No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis examines the use of praise and blame in Greek tragedy as a method of identity construction. It takes sociolinguistic theory as its starting point to show that the distribution of praise and blame, an important social function of archaic poetry, can be seen as contributing to the process of linguistic identity construction discussed by sociolinguists. However, in tragedy, the destructive or dangerous aspects of this process are explored, and the distribution of praise and blame becomes a way of destabilising or destroying identity rather than constructing positive identities for individuals. The thesis begins with a section exploring the importance of praise and blame as a vehicle for identity construction in the case of some of the mythical/heroic warriors who populate the tragic stage: Ajax, Heracles, and Theseus. I discuss the ways in which their own seeking after inappropriate praise leads to the destruction of Ajax and Heracles, and the lack of clear praise for Theseus in extant tragedy. The second half of the thesis examines the devastation caused by women's involvement in the process of identity construction, focusing on Deianira, Clytemnestra, and Medea. All of these women are involved in rejecting the praise discourses which construct the identities for their husbands. Clytemnestra and Medea further replace such praise with new discourses of blame. This process contributes to the destruction of all three women's husbands. Prioritising this important element in interpretations of tragedy, influenced by a greater recognition of the ways in which tragedy draws on older genres of poetry, leads to new readings of apparently well-known plays, and new conclusions on such iconic figures as Theseus. Furthermore, within the context of the extended scholarly discussion on women's speech in tragedy, this approach demonstrates an effective and destructive result of that speech from a new perspective.

No description available.

This thesis starts from the premise that modern poets have proved effective translators of Greek tragedy for the stage and is a hermeneutic consideration of why and how they succeeded. The spread of the close analysis is a period from 1981 to the present day. Four poets, Tony Harrison, Seamus Heaney, Ted Hughes and Tom Paulin, are considered in detail, while other translators, such as Liz Lochhead and Timberlake Wertenbaker, are used as comparators. The four poets’ translations are considered within the context of their whole poetic output, to enhance an understanding of each poet’s intentions. The major influences on these four poets are also scrutinized. The introduction provides the methodology, including the choice of modern scholarship to be cited in support or to be challenged. It provides a brief historical survey of translating the classics and describes the tools provided by modern academic disciplines which help to analyse the poets’ achievements. The bulk of the thesis consists of three chapters, each focusing on one aspect of poetic choice which contributes to the appeal of a work. In each chapter, a close comparison is made between the same source text but different translators. Thus, Harrison and Hughes both provide a version of the Oresteia, considered in terms of metre, rhyme and general structure, Heaney and Paulin both produced a version of Antigone, examined for the use of Ulster and Irish vernacular and Harrison and Paulin created very free adaptations of Prometheus, which are considered as part of a broad review of cultural overlay, modernising and democratising in producing Greek tragedy on the contemporary stage. The conclusion synthesises the strands, signposting possible further research. It celebrates the poets’ achievement - and contemporary British theatre for embracing Greek tragedy, as it currently does. It ends with a brief manifesto for the future.

No description available.

No description available.