No description available.

Orestes A. Brownson was an American journalist who converted to Catholicism in 1844, at the age of forty-one. He had been writing editorials and occasionally managing publications since 1828 in connection with religious activities as minister to various sects, Brownson, from the 1830's on, read, reviewed, and kept abreast of European literature concerned with philosophy, social, political, and economic theory. It was assumed that he continued that practice after his conversion in 1844 and that he would enlist the aid of European Catholic theorists to develop an acceptable Catholic system of thought—particularly since American Catholic literature in the mid-nineteenth century was mainly devoid of theoretical works. A brief scanning of Brownson's works written after 1844 revealed the names of several French Catholic writers who were part of a group known as Traditionalists--De Maistre, Bonald, Lamennais, Veuillot, Donoso Cortes, Bonnetty, and others. The problem evolved from this discovery to determine whether Traditionalists had influenced Brownson's Catholic theorizing, and if so, to what extent. The main source of reference for this research problem was the twenty-volume collection Henry Brownson had compiled of his father's Catholic journalistic efforts. Henry Brownson also published a three volume biography of his father, and I obtained the first volume, Early Life. Other biographies on Brownson have been written by Theodore Maynard, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., and Doran Whalen, which were useful for background material. A variety of articles have been written about Brownson, but none related him to Traditionalism; their usefulness, therefore, was limited. I relied on secondary sources for interpretations of the French Traditionalists: Quinlan's thesis and Cohen's article on Bonald; works from Lively, Greffer, and Koyre on de Maistre; and a variety of French historical surveys. I also consulted materials which would provide background information on the Enlightenment--a necessity since Traditionalists and Brownson continually attacked Enlightenment ideas. I compared the social, political, and economic aspects of Brownson's ideas to those of the Traditionalists. The conclusion arrived at was that Brownson had used Traditionalist theory almost exclusively as a foundation for his own work. Brownson not only displayed ideas similar to the Traditionalists, he featured their exact terminology: "germ of perfection theory", "divine origin of language", and "generative principle of constitution.” He referred to them as the "illustrious Bonald" and "illustrious de Maistre”l and occasionally stated that he was sympathetic to Traditionalist ideas. Brownson's deviation from Traditionalist theory was usually a result of translating French ideas to American society. He was careful to make the point that the ideas he altered remained valid for France, and Traditionalists were essentially correct in their entire assessment of society.

This study sets out to reveal the groundbreaking use of monody in the late plays of Euripides: in his hands, it is shaped into a potent and flexible instrument for representing emotion and establishing new narrative and thematic structures. Engaging with the current scholarly debate on music, affect, and characterization in Greek tragedy, I examine the role that monody plays in the musical design of four plays of Euripides, all produced in the last decade of his career: Ion, Iphigenia in Tauris, Phoenician Women, and Orestes. These plays are marked by the increased presence of actors’ song in proportion to choral song. The lyric voice of the individual takes on an unprecedented prominence with far-reaching implications for the structure and impact of each play. The monodies of Euripides are a true dramatic innovation: in addition to creating an effect of heightened emotion, monody is used to develop character and shape plot. In Ion, Iphigenia in Tauris, Phoenician Women, and Orestes, Euripides uncouples monody’s traditional and exclusive connection with lament. In contrast to the work of Aeschylus and Sophocles, where actors’ song is always connected with grief and pain, in these four plays monody conveys varied moods and states of mind. Monody expresses joy, hope, anxiety, bewilderment, accusation, and deliberation. Often, and simultaneously, it moves forward narrative exposition. The scope and dramatic function of monody grows and changes: passages of actors’ lyric become longer, more metrically complex, more detached from the other characters onstage, and more intensely focused on the internal experience of the singer. In the four plays under discussion we see a steadily increasing refinement and expansion of the form, a development that rests upon the changes in the style and function of contemporary music in the late fifth century. By 415 B.C., many formal features of tragedy had become highly conventionalized, and determined a set of expectations in the contemporary audience. Reacting against this tradition, Euripides successively redefines monody: each song takes over a traditional Bauform of tragedy, and builds upon it. The playwright uses the paired monodies of Ion to pose a conflict of ideas that might otherwise be conveyed through an agon. In Iphigenia in Tauris the heroine’s crisis and its resolution are presented in lyrics, rather than as a deliberative rhesis. In Phoenician Women, Antigone, Jocasta, and Oedipus replace the Chorus in lamenting the fall of the royal house. Finally, the Phrygian slave in Orestes sings a monody explicitly marked as a messenger speech that inverts the conventions of the form to raise questions about objectivity and truth in a disordered world. In examining these four plays, I hope to show some of the various potentials of this new Euripidean music as a major structural element in tragic drama, insofar as it can heighten emphasis, allow for the development of emotional states both subtle and extreme, reveal and deepen character, and mirror thematic movements. Euripides establishes monody as a dramatic form of considerable versatility and power. The poetry is charged with increased affect and expressivity; at the same time it articulates a new self-consciousness about the reciprocal capacities of form and content to shape one another. Here we may discern the shift of sensibility in Euripides’ late work, which proceeds pari passu with an apparent loosening of structural demands, or what one with equal justice might recognize as an increase in degrees of freedom. As the playwright repeatedly reconfigures the relationship between form and content, the range of what can happen onstage, of what can be said and sung, expands.

