Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Half-title -- Title -- Copyright -- Dedication -- Contents -- List of figures -- Preface and acknowledgements -- Abbreviations used in the text and bibliography -- 1 Phrasing the problem -- Introduction -- The Dorians in a 'sociology of knowledge' -- 2 The nature and expression of ethnicity: an anthropological view -- The rise and fall of instrumentalism -- Denning the ethnic group -- The genesis and maintenance of ethnic groups -- Summary -- 3 The discursive dimension of ethnic identity -- Ethnic groups in ancient Greece -- Myths of ethnic origins -- The Athenians: Ionians or autochthons? -- Dorians and Herakleidai -- Conclusion -- 4 Ethnography and genealogy: an Argolic case-study -- The ethnic populations of the Argolid -- The genealogies of the Argolid -- Decoding the genealogical grammar -- Staking the Heraklid claim -- Ethnicity and cult: Hera, Herakles and the Herakleidai -- Conclusion -- 5 Ethnicity and archaeology -- Excavating the ethnic group -- Archaeology and the 'Dorian invasion' -- Ethnic groups and archaeological cultures -- The archaeology of social praxis -- Conclusion -- 6 Ethnicity and linguistics -- Scripts and alphabets -- Greek dialect history: a synopsis -- Problematising linguistic diversity -- The Greek attitude to dialect -- The role of language in ethnicity -- Conclusion -- 7 Conclusion -- Chronological table -- Chronological table of authors cited in the text -- Bibliography -- Index

Athenian citizens deliberate in the assembly, but the theatre also becomes a place for public debate. In addition to being a consequence of economic or cultural aspects, democracy is a consequence of the development of a democratic imaginary. Located in that imaginary, Greek tragedies, regarded as «democratic myths», work to reaffirm Athenian democracy. Far from being dogmatic, the tragic myth explores the contradictions of social and personal life and implicitly or explicitly seeks their correction. This dramatic genre encourages participation from the spectator (citizen) that greatly exceeds the schematic reduction in Aristotelian theory of catharsis. Greek tragedy proposes the existence of an «audience», of spectators who need a sufficient level of maturity to make that assessment. Democracy is a path, or perhaps an active utopia, which should combine the political order with a coherent culture and art.Los ciudadanos atenienses deliberaban en la asamblea, pero también el teatro se convierte en un lugar de debate público. Porque una democracia (también la ateniense) no solo es consecuencia de aspectos económicos o de orden cultural, sino también del desarrollo de un imaginario democrático. Y es en dicho imaginario donde se inscriben las tragedias griegas, consideradas como «mitos democráticos» que servían para reafirmar la democracia ateniense. Lejos de cualquier dogmatismo, el mito trágico explora las contradicciones de la vida social y personal, y se pregunta, de manera expresa o tácita, por su posible corrección. Este género dramático induce a una participación del espectador (ciudadano), que va más allá de la esquemática reducción de la teoría aristotélica de la catarsis. El teatro griego propone la existencia de un «público», de unos espectadores que precisan de una gran madurez para emitir ese juicio. La democracia es un camino, o quizás una utopía activa, que debe conjugar el orden político con una cultura y un arte coherentes.

This article explores, from the standpoint of socio-political myth-criticism, the processes of revision and adaptation carried out in Gary Owen's 2015 play Iphigenia in Splott. The play, a dramatic monologue composed in the rhythms of slam poetry, rewrites the classical Greek myth of Iphigenia in order to denounce the profound injustice of the sacrifices demanded by austerity policies in Europe—and more specifically, in Britain—in the recession following the financial crash of 2008. Reassessing contemporary social, economic and political issues that have resulted in the marginalisation and dehumanisation of the British working class, this study probes the dramatic and mythical artefacts in Owen's harrowing monologue by looking back to Euripides's Iphigenia in Aulis, the classical play which inspires the title of Owen's piece and which serves as the mythical and literary background for the story of Effie. The aim is to demonstrate how Owen's innovative adaptation of the sacrifice of Iphigenia, slurred out in verse, resentful and agonising, speaks out a desperate plea against myth, that is, against a dominant social ethos that legitimises its own violence against the most vulnerable—those who, as in the classical myth, suffer the losses that keep our boats afloat.

This article explores, from the standpoint of socio-political myth-criticism, the processes of revision and adaptation carried out in Gary Owen's 2015 play Iphigenia in Splott. The play, a dramatic monologue composed in the rhythms of slam poetry, rewrites the classical Greek myth of Iphigenia in order to denounce the profound injustice of the sacrifices demanded by austerity policies in Europe—and more specifically, in Britain—in the recession following the financial crash of 2008. Reassessing contemporary social, economic and political issues that have resulted in the marginalisation and dehumanisation of the British working class, this study probes the dramatic and mythical artefacts in Owen's harrowing monologue by looking back to Euripides's Iphigenia in Aulis, the classical play which inspires the title of Owen's piece and which serves as the mythical and literary background for the story of Effie. The aim is to demonstrate how Owen's innovative adaptation of the sacrifice of Iphigenia, slurred out in verse, resentful and agonising, speaks out a desperate plea against myth, that is, against a dominant social ethos that legitimises its own violence against the most vulnerable—those who, as in the classical myth, suffer the losses that keep our boats afloat.

