希臘文明中的意識形態-論尤里皮底思的悲劇與他者形象-

Abstract

傳統的戲劇研究通常以型式結構的角度研究希臘悲劇，也就是以亞里斯多德式的方法分析該劇的六大要素：情節、人物、思想、語言、音樂以及場景。通常這樣的方式在於發現劇中的主旨，而且藉由此展示希臘悲劇正面的影響力。也就是使得觀眾經由洗滌獲得智慧，也因此，希臘悲劇被視為該文化的結晶，呈現出其崇尚理性的一面，而這樣的特質也成為後來整個西方文化的主要\\r表徵之一。然而，隨著西方現代戲劇的出現，理性以及高貴人物的理念開始受到挑戰，例如荒謬戲劇劇作家貝克特，藉著作品質疑為何以理性為傲的西方世界竟然發動二次世界大戰，並且對他國犯下非人道的罪行。雖然一般認為荒謬戲劇對西方理性作了最多的質疑，然而其實早在希臘時期，尤里皮底斯就藉著他的悲劇，孤獨地發出對希臘理性文明的挑戰，尤里皮底斯因此被劇評家稱為反動派。但是，他劇中描述的慘況無法被同胞所領悟，然而在二十一世紀的當代，尤里皮底斯的觀點卻能引起共鳴。例如，布雷希特或當代文化研究解構的態度，就是在檢審任何文本中的意識形態。因此，本論文以文化研究中與意識形態相關的觀念為主要研究方法，加上背景之分析，以探討尤里皮底斯如何經由他的悲劇，特別是他者的形象，揭露希臘文明中的意識形態。

Traditional theatre studies usually approach Greek tragedy from a formalist point of view; e.g. using an Aristotelian method to analyze a play in terms of its six elements： plot, character, thought, language, music, and spectacle. Usually, this kind of so-called objective study aims to reveal the main ideas of the play which is closely related to how Greek culture believes in the positive power of tragedy—to gain a sense of catharsis so that Greek citizens can learn wisdom through suffering. As a result, Greek tragedy is regarded as the epitome of Greek culture, capturing her belief in the positive side of reason, a feature which later on also characterizes Western civilization. However, with the emergence of modern drama, this belief in the reason and the image of noble tragic hero is gradually challenged. For example, in the theatre of the absurd, playwright Samuel Beckett questions through his work why a civilization which is so boastful of its reason can start two world wars and commits foul inhumanity on other races. As a matter of fact, Western drama does not need to wait until the twentieth century to question the ironic phenomenon of Western civilization. As early as in Greek times, Euripides has uttered a pungent sense of skepticism on Greek ideology. The aim of this paper, therefore, is to examine how Euripides’ tragedy reveals the hidden ideology in Greek culture. Compared with Aeschylus and Sophocles, Euripides is the least welcome and the most discredited playwright. In the plays of the former two dramatists, the Greek world is pictured as governed by poetic justice and the power of the rational Apollo will finally triumph. However, Euripides’ plays portray a decaying Greek society where irrationality dominates and his contemporaries are not ready to accept such a shocking fact. Euripides definitely has a very different view on Greek culture compared with Aeschylus and Sophocles. Critics therefore call Euripides ‘the crack-up playwright.’ His plays do not deal with Greek gods or the noble tragic heroes. Instead, his plays are full of the pitiable images of foreigners who have to face their misfortunes caused by the Greeks. As a result, Euripides’ ragedy is a protest against the Greek society, a view which cannot be appreciated by his contemporaries. Nevertheless, more recent dramatists can share Euripides’ insight. Bertolt Brecht, for example, encourages his audience to examine what looks most natural in one’s society and challenges the status quo. Specifically speaking, such belief resembles contemporary deconstruction attitude in some literary theories, such as cultural studies which are related to examining ideology behind certain social facts. Therefore, this paper will adopt related ideas on ideology to examine how some of Euripides’ plays can reveal the hidden ideology in his Greek society.