Sacrifice In Racine's Play '

714 Words2 Pages

Initially, I did not like Racine’s retelling of Hippolytus, Phaedra. The text was too wordy, and the lack of script notes made it difficult to visualize how the story would have been played out. My first attempts to read the play were met with resistance, either I’d find a reason to stall, take long “breaks”, or simply fall asleep after reading half a page. Three days before class, I managed to get half-way through the assigned pages. It was a pain to read the through the whole play, but I managed. Shockingly enough, I found myself appreciating the play the more we discussed it in class and saw clips of the performance.
In particular, I was drawn to Phaedra, a victim to the whims of gods and men. I could really sympathize with Phaedra, who …show more content…

Were this the original Greek script, this statement may differ. Racine explicitly points out the various factors that overpower Phaedra who is if anything is innocent bystander. Those to blame are Hippolytus for his prideful statement that earned him the wrath of Aphrodite and her tainted bloodline that is doomed in the affairs of love and sexual encounters. Her linage as a daughter of a women who conceived with a bull and sister to one whose end came in form of a fruitless love; which is talked about on p. 203, lines 60-74. Her love life is foreshadowed to be doomed from the start, it never had a chance to blossom to anything other than tragedy with Aphrodite involved. As an individual, Phaedra was willing to take her inappropriate passion with her to the grave, as seen on page 193, line 74, “I die, and my grim secret dies with me.” This all being said, I am certain that she holds no blame for the tragedy that occurs in the play. The play’s neoclassic background adds another level of …show more content…

I was able to extract the differences between the two, as well as their similarities. Realism is seen as a precursor to Naturalism, not only because it came before it, but also because at it’s bases it is a less extreme form of naturalism. Realist writers wrote about typical middle-class situations or events. Their characters were not extreme (such as aristocrats), but those of the rising middle-class. By having the main concept be the disconnection between people living in the city and nature, they showcase the unnatural effects of the urban setting. Furthermore, most works of realism were produced to contrast the works of the romantics that predated them. Tired of the sugar-coating romantics, realist sought to write about the ugly things in life in a “truthful manner”. Naturalism meanwhile was realism on steroids. They focused on the conditions of the poor-lower class, forcing readers to view the unjust world thru a labor’s eyes. This genre is filled with accounts that seek to show others the difficult conditions which many people must live with. To me these differences feel no more than markers in a spectrum. Writers from both genres no longer concentrate on the elite but diverge their attention to the middle and lower class that have for the most part been underrepresented. Moreover, these forms of literature center around how out of sync humans have become with

Open Document