would appear that Euripides deliberately employed harmony to create certain emotions.
The first place where harmony occurs is at the word ματεʆ ρος , ‘of the mother’, where the auloi seem to be in unison here, both playing a different note to the chorus. I feel that the music would gain more meaning and interest at this point, especially given that the unison music beforehand, while suitably serious in emotion, lacks particular impact. The harmony here draws our attention to the word, and may therefore emphasise the relationship between Orestes and Clytemnestra. The fact that the word α ἷ μα , ‘blood’, comes afterwards would then highlight the violent act of revenge which Orestes has committed. My next point of interest is the word τιναʆ ξας ‘having upset’, where the auloi play one held note whilst the chorus sing a moving melody. The harmony created by the chorus melody here could indicate a change in the tone of the text from one of pity, to one of danger. The meaning of the word is drawn out by the harmony as opposed to unison. The next point of harmony at the word δειν ῶ ν , ‘terrible’, is of particular interest because the auloi diverge, playing two separate notes to the chorus. I believe this this development in the harmony could convey a more intense effect to the audience. Given the meaning of the word, I think that this more unusual harmony could have been intended to give an effect of fear and terror to the audience. The final place in the fragment where the parts diverge is at the words ὡ ς π οʆ ντου , ‘as of the sea’. The chord, which appears to comprise the same notes as δειν ῶ ν , might indicate that Euripides intended to imply a relationship between the δειν ῶ ν and the π οʆ ντου . On the other hand, the chord could simply be one which was often used to convey an impression of power and fear to the audience. Nevertheless, the presence of harmony draws our attention to the destructive nature of the sea. In this essay, I have attempted to show why the aulos was the ‘instrument of tragedy’. 25 I have looked at the reasons why the aulos was employed as an accompaniment to the chorus; that is, the penetrating sound of the instrument enabled it to project music effectively in an outdoor setting. I have also attempted to suggest that the aulos was capable of being more than just mere accompaniment, and that the instrument could be used to convey emotions to the audience. Its ability to switch between different modes meant that it could induce a wide range of feelings among an audience. I also believe that it could enhance the meaning of the text and create the emotions associated with words in the text. I acknowledge that very little evidence is available concerning ancient music, and that one isolated fragment cannot provide an accurate representation of a lost world of music. However, having listened to the fragment reconstructed, I believe that tragedians wrote music for instruments to be interpreted with emotion and meaning, rather than as simply plain accompaniment.
Bibliography
Croally, N., & Hyde, R. eds. 2011). Classical Literature: An Introduction. Abingdon. Csapo, E., & Slater, W. (1994). The Context of Ancient Drama. Ann Arbor.
Ensemble De Organographia (1995). On Music of the Ancient Greeks [CD]. Oregon: Pandourion Records. Neuman, P. (1995). The Aulos and Drama: A Performer's Viewpoint . Retrieved August 30, 2014, from http://www.didaskalia.net/issues/vol2no2/neuman.html Plato. (1993). Republic. (R. Waterfield, Trans.) Oxford. West, M. L. (1992). Ancient Greek Music. Oxford. Wilson, P. (1999). The aulos in Athens. In S. Goldhill, & R. Osborne, Performance Culture and Athenian Democracy. Cambridge. Wilson, P. (2005). Music. In J. Gregory, A Companion to Greek Tragedy. Malden, MA.
25 I have taken this claim from Wilson 1999 p. 73.
8
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker