Aeschylus´ Diegetic Drama

Scholars are accustomed to point out the non-dramatic and "actionless" character of the earlier Greek tragedies of Aeschylus (Persae, Septem, Supplices, and eventually Prometheus) and to explain this feature by pointing out the aesthetical and literary primitive stage of tragedy in the first half of 5th century B.C. This assessment via negationis emphasizes those tragic features which scholars usually expect to find in tragedies, rather than what we really have in Aeschylean tragedies, and it shows that "action" is usually regarded as the very distinguishing mark of drama. In my research I would like to interpret earlier tragedies of Aeschylus independently from later (e.g. aristotelic) conceptions of drama, and on the basis of their continuity with pre-tragic poetic traditions, especially the epic and the choral lyric ones, which are mainly concerned with the narrative of mythical subjects. Since early tragedy in many respects arises and develops as a synthesis of these narrative poetic traditions, I suggest to understand it as transferring this manifold narrative heritage to the stage. Indeed, by analyzing the dramatic structure of the aforementioned tragedies we can notice how key-events are usually not acted or shown, but narrated, e.g. by messenger speeches, teichoscopiai, or prophecies. Such narratives report on events from the past, present or future, and by doing so they make up for the events themselves. Basically, archaic tragedy doesn`t perform any "action", but narrative. From a pragmatic-philosophical point of view, many tragic narratives function as performative speech acts, for they elicit reactions of the dramatis personae (including the chorus), who will e.g. comment, interpret, moan, take decisions, and proceed accordingly to the performed narrative. The very reaction, and no other kind of "action", is what the dramatic character of the early Aeschylean tragedy consists in. By transferring the archaic narrative heritage to the stage, early Greek tragedy develops new narrative techniques, and this is why I think a narratological examination of the these tragedies to be appropriate and useful. On the one hand embedded in the historic context of flourishing narrative poetic traditions, on the other hand adapting them to the theatre performance, early Greek tragedy essentially develops into a multi- and intermedial, highly complex form of narration.

The earliest extant tragedies ?Persians, Seven against Thebes, Suppliants, but also Prometheus Bound? tend to narrate events rather than enacting them. This conflict with our expectations, as in later drama narrative is marginal while action pivotal. Indeed, judgments about the supposed immaturity of early tragedy have become standard in much classical scholarship, usually highlighting narrativity and eventless plots. However, our horizon of expectations of drama is built upon later tragedy, in which action prevails over narrative. As such we may well be judging Aeschylus anachronistically, through the lens of later genre theory. Aeschylus Diegetic Drama seeks to overcome this approach and to focus on what the dramatic texts actually show, narrative, rather than on what we miss, action. Accordingly, I propose to understand narrativity not as a by-product or a deficit, but as a typical feature of early tragedy, which I redefine as the narrative genre termed diegetic drama. This shift of perspective is not for the sake of genre taxonomy, but allows for unbiased, fresh, and non-judgemental understanding of those elements that, in Aeschylus, strike us as eminently non-dramatic: that is long narratives and choral responses to them.By means of textual analysis, this study will identify the distinguishing marks of diegetic drama: this is not only the strong presence of narrative, but also the role narratives play, their interactions with non-narrative elements, and their impact on the plot. Indeed, what is peculiar about the narratives of diegetic drama is that they elicit reactions and responses from the dramatis personae. By calling for such events, narratives actively contribute to shaping the tragic plot. At the same time, they encourage the construction of what Aristotle classifies as non-unitary plots: for narratives represent events that, happening at times and places different from the hic et nunc, might well be causally non-related.This project seeks to understand why Aeschylus uses narrative to such a degree, and the reasons his audience judged him an outstanding tragedian for doing so. Diegetic drama will be contextualised into its own background: in Greek narrative culture, storytelling is essential to most poetic genres and develops into a manifold performance art. Under these premises, Aeschylus Diegetic Drama explores the performance and staging of tragic narratives, the ties between dramatic and narrative genres, and finally the ways in which diegetic drama transfers a complex narrative tradition onto the stage.