kings and deities but also on handmaids and slaves. He describes it as a “democratic act.”Euripedes also states that by putting rationality and critical thinking into his plays he teaches people how to think.
Aeschylus argues with this, stating that his work is full of “ares” - meaning that it is the direct successor of Homer’s epics and claims to have written plays on noble heroes whose model goes along with elite behaviour. Aeschylus in contrast states that Euripedes’ work is morally corrupting with its inclusion of “lustful women.” He claims that by putting “everyday” life into his work and by dressing kings in rags - he has made tragedy less noble. And only served to make the masses verbose (back then this was not considered to be a good thing).
The themes up for debate in the agone between the playwrights are the same featured in the parabasis. It is typical of Aristophanes that the themes of the plot and the themes of the parabasis always reflect one another. However, it is also said that this move from the poetic to political is all part of a joke by Aristophanes. A few years earlier the playwright Eupolis put on a play called Demes in which the great political leaders of Athens' past were brought back to save the city. Aristophanes states that you’ll need a poet, not a politician to save Athens. This insistence on the role of poetry in the polis is typical of Aristophanes - we see that he presents his plays as a way of teaching the city and thereby ensuring they live in a true and proper democracy.
Destruction of the Athenian Army in Sicily
The Political question that emerges most insistently in this play is whom to trust. This is shown in Dionysus’ questioning of Aeschylus and Euripides about how they can save the city and what to do with the infamous Alcibiades. Alcibiades was an Athenian aristocrat that contributed more than his fair share to mixed feelings of mistrust, despair and relief, as Athens lurched between victory and catastrophe and was rent by factions. A prime mover and elected as one of the generals for the expedition to Sicily in 415 B.C, Alcibiades defected to Sparta to avoid trial for the alleged profanation of the Mysteries and mutilation of statues of Hermes. On his advice, the Spartans garrisoned a permanent fort at Decelea in Attica. He also played a key part in bringing Persia into the war on the side of Athens’ enemies. An affair with the wife of Agis, the Spartan king stationed at Decelea, then contributed to a break with Sparta, and Alcibiades used his wit and resources to charm Athenians once again. He was pardoned, welcomed, and elected general in 407 B.C until defeat by Lysander at his battle of Notium in 406 B.C led to his replacement.
This debate on how to treat Alcibiades is not only mentioned in the dialogue between Aeschylus and Dionysus but it is referenced earlier on when Dionysus is wearing both his saffron robe and Heracles costume. This double layering has a metatheatrical element to it - draws our attention to the act of taking on other identities. This same concept is shown with Alcibiades, he takes on a new identity when he leaves the Athenians for the Spartans, and once again when he reverts back to the Athenians.
We see this idea of how not only is it important to entertain the audience but how it is important to educate the audience about not only the social hierarchy and correct morals but also about politics and how to elect acceptable leaders. Politics is about performing and getting people to be on your side, by showing the audience the ins and outs of how a theatrical performance is put together, Aristophanes makes the audience into critical spectators - who can take these skills and use them when watching politicians in the political assembly.
In comedy, it can be difficult to separate “politics from poetics” and by listening to the dispute between Aeschylus and Euripides we are inclined to think that the playwright who truly combined the best of both - who balances the good moral values of old with the good democratic values of today is none other than of course Aristophanes himself.
Comments