MURDER AMONG PHILIA (Friends, loved ones, relations)
At
first look, the Andromache to appears to be less centrally concerned with harm
to friends and kin than in most other plays.
But in this play, Euripides has concocted a mixture of characters and
motivations in which the relationships between any two characters becomes
ambiguous and multivalent.
There is no consensus among scholars of Ancient
Greek about the exact meaning of the word philos or other related expressions
such as philein and philia. It seems apparent, however, that the use of these
terms went through significant changes from the time of Homer to the fifth
century. In classical Athens, the term could take on different meanings
depending on the situation it was used in, sometimes denoting emotional relationships
based on personal feelings and attitudes, sometimes referring to socially
regulated, politically influenced ones. In the Andromache the terms signifying
family relationships and friendships are especially prone to change depending
on the speaker's current situation and aims. The main conflict of the play
revolves around the status of Andromache and most of the cases in which the
term philos is used are connected to Andromache, therefore it seems justified
to concentrate on the question of who is or might be regarded as her philos.
The characters manipulate and distort the meaning of the word to serve their
own purposes. Euripides uses conflicting concepts of philia which belong to
different codes of behavior and sets of values and by doing so reveals the
inherent tensions in some of the terms and concepts which were prevalent in
fifth-century Athens.
Menelaus
and Hermione threaten Andromache and her small son Molossos, who are not blood
kin to them, and Orestes is implicated in the murder of Neoptolemus, who is not
his kin. Although threats to a suppliant occur in the first part of the play,
suppliance is not the main concern of the play as a whole. Xenia does not
figure in Andromache, nor does spouse murder spouse, as happens in Aeschylus’s
Agamemnon and Sophocles' Women of Trachis. Nevertheless, this play, focusing as
it does on conflict between the wife and concubine of Neoptolemus, is centrally
concerned with violations of philia within the marriage relationship. In the
Greek view, the acts it represents are just as dreadful as kin murder and
incest.
Left
behind by her father, Hermione attempts suicide and expresses great fear of
Neoptolemus’s anger. She is saved from her plight by the arrival of Orestes, to
whom she had previously been betrothed. He offers her protection and marriage
and reveals that he has contrived a plot against Neoptolemus. After they leave
together, a messenger reports the death of Neoptolemus at Delphi. The young
man's body is then brought in and Peleus mourns the death of his grandson and
heir. The play ends with the appearance of Thetis ex Machina, revealing that
Peleus is to live with her as an immortal, that they are to be reunited with
their son Achilles, who now lives in the Blessed Isles, that Andromache is to
marry the ruler of the Molossians, and that Molossos will be the father of
Molossian kings. In this tangled plot, Neoptolemus’s philoi injure or attempt
to injure one another in a series of actions that leads to the destruction of
his house. Relationships in this play are so twisted and perverted that not
only do philoi treat one another as enemies, but enemies also treat one another
as close philoi. Andromache, the wife of Hector, is the natural enemy of the
family of Achilles, who killed Hector. Yet, she is treated as a close phile,
who lives in Neoptolemus’s house and has a child by him. In treating this enemy
as a friend, Neoptolemus also thereby treats his philoi as enemies. In
Andromache, inappropriate relationships with enemies play the same role that
kin murder does in other tragedies.
Neoptolemus’s
union with Andromache has created a situation in which they themselves and the
other dramatic figures are both philoi and enemies to one another. When they
are forced to act in these circumstances, their actions are ambiguous, since
they help or harm someone who is both philos and enemy. 'All of those connected
by blood or marriage with the house of Peleus — Neoptolemus, Andromache,
Molossos, Peleus, Hermione, Menelaus, Orestes, and Thetis—are involved in ambiguous
situations. Although Neoptolemus is absent throughout
the play, appearing only as a corpse, he is at the center of the web of
relationships from which the dramatic action springs. He is related to every
other major figure in the play either by birth (Thetis, Peleus, and Molossos)
or by marriage (Andromache, Hermione, Menelaus, and Orestes). Moreover, because
we see him only through the eyes of others, Neoptolemus is defined by his
relationships with them, by his roles as husband, master, father, grandson, and
son-in-law. To each of these dramatic figures Neoptolemus is both friend and
enemy, the sum of the perverted relationships he has created. Neoptolemus
is Andromache’s enemy, as a Greek and the son of her husband's murderer. Yet in
taking her into his household, he treats her as a phile, becoming her
"husband" and the father of her son, Molossos.
Neoptolemus,
however, has not acted as a philos to Andromache and her son. He thrust her
aside after marrying Hermione (30, 37), and he left Phthia without providing
for her protection or clarifying her position in his household. Andromache
comments on his absence in time of need and complains that he does not act as a
father to Molossos (49-50, 75-76). By failing to protect Andromache,
Neoptolemus violates the obligations of philia he has incurred toward her and
Molossos. On the other hand, in keeping Andromache and her son in his
household, Neoptolemus injures Hermione, his legitimate wife.18 Greek custom
held that while a man might keep a concubine in a separate establishment, he
should never bring her into contact with his legitimate wife, much less allow
the two to live in the same house. It was also held to be shameful for a
concubine to usurp the wife's place by bearing and rearing children; only
legitimate children should be reared in a man's house.
Neoptolemus
also acts wrongly in other ways with regard to Hermione. He marries her against
Peleus's will and advice (619-21); he marries a woman who had been promised to
Orestes, her relative; and, moreover, he insults his rival (966-81).
Neoptolemus also acts wrongly in leaving Hermione in his house during his
absence, just as Menelaus did when he left Hermione's mother Helen alone
(592-95). Neoptolemus wrongs other philoi as well. He acts offensively toward
his father-in-law, Menelaus, in keeping, in the same house as his daughter, a
concubine who is, moreover, the widow of Hector, the brother of Paris (655-56),
who committed adultery with Menelaus’s wife. Although the play does not
explicitly mention Neoptolemus’s injuries to Peleus and Thetis, we may infer
that he also wrongs his grandparents when he brings into his household the wife
of their son's enemy. In addition, Neoptolemus fails to protect their only
great-grandson and deserts his aged grandfather, leaving him without protection
in the midst of disorder. Neoptolemus not only acts badly toward Thetis and all
of the major mortal dramatic figures, but he also insults Apollo, treating a
god who should be honored as the enemy who killed his father (53, 1106—8,
1194-96).
And
yet, Euripides has been accused of “rehabilitating “ and “whitewashing”
Neoptolemus. This seems only to be justified by the fact that nowhere does the
play mention the atrocities Neoptolemus was famous for: murdering Priam at the
Altar of Zeus, and hurling Astyanax (Hector and Andromache’s son) to his death
from the walls of Troy.
No comments:
Post a Comment