Lysistrata (Dover Thrift Editions)

Rating:
Summary: Redemptive Passion
Review: There must be a control for the passion of lust and sex in thef play and this is one woman's idea how the civil war can be ended'. Unlike "Romeo and Juliet" it is neither ethically deficient nor deterministic: odd for a play whose central theme would appear superficially to be sex. It is about control. The passion of power. There is a reason for wanting power that is noble, and that noble reason is what makes the play ethical. This is not what most people think hearing the name of.the play. There is heat. The heat of lust. Sexual tension is created, ready to explode. So many people all want to do the same thing at the same time. The men ache in erection, seem physically in pain with no relief in sight and will resort to any means short of violence to have their release. The men admire and have lustful thoughts and fantasies about other women but stay with their wives. The purity of the play Women create the lust, moral chaos (p.46) But men created the depravity in the women (p.46-47) The male takes the blame. The Christians certainly change this concept later with the apple, Eve and that garden The second strata of the passion is much more poignant, more endearing, more enduring. Women no longer want to lose men through injury, time or death to war. As mothers, they no longer want to see their daughters die unmarried, childless, never knowing love either emotionally or sexually. It is the passion of women to end the slaughter and decimation by ending the excuse of the oldest of boys' clubs, that of man as warrior, protector. The women want man as lover, father. The women also want to be treated more as equals, allies, partners, friends (p. 94) In "Romeo and Juliet" we saw what passion destroyed. In "Lysistrata" we see what passion can create.

Miguel Llora

Rating:
Summary: One way to end a war
Review: Until now, I had known Lysistrata only by reputation. What can I say - I should have read it myself long since. This play seems to offer everything. It goes beyond just bawdy, but never turns salacious. It's got silly wordplay, but real social commentary. The battle of the sexes is about real battle this time, and Aristophanes fires a few well-aimed shots at both the men and the women. It's a classic of the Western canon, but amusing and readable. Also, for those who dread literature that's "good for them," it's short. The script comes in under 100 pages, and they're not dense pages.

As I said, this is a modern rendering full of wordplay and chants for the traditional Greek chorus. I'm afraid that the easy, humorous style puts me on edge, though. If a play starts in classical Greek, then ends up in modern English with proper rhyme, scansion, and dialect(!), I know the translator has taken some serious liberties with the libretto. Still I'm torn. Which is more important, academic integrity in creating a version for English readers, or being true to the popular, funny, bawdy tone that Aristophanes intended? I really can't answer that question.

It's a great play in a readable translation. There's a good bit of explanatory material, but not the kind that interferes with the flow of the play. I recommend this Lysistrata if you want the fun in the play, but I have reservations about the rigor of the translation.

//wiredweird

Rating:
Summary: A ghastly translation
Review: What can you say about a translation of Aristophanes which makes liberal use of just about every prejudice the modern reader might have about dialects of English? The "poor white trash" accent used for some characters here is an insult to amy reader's intellignce; the excuse that similar prejudices existed in ancient Greek is a thin one. AVOID this edition at all costs!!