8/11/2019 Greek Chorus
1/9
The Function of the Tragic Greek Chorus
Author(s): Albert WeinerSource: Theatre Journal, Vol. 32, No. 2 (May, 1980), pp. 205-212Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3207113.
Accessed: 30/08/2014 03:04
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
The Johns Hopkins University Pressis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Theatre Journal.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 168.131.53.85 on Sat, 30 Aug 2014 03:04:28 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3207113?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3207113?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup8/11/2019 Greek Chorus
2/9
ALBERT
WEINER
The
Function
f
the
Tragic
GreekChorus
What
do we know for
certainty
bout
the
tragic
Greek
horus?
We know that
t
numbered
ifty
t
the
beginning
f
the
5th
century
.C.;
we
know
that t
was
prob-
ably Aeschylus
who lowered that number to
twelve,
and it was
probably
Sophocles
who
raised thatnumber o
fifteen,
here t
stayed
forthe
remainder f
the
entury.
We know
that he
horus
was
confined,
ither
ompletely
r
mainly,
o
that
part
of
the
theatre nown s the
orchestra,
nd since
the
meaning
f that
word
is
dancing
place,
we can
only
conclude that
dancing
was a
major
part
of
what the
chorus did. But
of
greater ignificance,
e know
that
the
poets
consideredthe
chorus
xtremelymportant;
e
know
that,
fforno
other
eason,
because all of the
extant
ragedies
ontain
horuses,
nd
because
of
the
arge
number
f
ines
given
to
the
choruses.
f
there s a direct
orrelation etween he
number f ines nd the m-
portance
ttachedto the
chorus
by
authors,
hen
Aeschylus
onsidered he
chorus
more
mportant
han either
ophocles
or
Euripides,
ut
clearly
hey
ll
considered
the chorus
mportant.
We
therefore
now what the
chorus
did;
it
danced and
sang.
How it
danced and
sang
s a
question
hat an never e
answered.
But to whatend
did it
dance and
sing?
What was its
role,
whatwas its
function?
What did it do
that he ctors
did not
do?
Aristotle's
rincipal
in
truth
is
only)
statement
n the
tragic
horuscomes
in
Chapter
18
ofhis
Poetics.Here
s theButcher
ranslation:
Thechorus
oo
hould
e
regarded
s oneof
he
ctors;
t
hould e an
ntegral
art
f
he
whole,
nd
share n
the
ction,
n
themanner
ot
of
Euripides
ut
of
Sophocles.
s for
the
ater
oets,
heir horal
ongs ertain
s little o
the
ubject
f
the
iece
s to that f
any
ther
ragedy.
hey
re,
herefore,
ung
s mere
nterludes-a
ractise
irst
egun y
Agathon.
et what
difference
s
there etween
ntroducing
uch horal
nterludes,
nd
transferring
speech,
r even whole
ct,
from ne
play
to
another?1
The
paragraph egins
with
major ambiguity:
The
chorustoo should
be
regarded
as
one
of
the
actors.
Who is to
regard
t
so?
The
audience?
the
poet?
the other
characters?
he
chorus
tself?
his
aside,
Aristotle eems to
be
saying
hat omeone
ought
to
regard
he
chorus
s a
character,
collective
haracter o be
sure,
but a
character o the same
degree
as
Oedipus
or Heracles or
Medea are
characters.
Albert Weiner s
Professor f
Theatre t the State
University f
New York at
Albany.
1
(New York:Hill & Wang, 1961), 18. 7.
205
This content downloaded from 168.131.53.85 on Sat, 30 Aug 2014 03:04:28 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Greek Chorus
3/9
206
/
TJ,
ay
980
assume hat rofessor
eter rnott
grees
with
his,
or
have
een t east hree f
his
marionettereek
ragedies
nd t eems lear o
me
that
e
regards
is
horus
s
another haracter.rofessoritto ertainlygreeswith his nterpretation;nhis
translationf this entence e
even
etains
utcher's
mbiguity:
The
horusmust
be
regarded
s one
of the
ctors. 2
Many
theories ave taken n the
qualities
f
known ruths
nd
thus re difficulto track own at their
ources.One hears
somewhere
long
he
way
that he
horus
xists o
elevate
ommonplace
etails
nto
universal
erities. ne
hears
hat
he
horus
cts s a
bufferetweenctor nd
au-
dience.
his
heory
eems o
mply
hat here ill
lways
e some lack etweenhe
two,
nd t
s
the
ole
fthe
horus
o
take
p
that lack.One hears hat he
horus
exists
o transformhe
passions
f the
haracters,
hich re
necessarily
iffused,
into
harp
ocus.
One hears hat he
horus
s
an
Ideal
Audience,
hat he
udience
maymeasuretsresponseothat f the horus. utthis s surely rong, or re-
quently
horuses
isunderstandhat s
happening
n
the
ragedy
hile he udience
understands,
nd
frequently
horusesmake ommentsn the ctionwhich
eem
positively
tupid
r
inappropriate.
urthermore,
he deal Audience
heory
must
giveway
to
Artistotle,
ho eems
o
have
aid
that
he
horusmust e
regarded
s
an actor.
east,
ut
erhaps
ot
ast,
nehears hat he horus
unctions
s a decora-
tion.
But
what,
we
may
well
sk,
s it
supposed
o
decorate?
As
diverses these heories
ay
e
detect
t east ne ommon
hread:
he
more
closely
he
horus
s
integrated
nto
hefabric f
the
play,
hemore t resembles
collective
haracter,
he etter. nd
because
uripides'
horuseseem o
be
less
collectiveharacter han hose fSophocles,heSophocleanhoruses re often
praised
while
hose f
Euripides
re
criticized. ichmond
attimore,
or
xample,
has
said that
uripides
wrote
ome
ovely yrics
in
hischoral
des]
butoften
..
they
ave
nothing
odo
withwhat
s
going
n
n
the
play.' 3
rofessorrnott
sks f
Euripides'
horuses,
Do
they
ot .
grow
omewhat
edious,
articularly
n
ome
of
the
plays
f
Euripides
here he
ontent
s
negligible ?4
itto,
who s
unusually
severewith
uripides'
horuses,
hinkshat
heMedea
horus,
ecause
t
s not ele-
vant
o
the
play,
s
a
total
ailure.5
The
basic
notion, hen,
s
that he
choruses'
ines
ought
necessarily
o have
something
todo withwhat
s
going
n n the
lay.
Moreover,
ecause
uripides'
choruseseemto have less to do withwhat s goingon in theplaysthando
Sophocles',
hey
re
necessarily
ess uccessful.
his s all somewhat
onfusing.
at-
timore,
or
xample,
ould
have
us
believe hat
uripides
as
capable
of
writing
lovely
yrics,
ut
that
e
was
not
apable
f
ncorporating
hemntohis
tragedies;
he
could
write
ovely yrics,
ut
not
elevantnes.ThenAristotle
oncludes
yrap-
ping
he
nuckles
f he later
oets
whose
horusesre o
nondescript
hat
hey
it
2
H.
D.
F.
Kitto,
Greek
Tragedy:
A
Literary
tudy
Garden
City,
N.Y.:
Doubleday,
1954),
p.
167.
3
The
Complete
Greek
Tragedies,
avid Grene
nd Richmond
attimore,
ds.
(Chicago: University
f
Chicago
Press,
1959), III,
vii.
4
The LostDimensionof GreekTragedy, ETJ11 (1959), 101.
5
Kitto,
pp.
275-6.
This content downloaded from 168.131.53.85 on Sat, 30 Aug 2014 03:04:28 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Greek Chorus
4/9
207
/
THE GREEK TRAGIC
CHORUS
into
one
tragedy
s well as
another;
hey
ave
nothing
o
do
with
what
s
going
n in
the
play;
their ontent
s
negligible.
hus
lacking
relevance nd
therefore
ramatic
quality,
the choral odes are
sung
as mere
nterludes,
s theatrical
as
opposed
to
dramatic)
lements.
Everyone,
t
seems,
prefers
ramatic
horuses
o undramatic
nes.
Indeed,
Pro-
fessor
Kitto
goes
so far
as
to
say
that
Sophocles
invented
new function
or
the
chorus,
nd
thatfunction
was to make t
always
dramatic. 6
think hat
t
might
be
wise
at
this
point
to define
what we mean
by
dramatic.Dramatic
elements n
a
play
are
intrinsically
unctional
lements,
lements
without
which he
play
could
not
operate.
use
the
word dramatic
s an
antonym
f
theatrical.
A dramatic
lement
must
ctually
work toward
furthering
r
developing
lot
or
character;
t is
literary
and is unrelated
o
production.
A novel or a
poem
may
be dramatic.
Theatrical,
n
the other
hand,
is not
directly
elated o drama. It derivesfrom
OtaTQov,
seeing
place;
indeed,
the variant
eOaTrl
is a
looker-on,
viewer.
Hence,
that which
s
dramatic
s abstract
nd
is concerned
olely
with the art
of
telling
story.
That
which
s theatrical
s
concrete,
s
in thevisible
ealm,
nd is concerned
with
llustra-
tion.
f
a dramatic
lementwere
removed
rom unified
lay
tcouldnot
operate
fully
or it
would
lack coherence.
On the other
hand if a theatrical lement
were
removed
the
production
might
uffer,
ut
the
reader
would
miss
little.
The
plot
would
still
operate
with
ts full
force.
Thus,
the
Tyrannos
would
be unthinkable
without he
characters
f
Oedipus
or
Jocasta;
o,
if
the
chorus
s,
as Kitto
says,
dramatic,
f t were
expunged
he
tragedy
ught
to be
equally
unthinkable.
We can
certainly
est the dramatic-ness f the
Tyrannos
horus
(the
model
Greek
tragedy
with the
model
chorus).
The
chorus's
first tterance
oes
not even
approach
being
dramatic.
t
s
a
lyric
de
of
ome 115
ines
n
which
t
merely
peaks
of ts
uffering.
his could
certainly
e deletedwith
no
loss
to
the
tory.
At 1.276
he
chorus
begins
a
dialogue
with
Oedipus
in which
it
seems
to
be
functioning
dramatically.
t
suggests
hatTeiresias
be
summoned,
ut
by
Oedipus's reply
hat
he
has
already
sent
for the
seer,
he denies the
chorus
a
functional ole.
During
the
Oedipus-Teiresias pisode,
the
chorus
tries
unsuccessfully
o
intrude tself
nto
the
conversation
y
offering
latitudes
which
go
unheeded nd
unacknowledged.
ur-
ing
the nterval etween
eiresias's
xit
nd
Creon's
ntrance
he
horus
ings
nother
lyrical de,utterlyackingndramatic alue. Itsings f the racking own ofLaius's
murderer,
nd reiteratests
oyalty
o
Oedipus.
During
the
Oedipus-Creon pisode
the
chorus
nterrupts
he conversation
with
such
meaningless ommonplaces
s,
His
words
re
wise,
king,
f
one
fears
o
fall.
Those
who
are
quick
to
temper
re not
safe. 7
But
there s
no
need
to
go
on;
the
horusdoes
not
greatly
hange
n
this
egard.
n
a
word,
if
my
definition f
dramatic
s
correct,
he
Tyrannos
horus
s
simply
not
dramatic;
urely
t
s notmoredramatic han
many
of
Euripides'
horuses,
nd
it
s
6
Kitto,
p.
165.
70.
T. 11. 16-7.All
quotations
from he
tragedies
re from heGrene nd Lattimoredition, ndwill
be cited
n
the
text.
This content downloaded from 168.131.53.85 on Sat, 30 Aug 2014 03:04:28 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Greek Chorus
5/9
208
/
TI,
May
1980
considerably
ess
dramatic
han,
for
xample,
he
choruses
f
the
on
and the
Bac-
chae. Either
Aristotle
s
dead
wrong
when,
referring
o
the
Tyrannos
s
the model
tragedy,
e suggests hatthechorus houldbe regarded s one of theactors as is
clearly
he
case
with
Aeschylus's
ragedies)
r
our
interpretation/translation
f
the
Poetics s
wrong.
Our
test
f the
dramatic-ness
f
the
Tyrannos
horushas
shown
t
to
be
a
total failure.
But
there s even more
obe
said about
the
failure
f
choruses
o
be
dramatic;
hey
are
frequently
nti-dramatic.
As a
single
and almost random
example
of
a
phenomenon
hat
occurs
again
and
again
and
again
in
Greek
tragedy,
ake the
heated
quarrel
between
Creon
and
his son
Haemon
in
the
Antigone.
