Used price: $539.00
Buy one from zShops for: $495.00
Although narratively it comes last in the Theban plays, "Antigone" was actually written first by Sophocles. Following the death of Oedipus, his sons, Eteocles and Polyneices engaged in a civil war for the throne of Thebes (covered in "Seven Against Thebes" by Aeschylus). The two brothers kill each other and Creon, brother of Jocasta, becomes king. He orders that Eteocles, who nobly defended his city, shall receive an honorable burial, but that Polyneices, for leading the Argive invaders, shall be left unburied. This leads Antigone, sister to both of the slain brothers, to have to choose between obeying the rule of the state, the dictates of familial binds, and the will of the gods. This, of course, is the matter at the heart of this classic tragedy.
It is too easy to see the issues of this play, first performed in the 5th century B.C., as being reflected in a host of more contemporary concerns, where the conscience of the individual conflicts with the dictates of the state. However, it seems to me that the conflict in "Antigone" is not so clear-cut as we would suppose. After all, Creon has the right to punish a traitor and to expect loyal citizens to obey. Ismene, Antigone's sister, chooses to obey, but Antigone takes a different path. The fact that the "burial" of her brother consists of the token gesture of throwing dirt upon his face, only serves to underscore the ambiguity of the situation Sophocles is developing. Even though the playwright strips Creon of his son, Haemon and wife, Eurydice by the end of the drama, it is not a fatal verdict rendered against the king's judgment, but rather the playing out of the tragedy to its grim conclusion.
Of course, "Oedipus The King" is not only the most read of all the Greek tragedies, it is also the most misread of the Greek dramas. The play's reputation exists in part because it was presented as the paragon of the dramatic form by Aristotle in his "Poetics," and it may well be because of that fact that "Oedipus The King" was one of the relatively few plays by Sophocles to be passed down from ancient times. When I have taught Greek tragedies in various classes students have reconsidered the play in terms of key concepts such as harmartia ("tragic error of judgment"), angonrisis ("recognition"), peripeteia ("reversal"), catharsis, etc., and they usually agree this play provides the proverbial textbook examples of these terms.
However, I was always bothered by the fact that Sophocles engages in some rather heavy-handed foreshadowing regarding the fact that the play's tragic hero is going to blind himself before the conclusion. The lines were closer to, dare I say, sophomoric humor than eloquently setting up the climax. But then I read something very, very interesting in Homer's "Iliad," where there appears a single reference to Oedipus which suggests that he died in battle. Remember now that Homer's epics were written several hundred years before Sophocles was born and that the Greek playwrights were allowed to take great liberties with the various myths (consider the three different versions of the death of Clytemnestra at the hands of Orestes we have from Sophocles, Euripides and Aeschylus). The Athenian audience would know its Homer, but "Oedipus The King" was a new play.
This leads me to advance a very interesting possibility: the Greek audience did not know that Oedipus was going to blind himself. This was a new idea. Jocasta (Iocasta) appears in the "Odyssey" when Odysseus visits Hades, but the only mention of the sin involved is in her marriage to her son, nothing about his being blind. Obviously you will have to make your own judgment about my hypotheses, but I have to think it is at least worth consideration.
Still, there is the fact that because even those who do not know the play know the story about the man who killed his father and married his mother, "Oedipus The King" is usually misread by students. Because they know the curse they miss something very important: the curse that the oracle at Delphi tells Oedipus is not the same curse that was told to his parents (you can, to quote Casey Stengel, "look it up"). As in his play "Antigone," where the main character is not the title figure but Creon, Sophocles makes Jocasta more than a mere supporting character in this tragedy.
