|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of central importance is the hostility of the Danaids toward marriage with their cousins, an aversion which forces certain questions upon the critic of the play. Are the Danaids opposed to their cousins alone or to men in general? What is the cause of their aversion?4 The reasoning of those who hold that the Danaids are opposed specifically to marriage with their cousins is usually based upon the force and violence which characterize the pursuit of the Danaids by the Aigyptids. But it must be kept in mind that our knowledge of the Aigyptids is based almost entirely on what the Danaids say they feel about them. This is an often overlooked aspect of any dramatic situation what one character says about another is not necessarily to be accepted as fact (or better, as anything but subjective fact).5 The view which seems to have widest acceptance may be represented by Winnington-Ingram's statement (1961: 144) that "the violent approach of the sons of Aigyptos has warped the feminine instincts of the Danaids and turned them against marriage as such." But this is neither more plausible nor more logical than to hold that the warped feminine instincts of the Danaids cause any sexual encounters to be regarded as acts of violence. Nor would this be a characteristic peculiar to the Danaids alone; one of the major themes of both mythology and psychology is the virginal perception of sexual encounter as rape, a dread of "the fight of the sexes as a deadly issue of violence, abuse, and defeat" (Thass-Thienemann 1967: 365). To say that the Danaids are opposed to marriage with the Aigyptids because of the violence of the latter may be true, but is not necessarily an exhaustive statement of causality; to say that the Danaids are opposed to all marriage because of the violence of the Aigyptids is petitio principii and true only if the absence of other determinants can be shown. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The cause of the "warped feminine instincts" of the Danaids has been studied by Kouretas, who finds in the Danaids "la personalité des femmes qui ont peur de la maternité avec négation de leur rôle de partenaire sexuel (frigidité) et attitude agressive envers le sexe masculin" (1957: 597). This view, virtually a word for word restatement in psychoanalytic terms of that of Méautis,6 is unfortunately not developed by Kouretas beyond the statement of the Danaids' oedipal attachment to their father, his "counter-oedipal complex'' in regard to them, and a few remarks on the "masculinity |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
4 See Garvie (1969) 215224 for the range of scholarly answers to these questions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 The Aigyptids themselves do not make an appearance in the first play of the trilogy, and we can say nothing at all about the nature of their subsequent appearances. They are, to be sure, represented by a Herald who is the epitome of violence, but, given the usual character of heralds in Greek tragedy, it is not necessary that his attributes mirror those of his masters. Furthermore, if the Danaids are indeed hostile to all men and any marriage, then even if it were to be proven that the Aigyptids were absolute villains we would still be entitled to believe that there must be factors within the Danaids which cause them to fear all men and not merely some men. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 Compare Kouretas (1957) 598 with Méautis (1936) 49. |
|
|
|
|
|