At
one
point,
after
fine
peech
by
Haemon
in
whichhe
respectfully
hides his
father,
ointing
out
that
t
s
not
a
disgrace
o
make
a mistake
nd
later
to
recognize
nd correct
t,
the chorus
nterrupts
iththisbland (and
dramatically
orthless) omment: Oh,
king,give
heed
f
ensebe
in
his
words;
/
Heed
thou
thy
ire
too--both
have
spoken
well
11.724-5).
he
intrusion
eemsbad
enough,
or t
seems
to
destroy
he
rhythm
of the
scene
without
dding anything ecessary,
ut this
comment
s
positively
bathetic;
t reduces
the
sublime
to the
ridiculous.As a matter
f
fact
Creon
has
spoken
badly
and
foolishly,
nd Haemon
has indeed
spoken
well,
but
the
chorus
will
not
even
udge
whether ensebe
in
his
words;it
imply
wants
to
end the
quarrel
without
offending
nyone.
The
previous speech
by
Creon ended
with
these
pig-
headed
words:
So I must uard hemenwhoyield oorder,
And
not
et
myself
e beaten
y
a
woman.
Better,
f t
must
appen,
hat man
Should
versetme.
I
won't e calledweaker
han
womankind.
[11.
77-80]
To this he
horus
replies:
We
think--unless
ur
age
is
cheating
s-/
That what
you say
is sensible
nd
right
11,
81-2).
n
the
previously-quotedouplet
he horus
could
not
even make
up
its
mindwhetherHaemon was
making
ense;
here
t
does
commit tself
o
a
judgment,
ut a
palpably
wrong udgment.
n this ase the
horus
(the
deal
Audience?)
would
be the
only
one
in
the
theatre,
n
either ide of
the
or-
chestra,who wouldthinkhatCreonwasbeing ightnd sensible. utthemajor ost
of
such
insipid
remarks
with
which
Greek
tragedy
bounds)
is that
they
eem
to
constitute
n
interruption
n
the
action.
Even Professor
Kitto,
that
taunch
ham-
pion
of the
ophoclean
chorus,
annot
xplain
uch nti-dramatic
ehavior.
Even
he
calls the
above-quoted
ines tedious
emarks. 8
If Aristotle
id
not mean that he
tragic
horus hould be
regarded
s
a collective
characterwhat
did he mean?
Perhaps
the
first lue
that
a
reinterpretation
f this
point
s
necessary
s
the
very
act
hathe has saidso little boutthe horus. t would
seemthat ecause
the horus's
ines n even the eastchoric
ragedies omprise
uch
large
portion
f thetotal ines
not
ess
than
/5),
that
Aristotle ould
have devoted
8
Kitto,
p.
168.
This content downloaded from 168.131.53.85 on Sat, 30 Aug 2014 03:04:28 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Greek Chorus
6/9
209
/
THE GREEKTRAGIC CHORUS
at least a
proportionate pace
to
it n the
Poetics. We should
not allow
thisvoid
to
pass
unnoticed. Because Aristotle
eems to dismiss
thechorus n a
single,
short
paragraph,
ne
might
e led to believethat
part
of the
manuscript
s
missing,
s we
assume
s the
case
with
his
discussion
f
comedy.
Yet
thetranslation f
this
passage
by
Professor
lse makes
t
clear that
nothing
s
missing,
hat
verything
hat
Aristo-
tlewishedto
say
about the horusvis-a-vis he
omposition
f
tragedy
s contained
in that
paragraph.
Here s that
mportant
irst entence
n the
Else translation:
And
one
[the
tragic
oet]
should
go
on
the
premise
hat he
chorus lso
is
one
of
his
ac-
tors:
t
should
be
a
part
of
the
whole
enterprise
nd an
aid
to him
n
winning
he
competition,
not the
way
it
was
to
Euripides
but rather
the
way
it
was to
Sophocles.
9
The
crucial
word
in
the
sentence s
ovvaywovLtoOat,
hich Butcher
ranslates
s
share n action, but Else arguesto do so creates
syntactical
ifficulty
ith the
datives
oted
Q1iQLnt6rl.
.
oaTne~.Io+o)o,.d
forcing
he
phrase
o be
translated
ith
n
interpolated
aQa.
Moreover,
nd forme of
overwhelming
mportance,
he temof
theword
n
question
s
aywv
which
Aristotle
lways
uses to refer
o
the
tragic
om-
petitions.'
Thus share
n
the action
becomes
aid
.
. .
in
the
competition,
nd
suddenly
he
paragraph
oses most of its
ambiguity
nd
obscurity.
The
key,
it
seems to
me,
to
understanding
his
passage
and
ultimately
o
understanding
rtistotle's
houghts
n
the
horus,
s
to
construe
t
as
referring
ot to
playwriting
ut
to
production.
We
must
not
allow
ourselves
o
forget
he
meaning
of
floLr7TrlX7.
he
Poetics is concerned
olely
with the
art of
poetry,
he craft f
dramaturgy,hemechanics f
writing
uccessful
ragedy.
he Poetics
rarely
efers
to
production,
nd when it
does
it
is
only
n
passing,
nd then
lmost
n
a
casual
manner.
This
fact
n
itself
might o
fartoward
xplaining
why
Aristotle
as
said
so
little
bout the
horus:
he did
not
consider
t
dramatic
lement.
He
considered
t
an
element
of
production.
By interpreting
he
above
passage
to
mean
that
Aristotle
considered he
horus o be like
one of
the
ctors nsofar
s
it
should
be a
part
of
the
whole
enterprise
nd an
aid
to
winning
he
ompetition,
e
suddenly
ealizethat
he
saw the
horus s
a
practical
lement.
Coming
s
late as
it
does
in
the
Poetics,
fter
the
principalpart
of
the
theory
was
expounded,
this
paragraph
seems
to
come
almost as an
afterthought
nd not
as
part
of
the
theory
tself.
A
paraphrase
f he
passagemight o
something
ike
his:
The
poet
hould
compose
his choruseswiththe
same care and
attention hat
he
devotes
o
his
actors,
or f
he
hopes
to win
the
ompetition
hewhole
must eflect
reat
are.
Sophocles,
who
took s
much
are with
his
choruses s
he
did withhis
actors,
won
many
ompetitions,
hile
Euripides,
ho
did
not,
won
few.
Euripides'
horal des
frequently
ad little o
do with
what was
going
on
in
the
plot,
while
Sophocles'
werewell
ntegrated.
owadays
t
s
even
worse.
Agathon egan
the
practice
f
nserting
ongs
nto
his
tragedies
hich
had
9
Gerald
F.
Else,
Aristotle's
oetics: The
Argument Cambridge,
Mass.:
Harvard
University
ress,
1967),pp. 551-2.
10
Else,
pp.
551-3.
This content downloaded from 168.131.53.85 on Sat, 30 Aug 2014 03:04:28 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Greek Chorus
7/9
210
/
TJ,
ay
980
nothing
o do
withwhat was
going
on in
the
plays,
nd that s
just
as
bad as
taking
songs
from
ne
tragedy
nd
inserting
hem
n
another.'
What
s
important
s
not
that
Aristotles sayingthat well-integratednd relevant horus s essential o a
good
tragedy;
e
is
saying,
owever,
hat t
s
essential
o
winning
he
ompetition.
n
other
words,
he rt
of
writing ood
choruses
s not
part
f the
heory
f
tragedy;
t
s
part
f
the
theory
f
production.
Aristotle eems to have
premised
he chorus and its
songs
much as we
might
premise
ostume
design.
The
poet
may
approach
the
chorus
n
either f two
ways:
he
may,
as
is the
practice
nowadays, imply
nsert
ongs
which
he
borrowed rom
another
fhis
or
someone
lse's)
tragedies,
ongs
which
have
no
organic
onnection
to the
plot.
Or,
in
the
manner
f
Sophocles,
he
may compose
each
chorus
pecifi-
cally
for
each
tragedy,
ntegrating
he
songs
into the
fabric.
n
the
analogy
with
costumes, hedesignermay simply pull costumesout of stock,some of which
might
ot be
appropriate
or he
production.
ut
t
s better
o
design
nd buildeach
costume
or
ach
production.
o
dressMalvolio
in
a costume
riginally esigned
or
Horatio
might
ulfillome
requirements,
uch s
period,
but
t
would be
basically
n-
appropriate.
t would
not
harm the
play Twelfth
ight,
but
it
would
not
help
the
production.
In
this
regard,
hen,
how
does
the
Sophoclean
chorusdiffer
rom
he
Euripidean
chorus?
t
does
not,
as I have
shown,
differ
n
the
degree
of
dramatic-ness.
oth
choruses
re
basically
undramatic.
ut
the
Sophoclean
choruses
re
more
relevant
to
the
plot,
more
ntegrated
nto
the
tragedies.
or
example,
the
Tyrannos
horus
representshe itizens f Thebes whosewell-beingsdependent pon Oedipus;most
of
what
t
says
is
in
response
o
Oedipus.
Indeed,
t
is the chorus's
uffering
hat
s
behind
Oedipus's
investigation
f
themurder
f
Laius.