Because of history, culture, and politics, European identity has its archetypical elements in ancient Greek culture. Ancient Greek philosophy brought Logos to fore and defined it as the crucial problem and the postulate of the human. We translate the Greek term Logos in English as reason or rationality. These terms, however, do not cover the semantic field of Logos since this includes, among other things, order of being, ground, language, argument etc. The juxtaposition of Logos (reason) to myth makes up the matrix of rationalism. Ancient Greek culture, however, was a culture of Logos (reason) as well as of myth and had enough room for forms, gods, and heroes, for science, poetry, and religious festivities. While ancient Greek culture seems to follow the logic of forms, modern European culture follows the logic of things. Plato criticizes myth and, at the same time, he sets out a philosophy of myth. He follows the principle of 'giving reason' (logon didonai) about things, as his master Socrates did. He establishes dialogue and defines dialectics as the science of principles and ideas and their relations to the things of this world. Aristotle did not accept Plato's interpretation of Logos. He considered dialectics only as a theory of argumentation and defined his 'first philosophy' or 'theology' as the science of highest Being. His program of rationalism is based on ontology and accepts the primordial relation of Logos, life, and order of things. European modernity begins in philosophy with Descartes' turn to the subject. Descartes defines the main elements of European rationality and their problems. He brings to fore the human subject as the 'I' that is free to doubt about everything it can know except itself. Knowledge has to consolidate the power and the mastery of humans over things and nature. Besides, the distinction between soul and body in terms of thinking thing and extended thing does not allow a unique conception of the human. Especially Kant and Hegel attempted to eliminate the impasses of Descartes' and of Cartesians. While Kant defined freedom as the transcendental idea of reason, Hegel highlighted the reconciliation of spirit and nature. Nowadays there is a confusion regarding rationality. The power of humans over nature and over other humans as nature is increasing. We have lost the measure of our limits. Perhaps we need the ancient Greek grammar of Logos in order to define the measure and the limits of modern European rationality.

Pasolini was simultaneously a revolutionary Marxist and a man forever influenced by his religious childhood. So his question was: do the revolutionary becoming of history and political negativity represent a destruction of the tragic beauty of the Greek myths and of the peaceful promise of Christianity? Or do we have to speak of a subtraction where an affirmative reconciliation of beauty and peace becomes possible in a new egalitarian world? ; Alain Badiou, 'Destruction, Negation, Subtraction', in The Scandal of Self-Contradiction: Pasolini's Multistable Subjectivities, Geographies, Traditions , ed. by Luca Di Blasi, Manuele Gragnolati, and Christoph F. E. Holzhey, Cultural Inquiry, 6 (Vienna: Turia + Kant, 2012), pp. 269–77

During the first decade of the 2000s, Medea's myth was revived numerous times on the operatic stage. Among several scenic works, we chose to refer to three French operas which, despite their differences, share some common features: Médée de Thessalonique by Christophe Looten (2001), Médée by Michèle Reverdy (2003) and Medea by Pascal Dusapin (2007), a choreographed version of the composer's opera Medeamaterial (originally written in 1992) by Sasha Waltz. These operas display a contemporary musical expression and they also reveal very different and modern versions of Medea's myth, associated to actual events, political or not. Each composer's point of view, their goals and choices concerning the myth's adaptation, vocal treatment, instrumentation and musical language show not only how intriguing is to represent Medea's character for an artist, but also how an ancient female archetype can offer countless possibilities for ingenious and powerful operas. As a free and strong immigrant woman, Medea is reflected in a way in the face of modern women, who still fight to find their place in patriarchal societies. As a result, Medea's myth is present in musical creation of our days and largely contributes to the fact that ancient Greek drama remains an indelible source of inspiration for the French contemporary opera.

This essay draws on the work of the ancient Greek poet Hesiod to reflect on the dynamics of gender, reproduction, and power in Greek myth and in contemporary politics.

Through his analysis of classical sources, the author finds no convincing grounds for understanding the myth of Europe as the foundational myth of the modern political & cultural entity that calls itself Europe. In this Europe, however, it is widely believed that Greek myth is the European foundational myth. By taking over Greek & Roman interpretations of the myth of Europe as a love story, & the adjunct eroticizing & banalizing the rape of Europe, rape has become a constitutive element of European identity. Adapted from the source document.

This paper draws on classical scholarship on myth in order to critically examine three ways in which scholars and fans have articulated a relationship between fan fiction and myth. These are (1) the notion of fan fiction as a form of folk culture, reclaiming popular story from corporate ownership; (2) the notion of myth as counterhegemonic, often feminist, discourse; (3) the notion of myth as a commons of story and a universal story world. I argue that the first notion depends on an implicit primitivizing of fan fiction and myth, which draws ultimately on the work of Gottfried von Herder in the 18th century and limits our ability to produce historically and politically nuanced understandings of fan fiction. The second notion, which is visible in the work of Henry Jenkins and Constance Penley, is more helpful because of its attention to the politics of narration. However, it is the third model of myth, as a universal story world, where we find the richest crossover between fan fiction's creative power and contemporary classical scholarship on myth, especially in relation to Sarah Iles Johnston's analysis of hyperserial narrative. I demonstrate this through some close readings of fan fiction from the Greek and Roman Mythology fandom on Archive of Our Own. I conclude the paper by extending Johnston's arguments to show that fan-fictional hyperseriality, specifically, can be seen as mythic because it intervenes not only in the narrative worlds of its source materials but also in the social world of its telling.