Papers by paola schirripa
Antiquité classique 88, 2019
Antiquité classique 88, 2019
Invigilata Lucernis, 2019
Abstract
The making of discourse et the parody of history
The tie between Thucydides and Plato i... more Abstract
The making of discourse et the parody of history
The tie between Thucydides and Plato is a longstanding debated subject, just like, in general, the relationship between Plato and the historians. Whether poetry is a largely explored field, history, as literary genre, seems to be relegated to a marginal role in Plato’s work, and, analogously, at a first glance, historians look marginal and residual in his reception of the Greek past literary heritage.
Nevertheless, recent studies have proved Plato’s real interest in historical matters, especially regarding Herodotus’ work.
To what extent Thucydides could have covered an active role in Plato’s thought, remains, on the contrary, difficult to say, just as it is hard to measure Plato’s real knowledge of Thucydides’ entire history; he is far, in fact, from giving us direct quotations of Thucydides’ words, that could authorise the reconstruction of an intentional long-distance quarrel with the historian. However, Thucydides’ linguistic influence is detectable in Plato’s work, also beyond the frame of the Menexenus; they both consider, in fact, the rhetoric of history a pivotal and potentially dangerous instrument of Athens politics and they analogously explore the uses and distorting abuses of public discourse.
« Ancient Thrace: Myth and Reality. THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRTEENTH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THRACOLOGY KAZANLAK, SEPTEMBER 3–7, 2017», Sofia, 2022
Gaia , 2018
Le mythe des Labdacides, sur lequel Euripide revient entre 411 et 409 av. J.-C. en mettant en scè... more Le mythe des Labdacides, sur lequel Euripide revient entre 411 et 409 av. J.-C. en mettant en scène les Phéniciennes, nous paraît tendu, dérangeant, corrompu à l’intérieur : tous les personnages de la saga, c’est-à-dire les guerriers eschyléens des Sept contre Thèbes et la famille sophocléenne de l’Œdipe Roi et de l’Antigone, sont de retour sur une scène trop pleine et engagée dans la lecture du passé et du présent. Cette accumulation anomale des noms et des enjeux nous parle de la confusion, de l’excès, de la matière mythique sans discipline, qu’Euripide laisse volontairement décomposée pour mettre en question la diction du mythe et sa fonction dans la cité. Les fils d’Œdipe, nous dit Jocaste dans le prologue, enferment leur père dans la maison pour effacer un passé que seuls des artifices, des sophismata, peuvent mettre en sourdine. Cette leçon de falsification de la mémoire et des accords familiaux au début du drame s’impose dans le déroulement tragique. Ce travail analyse la déconstruction du récit mythique mise en œuvre par les personnages d’Euripide, en relisant leurs perspectives différentes mêlées à la voix étrangère du chœur. À partir de la fusion des morceaux narratifs de la légende thébaine et de la superposition des plans temporels, Euripide vient nous offrir une version fragmentée du passé de la cité, à l’origine de l’adultération irréversible de la politique de Thèbes, en lisant en filigrane l’histoire des années de guerre.
Uploads
Papers by paola schirripa
The making of discourse et the parody of history
The tie between Thucydides and Plato is a longstanding debated subject, just like, in general, the relationship between Plato and the historians. Whether poetry is a largely explored field, history, as literary genre, seems to be relegated to a marginal role in Plato’s work, and, analogously, at a first glance, historians look marginal and residual in his reception of the Greek past literary heritage.
Nevertheless, recent studies have proved Plato’s real interest in historical matters, especially regarding Herodotus’ work.
To what extent Thucydides could have covered an active role in Plato’s thought, remains, on the contrary, difficult to say, just as it is hard to measure Plato’s real knowledge of Thucydides’ entire history; he is far, in fact, from giving us direct quotations of Thucydides’ words, that could authorise the reconstruction of an intentional long-distance quarrel with the historian. However, Thucydides’ linguistic influence is detectable in Plato’s work, also beyond the frame of the Menexenus; they both consider, in fact, the rhetoric of history a pivotal and potentially dangerous instrument of Athens politics and they analogously explore the uses and distorting abuses of public discourse.
The making of discourse et the parody of history
The tie between Thucydides and Plato is a longstanding debated subject, just like, in general, the relationship between Plato and the historians. Whether poetry is a largely explored field, history, as literary genre, seems to be relegated to a marginal role in Plato’s work, and, analogously, at a first glance, historians look marginal and residual in his reception of the Greek past literary heritage.
Nevertheless, recent studies have proved Plato’s real interest in historical matters, especially regarding Herodotus’ work.
To what extent Thucydides could have covered an active role in Plato’s thought, remains, on the contrary, difficult to say, just as it is hard to measure Plato’s real knowledge of Thucydides’ entire history; he is far, in fact, from giving us direct quotations of Thucydides’ words, that could authorise the reconstruction of an intentional long-distance quarrel with the historian. However, Thucydides’ linguistic influence is detectable in Plato’s work, also beyond the frame of the Menexenus; they both consider, in fact, the rhetoric of history a pivotal and potentially dangerous instrument of Athens politics and they analogously explore the uses and distorting abuses of public discourse.