True Mimesis

I find that I have developed a distaste for much of the new, popular shows and movies. Often I find that the media gains a lot of hype for it's special effects and famous actors, then when it premiers it fails to impress me (and others) with underdeveloped writing, plot holes and bad acting. And when it comes to acting, one of my biggest pet peeves is something that I call the sexy cry

A sexy cry is a scene when a female character is put into a grieving situation and cries only mildly as to maintain the beauty or gentleness of the role they are portraying. Nearly all female roles in today's media carry out this unrealistic form of acting. It is perhaps more visually appealing, but the audience gains no empathy with the person facing the trauma. The overall effect is hindered.

But in Hecuba, Euripides knows how to appeal to logic through emotion. Hecuba herself brims with sadness, none of which is honestly unrealistic. You can feel her heart-wrenching pain. And when she cries, it isn't some quiet pathetic sob. No, this is true sadness - the kind that makes you a twinge of guilt and embarrassment for willingly observing someone literally break down. She doesn't hide it because it's not meant to be attractive! You feel her pain. That is more than you ever see in current media. That is Mimesis.

It doesn't even end there. Every character gives off such outspoken yet honest feelings that you can't help but agree with their pleads and causes, even if you disagree. Hecuba may not be able to convince Odysseus to let her daughter live, but she gives off not only reason but emotional appeal as well, until your heart strains with woe as Odysseus denies her any peace from her misery, or in her implore to Agamemnon demanding revenge, where you know that she has been driven to madness and yet you have sympathy for her. That is power and that brings out more rhetoric than just a pretty face ever will.

A bummer of a triathlon

The actress for Hecuba was phenomenal at displaying sorrow.  The only other person I know that can cry convincingly at will is my sister.  Definitely an art.  When I looked up the definition of mimesis on the website rhetoric.byu.edu, I noticed that this word was closely related with imitation.  What was the actor trying to imitate?  Obviously the sorrows that a mother would feel when her family and city had been destroyed.  Her sorrow seemed amplified to highlight one of the modes of persuasion that Hecuba used.  Mimesis contributes significantly to plead her case for justice, or revenge.

A few weeks ago I moved into my new apartment.  In less than a day management had cut my bike lock and impounded it.  I discovered this to my great dismay a couple days later when I went to load my bike up for a triathlon that morning.  When I finally spoke with them, I pleaded that I had been given insufficient warning, was incompetent, and suffered from the inconvenience of not having a bike on race day.  These pleas proved ineffective.  A few days later I tried a different approach.

Hecuba had a backup method of persuasion.  By reasoning with Agamemnon, she told him about the inhumane way that her son had been killed.  She explained the asset he would have been had he been preserved.  Then she explained the faulty motives that Talthybius had in killing him.  By her logic, she was perfectly justified in her revenge.

I did not kill anyone over my bike, but I did present a better case to management when I brought documents that showed them they were in the error.  To avoid a small claims court, they acquiesced to reimburse me for a new lock and to give me my bike back.

Persuasion comes in many forms.

A Little Bit of a Big Disconnect

Although I was able to engage and understand the play my personal “emotional investment” in it was low.  As I considered this, I quickly realized an essential part of both drama and public speaking in regards to “managing and mediating the irrational”; it must be experienced by the audience first hand.

What I mean by this is that the irrational remains irrational if the audience of those speaking do not vindicate the speaker. For example, Hecubas use of Mimesis caused many of the other characters as well as the audience to justify her irrationality.

Both drama and public speaking has the same purpose (as pointed out by Joseph Pearson); “to objectify, classify, and understand” the irrational or the event as a whole.

The differences found within these two parts is the way in which they arrive at the desired outcome.  While the application of drama (one could say mimesis generally speaking) brings a sense of connection and validation (therefore persuasion) to emotion, public speaking (rhetoric) allows one to explain and persuade using speech.  Drama seems to bring out so much emotion or, for lack of a better word, “drama” that one wants to connect emotionally with the individual. This being said, if that connection is not made as it was not for me in the playwright Hecuba than the irrational continues to look irrational. The same is true with public speaking; if one is unable to connect through the use of ethos, logos or pathos than the speech itself has no ability to put into context or rationalize the irrational.

Both methods of language require the audience or recipient to emotionally/mentally invest in the communication to manage or mediate the irrational. Without this connection the yelling and crying are just more yelling and crying and the words of persuasion are simply words unheard and therefore remain irrational. 

"I'm Sorry, That Sucks"

“Not every problem I confide in you needs to be fixed. Sometimes I just want to hear, ‘i'm sorry, that sucks.’”

Boys, have you heard this before? Probably from a girl right? And regardless of whether or not you are capable of fixing the problem the fact of the matter is you are forbidden from even attempting. Is this rational? Probably not. But does it eventually help an individual return to rationality? It is not scientifically proven, but from my experience I would say, yes. As we saw in Hecuba, sometimes we need to be validated in our irrational coping of emotions in an effort to return to rationality.

In the play, with the appearance of the women of Troy, Odysseus, and Agamemnon there was a common response to Hecuba’s penetrating grief. The gist of these statements was “your life is so terrible,” “you are the queen of sorrow, grief, and pain,” “I would rather die than sink as low as you have,” “you poor, old, lonely, slave woman.” Sounds pretty similar to the, “that sucks” concept doesn't it? But why did so many people validate her in her irrational expression of grief? Because, it eventually helps her return to rationality.

Lets analyze the situation. Hecuba, utilizing mimesis is able to effectively persuade others through emotionally charged language, to feel empathy for her and her situation. Then the listener, being filled with compassion, uses rhetoric to persuade Hecuba that she is justified in her all encompassing grief. They vindicate her and let her know she is rational in such extreme emotion. After she is comforted with this validation, she carries on with revenge (which in this society would be considered "rational" because justice was a right esteemed by the gods and executed by the people).

Today's Way of Mourning

Going into the play I wondered what Professor Burton meant when he said that we will be surprised and should brace ourselves.  From the moment that Polydorous gave his opening speech on the props I knew that he was referring to the emotions and the mimesis that the actors portrayed.  Sometimes in the play I felt like Hecuba was a little over the top and exaggerating, partially because I couldn't fully relate to her.  It was hard for me to watch such powerful emotions on the stage, but as I would take my attention off of her and onto the five other woman on the stage, I noticed that they too portrayed emotions of grief and pain, but through their more subtle gestures than through the waiting and grand movements that Hecuba often did.  

This really helped me become more persuaded through the emotional appeal of the play because when I looked at the others on the stage, they were portraying the same emotions, but on a smaller scale.  I think I related more to them because in today's culture and society when one is in mourning we do not often make a huge scene in the middle of our town and let everyone know what is wrong, but we often quietly mourn and confide in our closer social circle, and generally within our homes where not everyone can see.  That is why in my opinion, the five woman on the stage were able to relate to the audience simply because of today's culture. 

Round of Applause for Hecuba!

Everyone had to have noticed that at the very end of the play, the crowd clapped for all of the actors to express their support and love. However, I couldn’t help but smile when I noticed that when Hecuba went up to bow, the volume of the crowd increased exponentially and everyone clapped and whistled with much more passion. It was somewhat a verification of a job well done. To me, this was an enormous sign that the actress did a terrific job of pulling in the audience with her great demonstration of mimesis. 

There were multiple points during the show where I couldn’t help but feel terrible for this mother who has lost her son and is on the verge of having her daughter ripped away from her and killed. When Hecuba first began to wail and cry, as the women surrounded her and told her what was to be done with her daughter, I was almost startled at how hard she seemed to be bawling. I wasn’t expecting to see so much emotion. Then, she gets up and starts defending herself as to why everything that is happening is unfair and why such an awful thing shouldn’t be happening. 

Similar to what Thomas said, this poor old woman had nothing else to lose and couldn’t fall any lower. She argued and debated with such a conviction that seemed to make the irrational more rational. It’s just like we have discussed in previous classes, love can be extremely irrational. However, as I watched Hecuba yell towards the heavens with all of her heart and cry with real tears, I couldn’t help but notice that the irrational seemed to be more rational in my head. I think the audience all agreed as we all clapped unanimously after witnessing her phenomenal rhetoric appeals through logic and an engagement of emotions. 

Don't Mess with Momma

After seeing probably my first play since grade school, I was quite impressed with the production.  Of note, both Hecuba and Polymestor made excellent displays of mimesis and the art of persuasion.  Obviously, one was more vindicated than the other, no doubt due to Hecuba's exposing of Polymestor as a greedy liar (and possibly because he spat too much).  Both appealed to Agamemnon over the murder of Polydorus, with Hecuba raging for justice and Polymestor defending with claims of protecting against any future instances of war. 

In the end, Polymestor cannot stand fast against the buffetings of his sons' murderer.  It might have been easier if he had still been able to see so that he could have just killed Hecuba, but that was not the case.  Unfortunately for Polymestor, his appeal to patria was not enough to deter Agamemnon from the blind greed so readily apparent in the childless father.  Hecuba had lost her husband to war, Polydorus to the gold frenzied Polymestor, and one of her daughters to sacrificial retribution.  She was an old woman stricken with age and all manner of misdeed.  As she so expertly convinced to Agamemnon, there was no lower point for her to fall.  Seeing as she had nothing to lose and Polymestor had much to gain, the honesty of their feelings was easily distinguishable. 

It was this honesty combined with hard logic that allowed Hecuba to eventually win over Agamemnon.  In the eyes of Agamemnon, the distraught mother's actions had been fair and justified, whereas the slithering Polymestor clearly had acted only in his own self-interest.  If the play had been an act of public speaking rather than just amongst a select few, Polymestor could very well have won the debate.  His reasoning was sound, so his case would most likely have been supported amongst the masses.  This was not as effective as hoped for, however, as the debate parties were small enough that Hecuba could appeal to the individual rather than to the faceless crowd.  Having the ability to pinpoint and focus on Agamemnon's vital regions, she overpowered her opposition's standpoint with a potent hybrid of logos and pathos, successfully avenging her lost family.  

Hecuba & The Duality of Language

The lady who played Hecuba in tonight’s play did a wonderful job at bringing out the tragic condition of her character with language. Although she was unsuccessful in persuading Odysseus from taking her daughter to be sacrificed, she also laid out a very logical and reasonable argument to try and stop her daughter from being killed. Overall Hecuba’s language in the play really put on a powerful display of both pathos and logos.

Mimesis

Starting with Hecuba’s sad state, it was amazing the way that her words really brought out the sadness in what she was going through. I will say with all honesty that I am not the one to go to plays, and certainly not get that into them. With that said, it was thoroughly surprising when I felt an aching in my heart for Hecuba and all the trials she was being forced to go through. Her physical and emotional status on stage are attributed to making me feel for her as well, but her language is what made my mind tell my heart to feel for this woman. She was able to make the hearer’s emotions engage with the story, and help the audience feel as she was feeling.

Art of Persuasion

Although she was unable to persuade Odysseus from taking her daughter the layout and invention of her argument was impressive. Even after being denied once by Odysseus she persisted, and tried to take another angle. It was interesting when she made reference to her daughter as her “city.” Comparing this to our discussion on Euripides’ The Bakkhai, perhaps she was arguing that her daughter (& her son for good measure) were her only rationale to keep living. If so, this is a really interesting use of rhetoric.