Knemon's Hamartia

Michael Anderson

doi:10.1017/S0017383500017897

Knemon's Hamartia

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 January 2009

Michael Anderson

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

In a recent article on Menander, Professor Arnott acknowledges his debt to the conclusions of the late Armin Schäfer with regard to the construction of the Dyskolos. Schäfer's theory, briefly stated, is that Menander was faced in this play with the problem of combining two different themes—the romantic love-interest (involving Sostratos and Knemon's daughter) demanded of New Comedy, and a character-study of the misanthropic Knemon. Menander comes near to a solution, argues Schäfer, but these two elements are basically irreconcilable, and the play consequently fails to achieve complete unity of action. In the following pages I shall try to show that the conflict between the two sides of the play is an imaginary one (created in our minds, perhaps, by our knowledge of the lines along which ‘comedy of intrigue’ and ‘comedy of manners’ subsequently developed), and that the carefully integrated plot reflects a unity of theme in the comedy as a whole.

Type: Research Article
Information: Greece & Rome , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , October 1970 , pp. 199 - 217

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017383500017897 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © The Classical Association 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 199 note 1} Cf. Arnott, W. G., ‘Menander, gui vitae ostendit vitam…’, G & R xv (1968), 1–17Google Scholar; Schäfer, Armin, Menanders Dyskolos: Untersuchungen zur dramatischen Technik (Beiträge zur klassischen Philologie 14, Meisenheim am Glan, 1965).Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 2} Op. cit. 53, 79.

^{page 199 note 3} Op. cit. 8 f.

^{page 199 note 4} ἔστιν δὲ θος μὲν τὸ τοιοῦτον ὃ δηλοῑ τὴν προαίρεσιν, ὁποῐά τις ἐν ος οὐκ ἔστι δῆλον ἢ προαιρεῖται ἢ φεύγει (6. 1450^b7 ff. Bywater).

^{page 200 note 1} καὶ μάλ' ε,

οὐ πάνυ δ' ἀρεσκόντες ἐμοί (68–9).

The text used throughout is Handley, E. W.'s (London, 1965)Google Scholar; passages in translation are quoted from Philip Vellacott's version (Oxford, 1960 and Harmondsworth, 1967).

^{page 200 note 2} οὐ πεπλασμέν γὰρ ἤθει πρὸς τὸ πρᾶγμ' ἐλήλυθ[ας (764).

^{page 201 note 1} Post, L. A., TAPhA xci (1960), 159Google Scholar, suggests that Gorgias' mind is made up because he has seen the girl, brought on the stage by Sostratos at 1. 841; but the personal attractions of the proposed bride do not come into the question at all. Gorgias is persuaded on purely ‘ethical’ grounds that it is right and proper for him to marry the daughter of a man so much more wealthy than himself.

^{page 201 note 2} Cf. Poet. 6. 1449^b36 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 201 note 3} The whole of 1. 638 is spoken by Gorgias. A dicolon before ἡγοῦ indicates that he turns from Sostratos and speaks to Simiche (cf. Handley ad loc.).

^{page 202 note 1} τὰς δ' ἀρετὰς λαμβάνομεν ἐνεργήσαντες πρότερον, ὥσπερ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων τεχνῶν ἃ γὰρ δεῖ μαθόντας ποιεῖν, ταῦτα ποιοῦντες μανθάνομεν, οῖον οἰκοδομοῦντες οἰκοδόμοι γίνονται καὶ κιθαρίοντες κιθαρισταί οὕτω δὴ καὶ τὰ μὲν δίκαια πράττοντες δίκαιοι γινόμεθα, τὰ δὲ σώφρονα σώφρονες, τὰ δ' ἀνδρεῖα ἀνθρεἀοι

^{page 202 note 2} ἡ δ' ἠθικὴ [ἀρετὴ] ἐξ ἔθους περιγίνεται (1103^a17).

^{page 202 note 3} πράττοντες γὰρ τὰ ἐν τοῖς συναλλάγμασι τοῖς πρὸς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους γινόμεθα οἵ μὲν δίκαιοι ο δὲ ἄδικοι, πράττοντες δὲ τὰ ἐν τοῖς δεινοῖς καὶ ἐθιόμενοι φοβεῖσθαι ἢ θαρρεῖν οἳ μὲν ἀνδρεῖοι οἳ δὲ δειλοί. ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ τὰ περὶ τὰς ἐπιθυμίας ἔχει καὶ τὰ περὶ τὰς ὀργάς οὃ μὲν γὰρ σώφρονες καὶ πρᾶοι γίνονται, οἳ δ' ἀκόλαστοι καὶ ὀργίλοι, οἳ μὲν ἐκ τοῦ οὑτωσὶ ἐν αὐτοῖς ἀναστρέφεσθαι, οἵ δὲ ἐκ τοῦ οὑτωσί (iii. 2. 1112^a14 ff.).

^{page 202 note 4} ἑκούσιον μὲν δὴ φαίνεται [τὸ προαιρεῖσθαι], τὸ δ' ἑκούσιον οὐ πᾶν προαιρετόν. ἀλλ' ρά γε τὸ προβεβουλευμένον; ἡ γὰρ προαίρεσις μετὰ λόγου καὶ διανοίας. ὑποσημαίνειν δ' ἔοικε καὶ τοὔνομα ὡς ὂν πρὸ ἑτἑρων αἱρετόν (iii. 2. 1112^a14 ff.).

