Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Untersuchungen zum Deus ex Machina bei Sophokles und Euripides

1962; Classical Association of Canada; Volume: 16; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.2307/1086950

1929-4883

D. J. Conacher, Andreas Spira,

Archaeology and Historical Studies

ANDREAS SPIRA presents a thorough and (with one possible exception) internally consistent defence of the deus ex machina as a device which, far from betraying any form of dramatic irresponsibility, brings into the open some truth or meaning which is already implicit in the theme and structure of the play. Perhaps the most successful of the author's discussions is that of the Philoctetes (pp. 12-30). A clear analysis of the play indicates that its symbolism, and the various dramatic expectations which are aroused by other means, prepare us for the ending which the theophany finally brings about. Thus, while the divinefiat at the end does effect a reversal in the hero's decision, it does not really reverse the direction in which the play has been leading us. Spira finds, moreover, that the deus-ex-machina device expresses an essential point in the play's meaning: where various human attempts at a solution have failed, we have a situation in which a man can see the true meaning of his experience and suffering only with the help of the gods. While this solution will not please believers in the heroic humanism of Sophocles (see C. R. Whitman, Sophocles [Cambridge, Mass. 1951] 187-188), it does not run counter to the more traditional view of Sophoclean gods and heroes. If Spira is less convincing in his treatment of various Euripidean epiphanies, the reason may be that he tends to treat the Euripidean gods with more respect than does their author. Here we must limit ourselves to comment on a selection of Spira's many analyses which will, it is hoped, most clearly illustrate the strength and weakness of his thesis. Few critics would take exception to the more formal part of Spira's defence of the Ion's epilogue (pp. 35 ff.). The ironic basis of the plot and the complementary necessity of both prologue (for the audience's enjoyment of the irony) and epilogue (for the resolution, in plain view of the actors, of the ironic situation) are admirably expounded. Again, since the recognition of Apollo and his role in the destinies of Creusa and Ion is, if anything, the more important part of the recognition theme, one agrees that a divine revelation is necessary to complement the human recognition between mother and son. Finally, Spira skilfully indicates the dramatic expectations by which we are prepared for the ultimate revelation. It is only when the author finds serious religious meanings in Athena's revelation, and in the alleged reconciliation which it effects between Apollo and his human family, that he betrays a certain insensitivity to the higher irony-the tragi-comic joke at the expense of Apolloof the play as a whole. Unfortunately, it is this divine justification of the action which Spira finds to be the most significant and typical function of the deus ex machina in Euripides.