The duality of Dionysus and "the problem of the Bacchae" -- Mimetic Theory and Literary Study

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 19:18:52 02/10/08 Sun
Author: JD
Subject: The duality of Dionysus and "the problem of the Bacchae"

Although it is pretty clear in the Bacchae and in Girard's writings that Dionysus is a a bringer of both violence and peace, I think there are some interesting things in the Bacchae that deal with his duality. Girard speaks of modernity's problem in viewing the violence and the sacred is the wish to create a clear distinction between "good" and "evil", and that even as early as Plato and Socrates do we get this sort of attempt to expel the negative attributes of the gods. From this attempt comes the "problem of the Bacchae" as Girard puts it. In the Bacchae, we see the separation of Dionysus into his "good" and "bad" parts often associate with his different titles. For example, many times his violent side or his inflammatory facet is called Bromius-"roarer" or "earth-quake god"(he himself uses that title when giving Pentheus a final warning). Although Dionysus is a bringer of joy, we are told at one point in the play that he "has taken in the sphere of the war god". Girard accrues the problem of the Bacchae to Euripides trying not to fully acknowledge the workings of what is going on here. However, I think it is not a particular strain of thought or tradition that creates this problem of the wish for distinction between good and evil. The titles given to Dionysus would not have been purely of Euripides' invention, hence not just his wish to deny the mechanism present. I think that it is simply a human characteristic to try and create these distinctions and order (whether or not they are there) so as to differentiate between things. Girard says that the problem with modernity is that desire to keep the good and evil totally separate from one another, but doesnt that attempt seem to be plausible when working from within his own theory? If the whole idea is that violence arises from the blurring of distinctions, and the goal of religion is to prevent violence, wouldnt it be an integral part of education to instill a desire to create and discern distinctions?

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]