Scan barcode
redheadreading's review against another edition
challenging
dark
tense
medium-paced
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
yelafeld's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
inarasbooks's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
edwardscrowtown's review against another edition
challenging
dark
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
lizziestudieshistory's review against another edition
3.0
3.5 overall - technically these reviews contain spoilers, but I do think Greek Mythology shouldn't count because they're so well known?
Agamemnon - 4.5
Agamemnon is by far the best of these three plays, even by (what I know of) 5th century Athenian expectations. The motivations of all the characters are clear, well presented and the agons ACTUALLY MADE DECENT ARGUMENTS. They're not stunning or as complex as the ones put forward by Euripides or Sophocles, but I've read a lot worse!
The strength of this play comes from the female characters, Clytemnestra in particular is a stunningly complex woman (Cersei Lannister reminds me of her A LOT!) Everytime she's on stage she steals the episode and I fall a little bit more in love with her... I just love complicated and slightly villainous women...
To be honest, the major let down of this play is Agamemnon himself, he doesn't really do anything or have any character - the most interesting act he managed to do was die. Not the most inspiring moment for such a huge figure in Greek mythology. (This is why I standby the fact this play should be called Clytemnestra - it would also be a huge fuck you to Aeschylus for The Eumenides!)
The Libation Bearers - 2/5
I was so disappointed by this play - Clytemnestra was SUCH a GOOD character I was expecting similar treatment for a least Orestes, Electra would have been nice but no one can do better than Euripides.
No one had any character, all of the brilliance of Clytemnestra from Agamemnon (and The Eumenides) was destroyed, and I was left underwhelmed...
Honestly, middle book syndrome was a thing even in Ancient Greece apparently. It's also the beginning of the end for decent agons and stichomythia from Aeschylus.
The Eumenides - 2.5/5 ( 3/5 for the beginning half... 1/5 for the second)
I was waiting for the sexism to kick in throughout all of these plays and BOY DID IT COME OUT STRONG. I was actually enjoying this play in the first half... The discussion of Delphi's history, Apollo (actually acting like a reasonable god) purifying Orestes, and Clytemnestra's ghost hounding the Furies to avenge her murder. All good stuff, highly entertaining!
We hit Athens, and it looks promising with the Furies catching up with Orestes and Athena arriving to judge him before they can hound him out of Athens. And then we get the trial. That trial. Where Apollo (really man, you're my favourite don't do this to me!) argued that:
1. murdering your husband is wrong because it violates the scared bond of marriage, but
2. matricide is okay because 'the woman you call the mother of the child is not the parent, just a nurse to the seed. The MAN is the source of life...' in other words women don't parent children, they're just incubators.
I knew this was coming, I knew the ancient Greek view on women and parenthood but that was rough. I just can't, I'm out. I'll be reading Euripides for the foreseeable future if I feel the urge to read anymore Greek tragedies...
Also as a final note. The Furies actually put forth the most convincing argument in these plays? They had a well reasoned, well articulated set of points to tell the audience WHY Orestes was guilty and needed to pay for his crime... Apollo going 'but Zeus told me to' and 'women aren't important' are on the same level as a toddler throwing their toys out of the pram. Apollo, you're better than this, at least construct a decent argument next time!
Agamemnon - 4.5
Agamemnon is by far the best of these three plays, even by (what I know of) 5th century Athenian expectations. The motivations of all the characters are clear, well presented and the agons ACTUALLY MADE DECENT ARGUMENTS. They're not stunning or as complex as the ones put forward by Euripides or Sophocles, but I've read a lot worse!
The strength of this play comes from the female characters, Clytemnestra in particular is a stunningly complex woman (Cersei Lannister reminds me of her A LOT!) Everytime she's on stage she steals the episode and I fall a little bit more in love with her... I just love complicated and slightly villainous women...
To be honest, the major let down of this play is Agamemnon himself, he doesn't really do anything or have any character - the most interesting act he managed to do was die. Not the most inspiring moment for such a huge figure in Greek mythology. (This is why I standby the fact this play should be called Clytemnestra - it would also be a huge fuck you to Aeschylus for The Eumenides!)
The Libation Bearers - 2/5
I was so disappointed by this play - Clytemnestra was SUCH a GOOD character I was expecting similar treatment for a least Orestes, Electra would have been nice but no one can do better than Euripides.
No one had any character, all of the brilliance of Clytemnestra from Agamemnon (and The Eumenides) was destroyed, and I was left underwhelmed...
Honestly, middle book syndrome was a thing even in Ancient Greece apparently. It's also the beginning of the end for decent agons and stichomythia from Aeschylus.
The Eumenides - 2.5/5 ( 3/5 for the beginning half... 1/5 for the second)
I was waiting for the sexism to kick in throughout all of these plays and BOY DID IT COME OUT STRONG. I was actually enjoying this play in the first half... The discussion of Delphi's history, Apollo (actually acting like a reasonable god) purifying Orestes, and Clytemnestra's ghost hounding the Furies to avenge her murder. All good stuff, highly entertaining!
We hit Athens, and it looks promising with the Furies catching up with Orestes and Athena arriving to judge him before they can hound him out of Athens. And then we get the trial. That trial. Where Apollo (really man, you're my favourite don't do this to me!) argued that:
1. murdering your husband is wrong because it violates the scared bond of marriage, but
2. matricide is okay because 'the woman you call the mother of the child is not the parent, just a nurse to the seed. The MAN is the source of life...' in other words women don't parent children, they're just incubators.
I knew this was coming, I knew the ancient Greek view on women and parenthood but that was rough. I just can't, I'm out. I'll be reading Euripides for the foreseeable future if I feel the urge to read anymore Greek tragedies...
Also as a final note. The Furies actually put forth the most convincing argument in these plays? They had a well reasoned, well articulated set of points to tell the audience WHY Orestes was guilty and needed to pay for his crime... Apollo going 'but Zeus told me to' and 'women aren't important' are on the same level as a toddler throwing their toys out of the pram. Apollo, you're better than this, at least construct a decent argument next time!
mags549's review against another edition
4.0
We read this for my Greek Civ class and it wasn't bad? Some old stories are hard to get through or understand with the archaic writing style and words, but this one was easy to follow and seeing each person get justice dealt to them was fun?
I still say Clytemnestra was in the right to kill Agamemnon after he killed her daughter and tricked her into bringing her there in the first place. Sure, sure, you shouldn't kill your husband (or your mother), but sometimes that's what a situation calls for-
I still say Clytemnestra was in the right to kill Agamemnon after he killed her daughter and tricked her into bringing her there in the first place. Sure, sure, you shouldn't kill your husband (or your mother), but sometimes that's what a situation calls for-
hanrivermonster's review against another edition
3.0
First and second play follow the same murder format, which is dull. The third and final one is easily the best with its trial and interesting dialogue.
flowerbinsh's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Read as a requirement for my history class.
I've read Agamemnon before for my Ancient Lit class, but reading the trilogy together really provided such a great story. The way the characters are portrayed are so entrancing in my opinion. I couldn't help but feel so drawn to the women and how they are written and portrayed.
Agamemnon is definitely still my favourite out of the three, but I still loved the arguments and themes of Justice and if the mortal are allowed to bestow such judgement onto others in the later two plays.
I think I'd reread all of these, especially Agamemnon.
I've read Agamemnon before for my Ancient Lit class, but reading the trilogy together really provided such a great story. The way the characters are portrayed are so entrancing in my opinion. I couldn't help but feel so drawn to the women and how they are written and portrayed.
Agamemnon is definitely still my favourite out of the three, but I still loved the arguments and themes of Justice and if the mortal are allowed to bestow such judgement onto others in the later two plays.
I think I'd reread all of these, especially Agamemnon.