Le mythe des Atrides, qui résume à lui seul, toutes les horreurs et toutes les cruautés dont l’homme a pu se rendre coupable – fratricide, régicide, parricide, matricide, infanticide, inceste, cannibalisme, sacrifice humain – et qui a été relativement négligé par la tragédie classique au XVIIe siècle, a connu un essor sans précédent au XVIIIe siècle où une vingtaine de pièces tragiques lui ont été consacrées, sans compter les opéras et les ballets. Mais ce théâtre tragique, en dépit de son immense succès auprès du public au XVIIIe siècle, a pâti par la suite d’un regrettable préjugé auquel le célèbre vers de Victor Hugo - « Sur le Racine mort, le Campistron pullule », n’est pas étranger. Nous élevant contre cette vision réductrice , nous avons voulu par cette étude qui a porté sur huit des œuvres dramatiques les plus significatives qui ont traité des principaux épisodes de la fable antique – allant du crime de Tantale à la vengeance d’Oreste, en passant par le sacrifice d’Iphigénie et le meurtre d’Agamemnon – montrer la spécificité dramatique, morale et philosophique de la tragédie des Lumières qui a été « un laboratoire des formes et des idées » où se sont élaborées à la fois une sensibilité nouvelle, une nouvelle dramaturgie et une nouvelle vision du monde, bien différentes de celles de la tragédie classique. / The myth of Atrides, which summarizes to him only, all the horrors and all the cruelties the man of which was able to be guilty - fratricide, regicide, parricide, matricide, infanticide, incest, cannibalism, human sacrifice - and which was relatively neglected by the classic tragedy in the XVIIth century, knew an unprecedented development about the XVIIIth century when about twenty tragic plays were dedicated to him, without counting the operas and the ballets. But this tragic theater, in spite of its immense success with the public in the XVIIIth century, suffered afterward from a regrettable prejudice to which Victor Hugo's famous verse - " On the Racine died, The Campistron swarms "-, is not foreign. Raising us against this reducing vision, we wanted by this study which concerned eight of the most significant dramatic works the significant which handled main episodes of the antique fable - going of the crime of Tantale to Oreste's vengeance, including the sacrifice of Iphigénie and the murder of Agamemnon - to show the dramatic, moral and philosophic specificity of the tragedy of the Lights which was " a laboratory of the forms and the ideas " where developed at the same time a new sensibility, a new dramatic art and a new vision of the world, very different from those classic tragedy.

No description available.

No se posee.

De spectacle vivant, le théâtre d'Euripide devient très vite une pièce de collection dont la conservation, comme celle des deux autres grands poètes dramatiques, Eschyle et Sophocle, est décrétée par le législateur athénien Lycurgue. Très vite aussi, il est commenté, critiqué, enseigné. À travers les témoignages de sa réception, on veut comprendre quellesinterprétations antiques étaient proposées d’une tragédie d’Euripide, l’Oreste. On cherche dans le premier chapitre à établir la réception du personnage lui-même et de l’acte qui lui apporte une gloire équivoque – la vengeance du père par le meurtre de la mère – dans la tradition mythographique et judiciaire, et voir quelle part y prennent les questions posées parl’Oreste d’Euripide. Le deuxième chapitre examine la place que la tragédie occupe dans l’enseignement antique par l’étude des textes scolaires, exercices élémentaires découverts sur les papyri, manuels de rhétoriques, exercices types (progymnasmata) et déclamations. Les troisième et quatrième chapitres étudient les extraits les plus commentés : d’abord, les deux scènes les plus célèbres, le récit du messager et le diptyque de la maladie d’Oreste, qui se distinguent par la façon dont est traité leur sujet, le récit d’une assemblée politique et la représentation de la folie ; puis, des morceaux choisis pour leur genre, lyrique ou gnomique. Enfin, on examine dans le dernier chapitre les témoignages des spécialistes du « livre », de ceux qui ont transmis, édité, commenté, conservé l’Oreste d’Euripide. / From performing art, Euripides’ theatre very soon becomes a piece of collection, whose preservation, as for the two other Great tragedians, Aeschylus and Sophocles, is decreed by the Athenian statesman Lycurgus. It also is soon commented, criticized, taught. Through the reception’s testimonies, we want to understand which interpretations were given of anEuripidean tragedy, the Orestes, in the Antiquity. In the first chapter, we try to determine how Orestes’ figure itself and the equivocal glory of his act – i.e. avenging his father by killing his mother – were perceived in the mythographical and judiciary tradition, and which importance both of them give to the issues which are at stake in Euripides’ Orestes. The second chapter investigates which place the drama takes in teaching in Antiquity through school-texts, elementary exercises discovered on papyri, rhetoric handbooks, model exercises (progymnasmata) and declamations. The third and fourth chapters study the most commented extracts : first, the two most famous scenes, the messenger’s speech and thediptych of Orestes’ illness, which stand out through the treatment of their subject, i. e. the narration of a political assembly and the representation of madness ; then, some selected pieces on generic criteria, lyrical or gnomical. Finally, we investigate in the last chapter the testimonies of « book »’s specialists, of those who have transmitted, published, commented, preserved the Euripides’ Orestes.

The aim of this study is to examine and analyse how the Alexandrian prefect Orestes of late antiquity and his management of the events of 414-415 were depicted in the ancient sources: Socrates Scholasticus, John of Nikiu and Damascius. By applying S. Brownes rhetoric analysis to remove the authors “filters” in their depiction and then applying French & Ravens bases of power to analyse how prefect Orestes power were depicted. Th analyses also applies the bases of power on bishop Cyril and philosopher Hypatia as the study found it difficult to analyses the prefect without them. The result of the analysis and discussion mainly found that the depiction of the prefect Orestes is affected by the rhetoric “filterers” of the three ancient authors. The study also found that the depiction of prefect Orestes and how he managed the events between 414-415 is always dependent on the office of prefectures authority and power. This what French & Raven call legitimate power. Prefect Orestes actions were based on the office of prefecture authority and power, in accordance to the social structure and cultural rules. He was always depicted as the prefect not the person Orestes.

No description available.

No description available.