November MOR: Lysistrata

For the month of November, I am reading Lysistrata by Aristophanes. My partner is, once again, Rachel Minami! I’m only a little ways into the story, but so far I'm enjoying this more than I anticipated. It's a lot different from other classical texts we've read before, especially because of the focus on women. I feel like all of the ancient Greek or Roman texts we've read for English class in the past have been all about guys, which makes sense for the time period and a patriarchal society and all that. I’m excited to see how this plot plays out, too. It definitely doesn’t seem like the kind of storyline I would expect from something written in the B.C. years—it seems like the premise of a modern sitcom or chick flick! The opening scene in particular reads like the pilot episode of a TV show, with all the main characters getting introduced. I’m interested to see how these women change or develop over the course of the play—or to see if they don’t change at all. Lysistrata herself is hard for me to figure out at this point. She is angry and impassioned, neither of which were typical female characteristics during this time. She is tired of the way men talk about their wives, but is also angry that the women don’t stand up for themselves or care to get involved in anything. She says to her neighbor Calonice, “My heart’s on fire, Calonice—I’m so angry at married women, at us, because, although men say we’re devious characters…when I call them all to meet here to discuss some serious business, they just stay in bed and don’t show up” (Lines 9-11, 13-15). Despite this righteous anger at the mistreatment of women, she and Calonice proceed to objectify every woman that comes to meet with them, making comments about their bodies. Do you think that this could serve to characterize Lysistrata as a more masculine figure? I’m interested to hear your thoughts on the play so far!

Comments

Rachel M said…
So excited to be your partner again, Halle! I agree that it’s super cool that this play focuses more on women. Although, I do remember reading that the play, while focusing on women taking action, takes a more satirical approach that can seem to empower women on the surface but actually makes fun of women in many ways (I can’t remember where I read that, though). That could be an answer to your question about Lysistrata as a more masculine figure and your observation of the way that Lysistrata and her friends objectify all other women. Do we not act similarly in today’s society, though? Girls make comments about other girls’ bodies and nobody thinks anything of it (unless it’s mean), but when guys make comments about girls’ bodies everybody goes up in arms. Not to say that I think it should be considered okay when women are objectified by men, I’m just saying we generally accept objectifying comments easier when they come from girls. I think this is an interesting connection to the present day to consider. One of the things that I found interesting was the very beginning when Lysistrata claims, “If they’d called a Bacchic celebration /or some festival for Pan or Colias/ or for Genetyllis, you’d not be able/ to move around through all the kettle drums./ But as it is, there are no women here” (Lines 1-5). Right from the beginning Lysistrata implies that the women of Greece are basically drunkards and festivals are the only thing that will get them out of bed in the morning. In my book there is a little note to go along with this part that explains how in Greek comedies women are portrayed as very fond of drinking and dancing when in reality, these activities would normally be extremely restricted by their husbands. However, in the context of religious festivals these rules were not as enforced. Male-written Greek comedies liked to portray the religious activities of women as merely an excuse for drinking. I thought this was a very interesting point to note. To me, this seems like an example of what I explained before about the underlying criticism of women right from the get go. What do you think? Do you think there’s disguised mocking of women laced into this play that seems like it should be glorifying women?
November 29, 2019 at 10:19 PM
Halle said…
I didn’t even think about that connection to the modern world! You’re absolutely correct, though—it’s very easy and common for women today to dismiss objectifying comments from other women, even if they might be made uncomfortable by said comments. I definitely think there’s mockery (I love that word) disguised as empowerment, at least in the beginning for sure. I’ll be intrigued to see if/how it continues or gets worse throughout the rest of the play. In the section I just finished reading, all the women take their oath to abstain from their husbands until the fighting stops. Lysistrata has Calonice repeat the oath line by line on behalf of the other women. Lysistrata also tells the group of ladies that women are going to take over the Acropolis and the treasury of Athens so that no more money can be used on war spending. I know that this is a comedy and it isn’t supposed to be realistic, but if they really cared about ending the war, I feel like taking over the treasury and cutting off the war funds is by far more effective than forcing their husbands into involuntary abstinence. Do you think this could be another example of the disguised mockery you mentioned in your response? It’s as if Aristophanes is saying, “oh, look at these silly women, always making things more complicated than they need to be!” After they swear the oath, the women hear loud noises coming from nearby, and Lysistrata reveals that it is the sound of the other women taking over the Acropolis. Lysistrata’s confidence and leadership really shine here. Calonice asks, “Don’t you think the men will band together / and march against us—and quickly, too” (Lines 246-247), to which Lysistrata replies, “I’m not so worried about them. They’ll come / carrying their torches and making threats / but they’ll not pry these gates of ours apart / not unless they agree to our demands” (Lines 248-251). However, I’m wondering if her certainty will ultimately prove to just be hubris, and if the women will end up losing. I know I already asked a question earlier, but just for fun: do you think you’re more of a Lysistrata or a Calonice here? I feel like I tend to be a Lysistrata, since I’m so passionate and competitive, but my certainty isn’t always right in the end, and I wind up making a fool of myself.