The
Ajax
chorus
represents
the
ailors
who
serveunder
Ajax
and
who are
dependent
pon
him.
The
Philoctetes
chorus
represents
he
sailors,
under
the nominalcommand
of
Neoptolemus,
who
must
help
their
aptaincapture
Philoctetes
n
order
hat
heymight
e victorious
n
Troy.
Euripides'
horuses,
n the
other
hand,
with everal
xceptions,
eldomhave
a
vested
nterestn the
protagonists'
uccessor failure.
hey
are moreoften hannot
merely
ystanders.
requently
he failure
f
the
protagonist
as
no
greater
ffect
upon
the chorus than
to
make
it
unhappy.
Sophocles'
method s
better,
Aristotle
would say, justas appropriate ostumes re better: tadds something,lbeitnota
dramatic
lement,
o
the
generalpleasure
nd
understanding
f
the
audience.
If
my theory
s
correct-that
the
chorus
in
the
tragedies
of
Sophocles
and
Euripides
s
significant nly
in the
theatre,
not
in
the
study-
I must
turn
to
theatrical
ractice
n
order
o
conclude
my
argument.
xactly
what
function
oes
the
chorus serve
there?
In his well-known
essay,
Verfremdungseffekte
n
der
chinesischen
chauspielkunst,
recht escribes
he effect
f
watching
Chinese
ac-
tors:
The
efforts
n
question
were
directed o
playing
n
such a
way
that
the
au-
dience was hindered
rom
imply dentifying
tself
with
the characters
n
the
play.
Acceptance
or
rejection
f
their ctions
nd utterances as
meant
o take
place
on
theconsciousplane, nsteadof,as hitherto,n the udience's ubconscious.
11
he
11
Brecht
n
Theatre,
ohn
Willett,
d.
and
trans.
N.Y.:
Hill nd
Wang,
964),
.
91.
This content downloaded from 168.131.53.85 on Sat, 30 Aug 2014 03:04:28 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Greek Chorus
8/9
211
/
THE GREEK
TRAGIC CHORUS
Alienation
Effect,
s
it s
called,
has become
o
important
hat he theatre
f
Brecht
and,
indeed,
n entire
vant
garde
theatremovement ould
not
have come
into
be-
ing
withoutt. Western
echniques
f lienation, owever, re
dependent
esson act-
ing style,
the
method
on which
Chinese
alienation
s
based,
than
on
production
methods,
uch as
interrupting
he action
with
irrelevant
ongs,
dances,
and ser-
mons.
That
is
the
way
it
s done
in the
modern
heatre,
nd I am
suggesting
hat he
classic Greek chorus
played
exactly
his
role.
This
theory,
then,
might
go
far toward
explaining
the
many
choral
interruptions
e
find n
Greek
ragedy. pecifically,
hose have mentioned
n
the
Tyrannos
nd
the
Antigone
hould
be
viewed not
as dramatic
nterruptions,
ut
lyric nterruptions.
am
suggesting
hat these
nterruptions,
hen
they
re most
commonplace
nd
insipid,
were
composed
by
the
poets
not for
ensebut
for
music.
In otherwords,a
couplet
uchas, ' We hink-unlessourage is
cheating
s-/That
what
you say
is
sensible nd
right
houldnot
be read
dramatically
s
though
ts ole
value
were
in
its verbal
sense.
Rather,
t
should
perhaps
be
sung
and
danced,
perhaps xpanded
to
several
minutes,
nd
resulting
ot
n
a mere
nterruption,
ut a
full
reak,
n interlude
f
alienation
uring
which
ime he udience
ould
stop
feel-
ing
nd
begin
to
think. n cases
such as
this,
how the
horus
performs
hese
ouplets
is more
mportant
hanthat
t
performs
hem.
The
longer
horal
odes
were
possibly
major
nterludes
f
alienation
during
which
he udience
could
readjust
tself, elax,
watch
the
dancing,
isten
o the
music,
nd
perhapsponder
what
t
had
just
seen.
In
suggesting
hat heGreek
horus's
olewas that f
alienating
he
udience,
am
not
attempting
o
expound
ome chic new
theory
hatEuripidesndSophocleswere
Brechtians
n
disguise.
On the
contrary,
he Alienation
Effect,
which
Brecht er-
tainly
id
not nvent ut rather
merely ecognized
nd
named,
s an ancient
evice,
one
which artists-not
only
dramatists-have
always
subconsciously
nderstood
and used.
