THE MYSTIQUE OF FEMININE NARRATIVES #3 Helen of troy

 

"An Italian Beauty" Eugene de Blaas (1843-1931)

Euripides' "Helen" challenges traditional perceptions of identity and reality through the complex interplay of appearance and truth. This essay explores the duality of identity in the play, focusing on the contrast between the real Helen and her phantom, the ambiguity of Menelaus' character, and the power of names. Drawing on the concept of Dissoi Logoi, Euripides navigates the blurred lines between illusion and reality, inviting audiences to question the nature of perception and the reliability of societal judgments. Ultimately, the play leaves unresolved tensions, prompting reflection on the inherent complexities of human nature and the elusive nature of truth.

 Illusion and Reality in Euripides' Helen: A Study of Dissoi Logoi 

In the ancient world of Athens, Greek tragedy was considered to be the most significant form of art. At that time, Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides were famous and revered tragedians. They educated and entertained the general public by transmitting their ideas about language and social issues into tragic theatre. Euripides (c. 484-407 BCE), renowned for his interest in sophistic philosophy and melodramatic plays, was one of the most controversial thinkers of the 5th century. In his classic tragedy Helen, first performed in 412 BCE, he interweaves themes of romance with ideas of sophism. 

Euripides displays the sophistic notion of Dissoi Logoi, or the use of opposing concepts, in Helen by presenting paired opposites such as Helen vs. eidolon, names vs. identity, and appearance vs. reality, in addition to the unity of these opposites as resolution.


The antithesis of appearance versus reality and names versus identity are prominent themes in Helen. Unlike the Homeric rendition of Helen as a promiscuous woman who causes destruction and temptation, Euripides' Helen resides in both the world of illusion and reality. During the opening scenes, Helen narrates the story of how she was abducted to Egypt by Hermes. The Helen who supposedly betrayed her husband and accompanied Paris proved to be merely an eidolon, a phantom fashioned by the resentful goddess Hera. All men believed Helen's eidolon to be real, which led to inevitable bloodshed and war. The real Helen never witnessed the Trojan War nor betrayed her husband; she was a victim of divine schemes. Euripides highlights the ambiguity between onoma (name), pragma (fact), and soma (body) in the case of Helen and her eidolon.

 Helen constantly feels wronged since her name is cursed. When she meets Teucer, she asks him whether the Helen he saw is real or an illusion, questioning his faith in the senses. He tells her that he is sure because he saw her with his eyes. Helen suggests that appearances should not be relied on and the senses are not a reliable source of truth. Helen is unjustly denounced and held responsible for the lost lives; she claims, "The Trojans fought for me, except it was not I but my name."

Euripides illuminates how names are powerful, challenging through Helen the contemporary Greek conception concerning language and reality. Showing how Helen's name affects her reputation, Euripides reflects on the idea that names do not inherently derive meaning from objects in the outside world; it is a two-way process. The real Helen character is compassionate; she expresses her sympathy for the woes of both the Trojans and the Greeks. 

The unity of opposites depicted in both the characters of Helen and Menelaus in Euripides' attempt to resolve the tensions and dichotomies in Helen. For instance, when Menelaus arrives in Egypt, he is stranded in an unknown, mysterious land; his kingly character and race vanish as he roams in ragged clothes, seeking shelter. He even cries and begs an old woman to help him. This directly contrasts with the scene in which he rejects being pitied, disregarding men who shed tears of sadness. For Euripides, Menelaus is both a brave king and a cowardly beggar. His appearance illustrates the temporary disintegration of his identity as a king who fought in the Trojan War to regain the shadow of his wife.

In the case of Helen, she presents herself as an innocent and loyal wife who is different from her eidolon. However, by the end of the play, Euripides merges the two Helens together as the real Helen begins to assume the treacherous traits of her phantom, for instance, when she discovers that her husband is alive. She comes up with a plan to deceive Theoclymenus by using Teucer's report about Menelaus's death. Her wits triumph as she exploits the customary funeral to conduct the burial of the supposedly dead Menelaus. Helen uses Dissoi Logoi to trick Theoclymenus, promising to marry him only to run away with Menelaus. On their way to Sparta, Menelaus and Helen escape by ship, and once again Helen retains her destructive archetypal image when she encourages the Greek warriors to slaughter the Egyptians.

Throughout the play, Euripides tries to convince us that reality lies in Egypt and the illusion in Troy. However, we witness towards the epilogue the conflicting opposites within the character. Reality's location remains unresolved since our understanding of objective knowledge is limited. Euripides reorients us instead to the question of duality as he sheds light on the existing dualism and conflicts within one identity.

Written by @violet0lily