Used price: $15.00
Collectible price: $35.77
Buy one from zShops for: $21.89
Used price: $19.50
Buy one from zShops for: $33.95
Used price: $0.01
Collectible price: $2.05
Buy one from zShops for: $0.25
Without an identity, the man makes one up, introducing himself as Sam Wallace. Instinct warns caution is required until he can figure out who is and why he is in this small town. As his frustration mounts and panic comes close, Sam hides it behind his pride, refusing to admit to his vulnerability. Once discharged from the hospital, Sam accepts Serena's mother's offer a job and a place to stay, at least until answers can be had. Instinctive dislike of lawyers, certainty of previous self sufficiency, and indefinable need to know Serena better provide the only clues to his past and his identity. But when Serena realizes he's misled her regarding his identity, her reaction will almost certainly be outrage.
As tired as I grow with amnesia stories, I must admit to really liking this one! Typically, the heroine is struck with amnesia and finds herself terribly dependent on some man. Instead, Gina Wilkins casts a unique spell upon her hero, making him the amnesiac filled with the expected secrets and fears. As this unexpected hero struggles to reconcile his past to the present, the plot moves smartly along to its exciting conclusion. THE STRANGER IN ROOM 205 comes very highly recommended.
Davis and his wife, Hester, in time became unionists who feared the consequences of a Maryland secession for their state and family. "We may not like the present administration, nor endorse its acts-but-'we had better bear the ills we have than to fly to others that we know not of,'" wrote Hester to her daughter, Rebecca, late in May of 1861. "Let Maryland remain neutral and she may ride out safely this awful storm...I fear this secession element. It would be certain ruin to all our hopes as a family, in this world."
Their son, William Wilkins Davis, was a student at St. James College, a prestigious Episcopal boy's school near Hagerstown, in western Maryland. St. James had the misfortune to lie between opposing armies that tramped incessantly through the region and staged America's bloodiest day on a battlefield a mere seven miles distant, along Antietam Creek. The boys of St. James spent Sunday afternoons in the spring of 1861 not in the library but visiting nearby union and confederate camps. Fearful parents began withdrawing their sons as tensions grew. In the spring of 1861, with the bombardment of Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor and Baltimoreans clashing with northern troops marching through their city, young Wilkins became an impassioned sympathizer for the southern cause. Letters heretofore about food, studies and illness became angry diatribes against Lincoln, Maryland Governor Thomas Hicks, and others perceived to have a foot on the jugular of southern state's rights. "I hereby announce myself, henceforth, a straight out 'Southern Rights' man, and want nothing to do with Lincoln, his party or anything connected with him, or it, unless it is to help thrash him," he wrote to sister Rebecca on May 21, 1861. "I can no longer support a man whose avowed intention is to subjugate the South...and our contemptible, cowardly, lying governor winks at every thing [he] does without the lest compunction." Such words remind us that 19th century political discourse could also be ugly and coarse.
Both young Wilkins and St. James fared poorly in the cauldron of conflict. The boy took ill early in the war and, despite periods of good health, he died in 1866. The college closed its doors in 1864, an educational casualty of war.
Hein's book captures the complexity of the Civil War in a state of abolitionists, pro-slavery unionists, anti-slavery southern sympathizers and non-slaveholding secessionists. We see a pivotal Maryland through the eyes of adults and children, and the consequences of war for familial relationships, religious values and educational institutions. Hein's crisp editorial commentary knits these letters chronologically, supplying time and place for the Davis family to tell of life in the tumultuous middle of the nineteenth century. We are in the debt of this slender volume, for reminding us that a history replete with leaders and battles is incomplete absent the insights of sons and daughters, and mothers and fathers.
Used price: $1.20
Collectible price: $3.48
Buy one from zShops for: $3.55
Used price: $15.00
Buy one from zShops for: $78.53
Used price: $14.75
Collectible price: $10.00
Buy one from zShops for: $6.00
Great book.
It is a constant source of mystery to me why the publishers of out-of-print MHL books don't reprint them immediately. It's not as though they can argue that there's not a big market for them. HarperCollins, do the reading public (and your own profit margin) a favor: REISSUE THIS BOOK!!!