It s
perhaps
hemost fficientnd directmethod
f
arousing
he
motions
and
passions
of
the udience
while
forcing
t
to
think t the ame
time.
Through
his
technique
hedirector
we
should
not
forget
hat he
tragic
oets
were lso
directors)
can
simultaneously
ive
an action
specific
nd universal
ignificance.
eter
Brook,
who used theAlienationEffect
o
brilliantly
n
his
production
f
Marat/Sade,
aid
alienation s
a call
to
halt:
alienation
s
cutting,nterrupting,olding
omething
p
tothe ight,making s look again.Alienationsabove all an appeal tothe pectator
to
work
for
himself,
o
to
become
more
responsible
or
ccepting
what
he
sees
..
A
normal
tage
action
will
appear
real
to
us
if
t s
convincing
nd
so
we
are
apt
to
take
t,
temporarily,
s
objective
ruth.P 12nd
of
coursewhen
the
udience
begins
to view the
tage
ction
s
objective
ruth
t
begins
o
delude
tself.
lienation
uts
n
end
to
that.
The
greatest itfall,
tseemsto
me,
n
directing
reek
tragedy
s
to
takethe iteral
meaning
f the horus'swords too
seriously,
o
think
f t
as
another
ctor,
to
try
o
make thechorus eem dramatic.
My
own
theatregoing
xperiences
ave
taught
me
that uch effortsre
totally
wasted.To
emphasize
what is
unimportant
o
theun-
12Peter
rook,
he
Empty
pace
N.Y.:
Atheneum,
968),
p.
72-3.
This content downloaded from 168.131.53.85 on Sat, 30 Aug 2014 03:04:28 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Greek Chorus
9/9
212
/
TI,
May
1980
folding
f
the
plot
can
only
vitiate he
power
of
that
which
s
truly
mportant.
o
long
as
thedirector an
teachthechorus
o
communicatets
meaning hrough
ong
and dance the
major part
ofthebattle swon. Far more
mportant
hanthe iteral
meaning
f
thechorus's
ines
s
the
emotional
mood
or
tone
of
a
given
ode.
Surely
the
body
is the
most
mmediate
nd directmode
of
communication,
nd
it
s on
this
plane,
the
physical,
that the chorus exists.
Here,
I
believe,
we
may give
some
credence
o
Nietzsche's
heory
hat
ragedy
s
a
childof
the
marriage
etween he
op-
posing
ttitudes
f
Apollo
and
Dionysus.
The
one
represents
he
ntellect,
heother
the
body;
one
contemplation,
he
other he
dance;
one the
dream,
heother
ntoxica-
tion; and,
to
introduce reud nd take
t
a
step
further,
he one the
Superego,
he
other
he
d.
The
secret,
t
seems
to
me,
of
producing
reek
tragedy
n
an
essentially
Greek
manner
s to
think
f
thecharacters s
Apollonian
and thechorus s
Diony-
sian,toapproacheach as a distinctntity ith distinctunction,uteachbeing n
integral art
of
the whole
production.
The characters nhabit
dream
world,
a
world
of
myth
nd
contemplation
nd
intellect;
heir
rresistible
pell
draws the
u-
dience
nto
their
world,
and the
udience s abused
into
believing
t
s
a
real world.
And
when
the
audience
s most
deeply
nvolved
n
the
mythological
orld,
when
their ouls are
being
seared
by
the
suffering
f
an
Oedipus
or
a
Heracles,
then
he
chorus
explodes
them
out
of their
nightmare
nd
into
the
real world
of
sight
nd
sound,
nto
a
world
where
they
an
think,
onder,
ontemplate,
elax.
The chorus
does
not
act as a
concilliating
nfluence etween
character
nd
audience as
some
believe.
To the
contrary,
t
is
an
alienating
nfluence,
orking
o
insist n
thedif-
ferences
ot
the imilarities etween
he
two
natures
f
man.
The
characters,
n
that
they
mitate he
plot
arethe
very
oulof
tragedy,
nd this oul iseternal or texists
whether e read
the
tragedy
r
see
it on
the
tage.
The
chorus,
n
the
other
hand,
s
a
purely
heatrical
lement,
nd
it
exists
nly
n
the
theatre.We
must ee the
horus
dance and hear
t
sing
or
it
does
not
exist.
This content downloaded from 168 131 53 85 on Sat 30 Aug 2014 03:04:28 AM
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp