Swedish actress Anita Björk, in the play Aischylos
Unknown photographer, 1954
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from China

seen from United States
seen from Italy
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Brazil

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Vietnam
seen from Germany

seen from Germany

seen from Germany
seen from India
seen from Iraq
Swedish actress Anita Björk, in the play Aischylos
Unknown photographer, 1954
You said that Apollo is the ultimate misogynist... But that was Aischylos' Eumenides's fault! In othr myths he supports women! Why you say he is the ultimate misogynist? I'm a woman, but also i like Apollo! Do't forget he and Artemis defended their mother from that giant! Apollo also prefered the FEMININE companion of the Muses...
That misogynism is Aischylos! Now everyone will insult Lord Apollo something he didn't said and contradicts with others actions in his myths!
I didn't? I merely pointed out that (at least in my experience) people seem far more willing to call Athena a misogynist for what she said in the Eumenides in comparison to Apollo whose claims are just as problematic™ if not more so.
And sure, he has good relationships with some women and doesn't let his mother get raped (not that any of this would inherently make him not a misogynist), but at the same time he also pursues unwilling women, commits rape and fights with other men over a woman instead of asking her which one she wants to be with.
As for people insulting Apollo... I mean, the Eumenides is, like, two millennia and a half old, so his reputation is probably quite safe even if some people dislike him (generally for reasons unrelated to this particular play). The ancient Greeks themselves didn't seem to take any issues with his portrayal in the Eumenides and to consider it out of character for him. It's perfectly normal for a mythological character to differ in some respects from one story to another, even to act in ways that contradict their actions in other sources; that is the nature of mythology. All of that aside, why does everyone keep assuming that a character in a literary text must wholeheartedly believe every word he/she says? Apollo is trying to defend Orestes against the Furies and it would be very easy to choose to believe that he is simply using whatever argument he thinks will be most effective in absolving Orestes of the crime of killing his mother. Wouldn't that be easier than railing against the long dead author?
By me he fell, by me he died, I shall bury him.
Klytaimnestra in Aiskhylos’ Agamemnon
[trans. Anne Carson]
Me reading the Orestie from Aischylos: Ah yes, Orestes. A struggling young man who had to kill his mother as Apollo ordered it as revenge for her murder of Agamemmnon. He is the main character and I might not agree with his motifs, but I understand his struggles.
Electra and Phylades? They aren't really around for long but seem like the 'nice but troubled' kind of young people.
The ending? Fine, everyone is happy and a satisfying solution was introduced.
Me reading Orestes from Euripides: Oh no Orestes, the one who killed his mom because she was an 'evil woman' and uses his mysogonistic mindset to justify murder on women.
Electra and Phylades? Whoo boy those kids clearly have a knack for planning murder and they seem to really hate Helen of Troy. Also Phylades gave off some pretty gay vibes when he told Orestes that he could not go on living without him.
The ending? Felt like reading a two thousand year old LSD Trip. First the three kids want to murder Helen before Electra and Orestes have to commit suicide as retribution for the killing of their mom, because Helens Hunsband wasn't any help in saving them from their fate. Second the decide to take Hermione, Helens daughter, hostage and threaten to kill her. When Menelaos, Helens Husband and father of Hermione, comes and tries to get them back, Orestes orders Electra to set fire to the house. The house is burning. Helen has mysteriously disappeared after the attempted murder. Orestes is still standing on the roof, holding a sword to Hermiones neck, all the while screaming at Menelaos. Who the hell knows what Phylades is up to.
And then, before everyone can die, Apollo appears. Together with Helen, who be has saved from murder. He declares the perfect solution: Orestes will go into exile for one year and then he will go to Athen where his case will be judged. When he is done with that he can come back to Argo and reign as a King. Oh yeah, and he can marry Hermione, the girl whose mother he nearly killed amd who he held hostage.
Helen will become a star and chill with the gods. Oh yeah Menelaos, guess you will need a new wife. But hey, you can keep Sparta, as it kinda was Helens dowry.
Phylades and Electra - the couple who is so good at planning murder it is a wonder no one locked them up yet - they should marry each other.
And you know what's even more messed up than whatever is going on in Apollo's head? The fact that everyone just agrees with this solution. And that's the end.
What the hell, Euripides.
Busts of the three great tragedy writers, Aischylos, Sofokles, and Euripides
I’m currently reading Trojan Women by Euripedes
sorry but no language is as hot as dated German.
excerpts from Aeschylus' Prometheus Bound & The Persians, transl. by J.G. Droysen
“Wer Großes erdenkt und Großes ersinnt, zeugt Worte von gleichem Gewichte.”
- “Aischylos” // Aristophanes, Die Frösche
Even though it's technically right that Metis did not give birth to Athena, the context in which she says that is pretty gross and misogynistic. Like hearing "I'm for the males, I side with my father" from her, even though it was women who voted for her and made her the patron of Athens 😫 I'm glad Aeschylus seems to be the only one who gives this account for Orestes' acquittal, while others do not mention anything like this.
I mean, Metis still must have given birth to her even if she had to do so inside Zeus (and then he in turn "gave birth" to Athena from his head), but seeing how in the same play Apollon gives the case of Athena as an example of how it is possible for a father to exist without a mother and says that she has not been nourished inside a womb, it seems that Aischylos rejected the idea of her having a mother alltogether like many others seem to have done. So Athena simply speaks her truth here.
I kinda hope Leto smacked Apollon for his claim that the mother is only the nurse to the seed planted in her by the father and not a proper parent to her child, tho, but she is probably not the type to do that kind of thing.