Review

Reviewed Work(s): Actors & Audience. A Study of Asides and Related Conventions in Greek
Drama by David Bain
Review by: Bernard M. W. Knox
Source: The Classical World, Vol. 72, No. 2 (Oct., 1978), pp. 112-113
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press on behalf of the Classical Association of
the Atlantic States
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4349003
Accessed: 30-09-2018 19:54 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

The Johns Hopkins University Press, Classical Association of the Atlantic States are
collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Classical World

This content downloaded from 201.235.41.121 on Sun, 30 Sep 2018 19:54:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 112 CLASSICAL WORLD

rhetorical devices, and poetic structure. Much the same scheme is followed in
each of the other selections.
Von Albrecht's interpretations will startle few readers. He regularly summa-
rizes the opinions of other scholars before introducing his own. Whether or not
one accepts his ideas, they are uniformly thoughtful and helpful. Most interest-
ing, however, is his analysis of poetic architecture, particularly his establishment
of the Ringfortn as a significant element not only in poetic structure, but also as
an influence on meaning. He sees, for example, that the balanced structure of
Horace, Satires 1.1. gives that poem, so often dismissed as rambling discourse,
the unity of a true work of art (pp. 184-89, esp. 187.) By a similar analysis of
form, he demonstrates the delicate symmetry of Catullus 46 (p. 250) and hypoth-
esizes that Catullus 76 is an elegy, not an epigram.
Von Albrecht's book will be best read for its careful study of the individual
poems included in it. The unavoidable repetitiousness of his approach to each
selection becomes a bit wearisome after a time, but granted von Albrecht's ap-
proach to his problem, this could hardly be avoided. It does not detract in any
measure from the uniform excellence of his book.

University of Michigan Frank 0. Copley

David Bain. Actors & Audience. A Study of Asides and Related Conventions in
Greek Drama. (Oxford Classical & Philosophical Monographs.) New York and
London: Oxford University Press, 1977. Pp. x, 230. $21.50.

This clear-headed, very useful book explores with exemplary throughness the
dramatic aside (and some related conventions such as the Eintrittsmonolog and
audience address) in Greek tragedy, Greek comedy Old and New, and also in
Roman comedy - with a view to detecting Greek theatrical conventions adapted
by the Roman dramatists. It begins with a very sensible and much needed discus-
sion of dramatic illusion in the ancient theatre; all Bain means by the term is that
"actors pretend to be the people they play and the audience accepts that pre-
tence." He then examines the aside in Euripides, whose Hecuba contains the
best-known and most extended series of asides in Greek tragedy; on the basis of
this scene he produces what he himself calls a "narrow . . . definition" of the
phenomenon. It is a speech made by an actor in the presence of another (or
others) which is heard by the audience but not (or not properly) by those present
on stage. According to this strict (but fully justified) criterion Bain reduces the
large crop of Euripidean asides identified by editors (and ancient scholiasts) to
some ten; the rejects are classified as "emotional outbursts" or "address to a re-
treating back." In Aeschylus Bain finds no real asides at all (though Aeschylus
does use in Eumenides a "related convention," the entrance monologue);
Sophocles has no real asides either though Philoctetes 573-77 is tentatively
labeled "a genuine attempt to converse aside."
The rest of the book (the bulk of it) is devoted to comedy and here, of course,
the material is much more copious. Old Comedy has few classic asides ("where it
makes a difference to the action whether or not what a speaker says is heard by
others on stage") but with the New Comedy the aside comes into its kingdom.
Pages 105-53 of Bain's book deal in detail with the two types of aside common in
Menander, the "eavesdropping aside" and the "aside in conversation"; there

This content downloaded from 201.235.41.121 on Sun, 30 Sep 2018 19:54:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 REVIEWS 113
follows a chapter on Conventional Entrances - " . . . where the newly entered
character fails at first to notice that there are other people on stage." Roman
comedy is examined for conventions which "are at present unattested or ill-at-
tested in Greek comedy"; papyrus discoveries have attested some and may do so
for more, others can be traced to Greek tragedy. The book concludes with a dis-
cussion of Audience Address in New Comedy and Play with Dramatic Illusion -
references, not found in tragedy but fairly frequent in Plautus, to the theatrical
performance itself. Bain demonstrates that such references appear in the frag-
ments of fourth century comedy, though in Menander he finds only one example
and even that one controversial.
This is a book which no expositor of ancient drama can afford to neglect. For-
tunately it will be easy to consult on particular passages since it is provided with
an index locorum and a well-organized index of 'subjects discussed'.

The Centerfor Hellenic Studies Bernard M. W. Knox

Urs Dierauer. Tier und Mensch im Denken der Antike. Studien zur Tierpsy-
chologie, Anthropologie und Ethik. (Studien zur antiken Philosophie, Band 6.)
Amsterdam: Verlag B. R. Gruner B. V., 1977. Pp. xvii, 319. Hfl. 100.

The author is interested in the relation between men and animals in the
thought of ancient writers, and thought to him is the province of professional
thinkers. For this reason he does not consider: the views expressed by poets and
writers of fables; artistic representations; the role of animals in religion and agri-
culture; in short, popular opinion. His scope is therefore narrower than his title
might imply, and, since every idea must be philosophical, it must stem from a
(known) philosopher or philosophical school, a bias which distracts and slows
down the argument.
Three main concerns structure the book: 1) animal psychology-do animals
possess reason, or are they governed solely by instinct? 2) The relation between
man and animal-were animals created primarily for the service of man? Does
man stand at the top of the scale of nature either through evolution or by divine
order? 3) The use/misuse of animals as models of human behavior-are animals
more moral than men (Plutarch), or is morality an unnatural creation of man
which should be discarded in the light of animal behavior (Sophists)? Many of
the most interesting ancient controversies-such as physis:nomos-become in-
volved in these issues.
The approach is chronological, starting with Homer and progressing stolidly
to the end of pagan antiquity. The early period is the weakest part of the book,
but things warm up with Plato-a good treatment of his theory of transmigra-
tion of souls-and Aristotle, and become really interesting with the Stoics and
their opponents: indeed the work is in effect a fine treatment of Aristotelian and
post-Aristotelian views of animal psychology and the ethical consequences (if
any) to be drawn from animal behavior for man's place in the world and human
conduct. Always interesting, frequently fascinating, though occasionally heavy-
handed, this work constitutes a real contribution to our knowledge of a theme
which, if not always uppermost in our minds, is always lurking somewhere be-
neath the surface. The ancients asked most of the right questions, and were not

This content downloaded from 201.235.41.121 on Sun, 30 Sep 2018 19:54:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms