Close Reading IN Practice

1. Close Reading INPractice How to develop sophisticated analysis

2. After the murders, Orestes dismisses Aegisthus in two cursory lines, but his attitude towards Clytemnestra is much more complicated: “She—I loved her once— / and now I loathe, I have to loathe— / what is she?” (985-6). • Weak: Orestes is torn between strong conflicting emotions. He loved his mother very much in the past, but now he feels that he has to hate her. He does not seem as comfortable with her death as he did with Aegisthus. • Better: Orestes is torn between strong conflicting emotions, between love and duty. He does not exult in his mother’s death, acknowledging that he “loved her once.” Yet he also indicates that duty pulls him in another direction. His statement that “I loathe—have to loathe” her suggests that he needs to convince himself of his own hatred, as if his love has not been eliminated completely. His conscience does not seem clear. Aeschylus thus suggests that, despite Clytemnestra’s abhorrent actions, Orestes’ own revenge is not entirely free from blame.

3. After the murders, Orestes dismisses Aegisthus in two cursory lines, but his attitude towards Clytemnestra is much more complicated: “She—I loved her once— / and now I loathe, I have to loathe— / what is she?” (985-6). • Best Orestes’ language and syntax indicate that he is torn by powerful, conflicting emotions. The three dashes break up his words, creating a series of fragmentary statements . “She—I loved her” suggests that he starts a thought, then breaks off to say something else. The dashes collectively suggest Orestes’ hesitation and inability to think clearly. He does say that he loathes his mother, but moderates the language by adding, “I have to loathe” her, as if it is a duty rather than a natural emotion. In addition, if Orestes has to order himself to hate his mother, then that hatred becomes somewhat doubtful—and it is possible to interpret his continuing strong language as only partially-effective attempts to clear his conscience. These contradictions create an atmosphere of uncertainty which is only heightened by his rhetorical question: “What is she?” At various times, Clytemnestra can be seen as mother and murderer, as gracious queen and deceitful viper. Truth is evasive and often ambiguous. Aeschylus thus suggests that there are no clear-cut answers—only problems of interpretation.

4. Orestes faces similar problems of interpretation when he considers the robes with which Clytemnestra entangled his father. : “This—how can I dignify this . . . snare for a beast? / —sheath for a corpse's feet? / This winding-sheet, this tent for the bath of death! / No, a hunting net, a coiling—what to call?” (990-3). He hesitates over what to call them, wondering whether they should be categorized as a snare or a shroud. Just as he offered conflicting images of his mother, Orestes has trouble deciding how to interpret the trappings of his parents’ death; he has a shifting and contingent world view. Aeschylus thus argues that in this more primitive world, right action is impossible to determine. Orestes faces similar problems of interpretation when he considers the robes with which Clytemnestra entangled his father: “This—how can I dignify this . . . snare for a beast? / —sheath for a corpse's feet? / This winding-sheet, this tent for the bath of death! / No, a hunting net, a coiling—what to call?” (990-3). As with his earlier effort to characterize his mother, Orestes hesitates several times as he speaks. The three dashes create a series of fragmentary thoughts, and his different interpretations are tied to question marks, suggesting tentative ideas rather than clear answers; the final image, “a coiling,” is only an adjective, interrupted as if Orestes cannot even complete the thought. Orestes quickly cycles through a variety of metaphors—some, such as “snare for a beast” and “hunting net,” connote aggression and action, which implies thatthe robes can be viewed as a weapon. However, other phrases, such as a “sheath for a corpse’s feet” or a “winding-sheet,” suggest things that heal or provide closure, which in turn implies that the cloth can serve a more passive, almost beneficial quality. Taken together, these conflicting images indicate that Orestes is unsure whether the robes cause or resolve violence. Aeschylus thus suggests that Orestes’ hesitation and ambivalent emotions are attended by similarly uncertain results—in this more primitive world, right action appears difficult , if not impossible, to determine.