November 30, 2019 at 8:33 PM
Rachel M said…
I definitely think that part about the treasury could be a bit of disguised mockery thrown in there. It’s crazy how much more you notice when you’re really looking for it! Even the small things seem to be little mockeries. I think it’s interesting how the women are anxious to hear Lysistrata’s plan when she mentions an end to the war, as they miss their husbands, but they immediately shy away when Lysistrata reveals that the plan involves abstaining from sex. Before said abstinence is mentioned, the women all agree that there is much they would give up if it meant the end of the war, Myrrhine even going so far as to say, “Of course, we’ll do it,
even if we have to die” (Lines 134-135). I find it strange that the women claim they are ready to give up anything to end the war, but they cannot give up something like sex, I mean, I guess I understand that sex is good (not from personal experience!) but they’ve already gone a long time without it seeing as their husbands have been gone for many months. It doesn’t make sense to me that they would be so unwilling to give it up just for a short time in order to end the war when they have already been pushed into abstinence already. To answer your second question, I would say I’m a combination of both Lysistrata and Calonice in this section. I often suffer the same hesitance and questioning nature that Calonice embodies, but many times I do end up overriding my own thoughts against certain actions and going along with them anyways. It really just depends on the situation for me, but if I had to pick one I think I would say Calonice. I think my insecurities stop me from acting more often than not. Although, it is good to think deeper about what you do before you simply throw yourself into action. I mean, Lysistrata has a great plan and all that she is eager to enact, but she doesn’t even account for the fact that their abstinence will have no effect on men who are not at home to even ask for sex in the first place. Do you think Aristophanes meant to have this little inconsistency appear in his play? Do you think the lack of presence from the husbands will affect the sex-strike later in the story?
November 30, 2019 at 11:34 PM
Halle said…
I had been wondering the same thing about the men being away fighting anyway! And from my limited knowledge of what life in Ancient Greece was like at the time, it seems like even if the men had been at home, Lysistrata’s abstinence ploy probably would’ve just led the men to seek out prostitutes, or other unmarried women. It seems unlikely that Lysistrata would be able to get each and every woman for miles around to agree to her plan, especially not prostitutes who would be depending on the money. And to answer your question about whether or not Aristophanes meant to put this in, even though this loophole isn’t ever stated directly, I think it could be intentional. If the reader picks up on it, it adds another layer to the false empowerment, making Lysistrata seem like a fool for being so certain about her plan. I don’t think that this loophole will ever actually happen in the play, since that would be more along the lines of outright mockery of women, rather than the disguised empowerment we’ve seen thus far, but who knows, I could be proven wrong. I wish we could know more about some of these other women, like the ones leading the charge into the Acropolis. The leader of the chorus of old women has a quote that is particularly interesting to me. She says, “Listen, friend. You should never raise your hand / against your neighbour. If you do, then I / will have to punch you in the eye. I’d prefer / to sit quietly at home, like a young girl / and not come here to injure anyone / or agitate the nest, unless someone / disturbs the hive and makes me angry” (Lines 471-477). I think this seems to be the mindset of many of the women in this story, perhaps with the exception of Lysistrata, who doesn’t mind not sitting quietly at home. To me, this appears as more of a true kind of empowerment than what we’ve seen before: this woman knows who she is, and how she thinks, and she is prepared to defend herself for it. Do you agree that this could be true empowerment without any veiled insult? Also, we’ve really only talked about the women so far (which makes sense, since this play is centered on them), but do you have any thoughts on the men we’ve met, like the chorus of old men?
December 1, 2019 at 4:51 PM
Rachel M said…
I totally didn’t think of the fact that the men could just go to prostitutes! You’re so smart. The quote that you also refer to seems to be actually pretty good in the sense that it does paint women in a good light that isn’t tainted by satire. Another good instance of the women being portrayed well is when a character simply labeled “Old Woman A” recalls an experience in the market: “ By god, / I myself saw a cavalry commander— / he had long hair and was on horseback— / pouring out some pudding he’d just bought / from an old woman into his helmet. / Another Thracian was waving his spear / and his shield, as well, just like Tereus, / and terrifying the woman selling figs / while gobbling down the ripest ones she had” (Lines 660-668). I liked this memory because to me it seemed like Aristophanes genuinely recognized the fact that men can be super dumb sometimes. I can appreciate humor making fun of women, because I believe it’s important to be able to laugh at oneself, but it is also nice to see men made fun of as well so the whole thing is not just one big jab at women. This also goes along with my answer to your other question about the men in the story. To me to chorus of old men seems really dumb as well. They are easily overwhelmed by the women in the story, especially the opposing chorus of old women. They provide a lot of comic relief by portraying the reality of Greek masculinity. They think that simply ordering the women to stop will actually make them stop, and they have no idea what to do when their orders are not followed. And in truth, the chorus of old women actually end up being more effective than Lysistrata herself, as they manage to take control and hold on to the acropolis. The acropolis seems to be what the men are most concerned about getting back, rather than sex. So what do you think about the chorus of old men? Do you think that Aristophanes is able to balance out his mockery of women by poking a bit of fun at men as well?