^{page 204 note 1} Handley, , on 329 ff.Google Scholar, says that Knemon is shown to have ‘a spark of human feeling in him’ when Gorgias describes how he takes his daughter to work in the fields with him and will not talk to anybody except her. But this does not appear to be Menander's intention: the object of the speech is to impress Sostratos with what a difficult proposition he is up against, and Gorgias begins by telling Sostratos that Knemon ὑπερβολή τίς ἐστι τοῦ κακοῦ (326).

^{page 204 note 2} A similar effect might be obtained in a modern comedy if a dramatist, after creating a character as grotesque and unpleasant as Knemon, were to win sympathy for him in the final act by showing (without straining the credulity of the audience) that he had suffered a ‘traumatic’ experience in childhood which accounted for his behaviour in terms of Freudian psychology.

^{page 205 note 1} Menanders Dyskolos, 48 ff., 53.Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 1} TAPhA xci (1960), 152 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 2} In the event, Gorgias is not able to prove himself χρήσιμος to Sostratos until he has first performed the altruistic act of Knemon's rescue, when he might have reasoned (as the old man points out) that there was no need for him to be χρήσιμος on this occasion: ‘οὐδὲν ἡμῑν γέγονας αὐτὸς χρήσιμος, οὐδ' ἐγώ σοι νῦν’ (728 f.). Sostratos thus benefits from Gorgias' friendship, but only after a complicated series of actions involving Knemon and his own readiness to work in the fields.

^{page 206 note 3} Cf. Handley, on 341 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 207 note 1} Even so, in presenting this vignette of Knemon's daughter, Menander seems to go beyond what is customary in New Comedy: Post (AJP lxxx [1959], 403)Google Scholar notes that in the Dyskolos ‘a virgin speaks on the comic stage for the first time’. (On the girl's character, cf. Handley ad loc.)

^{page 208 note 1} It might be observed in passing that the ethical basis of this play, although it may be a fine and generous one, is characteristic of the ancient world and not of the modern. There is plenty of liberality, but little charity. Good deeds are performed, not for their own sake or for the sake of some reward in a future life, but as part of a coolly rational and calculated policy that will, Fortune permitting, earn its reward in this world. Its starting-point is an intellectual belief that a decent, civilized society is created by decent, civilized behaviour, and not a religious or emotional faith in the essential goodness of man. Perhaps it is because of this difference that Menander's theme is not immediately apparent to a modern reader or audience.

^{page 208 note 2} Else, G. F., Aristotle's Poetics: the Argument (Cambridge, Mass., 1957).CrossRef Google Scholar

^{page 208 note 3} Else, , op. cit. 379.Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 1} Cf. Else, , op. cit. 380 f.Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 2} Op. cit. 385.

^{page 209 note 3} Else, , op. cit. 531.Google Scholar Cf. Post, ‘Aristotle and Menander’, TAPhA lxix (1938), 1–42.Google Scholar

^{page 210 note 1} ὁ μήτε ἀρετῇ διαφέρων καὶ δικαιοσύνῃ μήτε διὰ κακίαν καὶ μοχθηρίαν κεταβάλλων εἰς τὴν δυστυχίαν ἀλλὰ δι' ἁμαρτίαν τινὰ τῶν ἐν μεγάλῃ δόξῃ ὄντων καὶ εὐτυχί (13. 1453^a8 ff.).

^{page 210 note 2} Cf. Eth. Nic. vi. 8.Google Scholar 1142^a20 ff.: ἔτι ἡ ἁμαρτία ἢ περὶ τὸ καθόλου ἐν τ βουλεύσασθαι ἢ περὶ τὸ καθ' ἓκαστον ἢ γὰρ ὃτι πάντα τὰ βαρύσταθμα ὓδατα φαῦλα, ἢ ὃτι τοδὶ βαρύσταθμον.

^{page 211 note 1} The title chosen by Gilbert Murray (on Shaw's suggestion), ‘The Rape of the Locks’, is thus singularly appropriate.

^{page 212 note 1} The ‘Coislin Tractate’ is not much help: μῶθος κωμικός ἐστιν ὁ περὶ γελοίας πράξεις ἔχων τὴν σύστασιν.

^{page 212 note 2} Op. cit. 189.

^{page 212 note 3} ἣμαρτον is found earlier in the play (75), where it is spoken by Sostratos and there is no possibility of a double meaning.

^{page 214 note 1} TAPhA xci (1960), 152–5.Google Scholar

^{page 214 note 2} I acknowledge that this is the link of my argument for which the Poetics, as it stands, affords least encouragement.

^{page 215 note 1} It might even be called an ἀναγνώρισις εἰς φιλίαν (cf. 11. 1452^a31), in that Knemon's recognition of the generosity of his stepson causes him to adopt him as a son.

^{page 215 note 2} The poverty of Gorgias and the hopeless love of Sostratos are not of course ‘tragic’ misfortunes like the plight of Orestes prior to the anagnorisis in Eur. IT.

^{page 215 note 3} Cf. Kitto, H. D. F., Form and Meaning in Drama (London, 1956).Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 4} Cf. Nietzsche, Friedrich, The Birth of Tragedy, tr. Golffing, Francis (New York, 1956), 71 f.Google Scholar

^{page 216 note 1} Cf. Kitto, , op. cit. 231 ff.Google Scholar

Article contents

Knemon's Hamartia

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests