Aeschylus’ The Oresteia: The Eumenides | Video 13 | Great Books of the Western Canon series

The Ramsay Centre continues to add to a series of videos featuring academics discussing the major themes and ideas of the some of the great texts of the West. Read the texts and watch the videos or simply watch the videos.

[@jamvin5647]

Great conversation, thanks for posting! The Oresteia was a very thought-provoking read and I think you guys did a great job exploring some of the subtleties that might occur to someone whose reading between the lines. The Eumenides really puts a lot into perspective.

[@Laocoon283]

The meaning behind Athena saying that she can decide the case because she is motherless is to point out the fact the she is completely impartial, that she is not subject to the same bias that every mortal is. So much of the conflict in the paradox of mortals assigning justice is due to the fact that it is not possible for any mortal to be truly impartial. That's the whole crux of the play. Our Apollonian logic is inexorably attached to mortal passions. Hers is not.

[@DFam144]

The Furies' basic position that killing your parents is ALWAYS a terrible offense that should be punished is only slightly wrong. It is true 99.999% of the time, but not in the case of a mother who is a murderer, a regicide, and a usurper of the throne (a very small group). I think it would have been better to indicate in the final ruling that the Furies do lose this case, but they will be very likely to win 99+% of future cases against those who kill a parent. I do agree that Apollo's arguments are terrible and Athena's reasoning is unsatisfying. I do not know why the Apollo is made to leave much stronger arguments in favor of Orestes and Apollo completely unsaid. In contrast to Dr. Savall, I think Aeschylus shortchanges Orestes' defense by only raising what are fairly characterized as deeply unpersuasive arguments. The final verdict seems correct even we reject the ridiculous idea that the mother is not really a parent. Orestes, who is the rightful king of Argos as the only son of Agamemnon, is punishing regicides/usurpers and taking on his responsbility to lead Argos forward to a brighter future. The conclusion of the play conveys that positivity.
If we compare the aftermaths of the offenses of the two sisters, Helen and Clytaemnestra, it puts Orestes' action in highly positive light. Helen runs off with Paris, and the matter is resolved by the Trojan War in which Troy is destroyed and the winning side suffers horribly. The innocent people that die because of that response begin but do not end with innocdent Iphigenia. In contrast, Clytaemnestra, who commits a much worse offense than Helen, taking up with Aegesthis, killing Agamemnon the King, and usurping the throne has an aftermath with no collateral damage to anybody. Only the guilty are executed. Orestes does it by himself. He is willing to get the blood of his guilty mother on his own hands, and does not pass off that unpleasant but necessary step. This makes him into even more of an idealized hero. It makes Apollo seem to be a very wise god too.