December 1, 2019 at 6:41 PM
Halle said…
I completely agree! I think part of what makes this a really timeless comedy is the fact that it makes fun of everyone to some degree. I feel like a lot of times today comedy falls short by targeting one person or group of people too heavily, to the point that it’s not funny anymore—it’s just mean. Aristophanes does a good job, in my opinion, of making everyone in this play sort of stupid. However, that’s just how it comes across reading it. I’m sure watching it being performed originally it might’ve been different, especially because I think all the female characters would’ve been played by men. However, I do have to disagree with you on one point: you said it seems like the men are more concerned with getting the Acropolis back, rather than sex. I feel like that’s what it seems like in the middle of the play, but by the end I think I may be persuaded the other way. They are very desperate for their wives. One thing that was very interesting to me was the fact that we only see Lysistrata’s plan in action once: when Myrrhine teases her husband. I feel like in the end, the point of this play isn’t really the abstinence plan itself (that part is the main comedic element), but the purpose the plan is meant to accomplish, which, in the end, it actually does. I don’t know about you, but I was surprised that there was actually a resolution in the end. I was expecting it to be one of those sort of tragedy-comedies, where the audience is left without any closure. Did you feel the same way? In the end, Lysistrata says, “Come now, since everything has turned out well / take these women back with you, you Spartans / And, you Athenians, these ones are yours / Let each man stand beside his wife, each wife / beside her man, and then to celebrate / good times let’s dance in honour of the gods / And for all future time, let’s never make / the same mistake again” (Lines 1271-1276). I think Lysistrata must be feeling pretty proud of herself that her plan worked, but I think the last two lines are the most important here: the main message of this play, to me, is to never let history repeat itself. When peace is attained, try to keep it that way for as long as possible. Maybe that’s not what Aristophanes meant (considering this is a comedy, so I’m not sure how deep of a meaning he meant to convey), but it’s the message I got out of it! Overall I enjoyed this. It was definitely harder to follow in comparison to F451 and the other books we’ve read in class so far, but I was surprised at how funny it actually was, even hundreds of years later. Did you like it? I’m excited to hear your final thoughts!
December 1, 2019 at 9:03 PM
Rachel M said…
I definitely agree with you that I was not expecting an actual resolution. I honestly believed that the war was going to end on its own or something and all of Lysistrata’s plans would have been for naught. I have to say that I liked this ending better than what I was expecting, though! I honestly thought that it was funny when all the women started making up excuses for why they needed to leave the cause. I thought it was so funny when one woman said she was going to have a baby and then when Lysistrata discovered that she had hid a helmet under her dress to make her look pregnant, she said that she was going to birth the baby into the helmet. I don’t know why that was so funny to me, but it made me chuckle on the inside. Another thing that I thought was clever and funny was the name of Myrrhine’s husband. When he comes looking for her he introduces himself to Lysistrata as, “Cinesias, her husband, / from Paeonidae” (Lines 853-854). My book has a little note that explains how his name is a play on words, with “Cinesias” making a pun with the word “kinein” (which essentially means “screw”) and “Paeonidae” making a pun with the word “paiein” (which essentially means “bang”). I honestly thought this little addition was really funny, and I’m proud of Aristophanes for paying attention to small details like that which really make the play extra funny. I also agree that if any big moral can be obtained from this comedy, it would be that war is bad and people should try to prolong peace as much as possible. I also agree that this story was a bit harder to follow, as is usually the case with classical works, but I am genuinely glad that I had the chance to read it. I have hated most of the other Greek or Roman works that we’ve had to read for school, so I was not expecting to like this one very much. However, I do think it was pretty funny and it’s definitely the best out of all the classical pieces that we’ve read in school. Overall, it was pretty good! I’m so happy I could read this with you!
December 1, 2019 at 9:52 PM
Mrs. Disher said…
Gotta love your comment: "crazy how much you notice when you're really looking for it"... made my AP teacher heart sing a little bit. Good job tracking layers and types of comedy and theme development (as much as there is in a comedy) all the way through. A note about the old woman whose empowerment you admire...I wonder if there isn't satire there, too. After all, she praises women who keep the peace (by staying home and not saying their piece) by loudly saying her own piece and threatening to bust heads. Are we supposed to laugh at her hipocrisy or meekly admit that at home and out of trouble is a woman's place? I don't know, but I love the possibilities. Grade on Portals.
December 17, 2019 at 5:08 PM
Post a Comment