Name Sumbul Raees

Course ENG 7103

Instructor Mrs. Salma Khatoon
Date Dec 23, 2010

HOPE WITHIN NIHILISM

Euripides’ “Trojan Women” is termed as a war tragedy, where the author tries to call forth the attention
towards wastefulness and futility of war through the chaos that surrounds the scene (Lushnig 8). The play,
“written out of a consciousness of final disintegration”, opens with an air of nihilism which prevails till
the last scene (Gilmartin 258). Poseidon calls Troy “fallen, ruined, sacked, gutted” where even the altars
of gods are empty and blood stained. However, amidst all this chaos, there is an intricate frame work and
web of hope present, at various levels, throughout the play, which keeps a semblance of order even for the
fallen Trojan women.

This hope is chiefly presented through Hecuba, whose dramatic figure stands for “power although she
typifies weakness” (Easterling 175). Hecuba is essentially a figure of hope while “weeping for multitudes
her multitudes of tears”. She is continuously present on the stage, harbouring hope among her fellow
women and dealing with all the bad news. She has fallen from her queen ship, has lost her husband and
sons and is about to be driven from her land as a slave, yet she fulfills the role of a hope giver. Thus, when
Andromache speaks of her wretchedness and favours the lot of dead Polexana, as dead cannot feel the
shame and pain of degradation any more; Hecuba gives her hope through life. She says that as long as
Andromace and her son, Astyanax, are alive, there is hope of regaining their freedom and “there still may
be another Troy”. Later, she tries to gain hope of revenge by drawing a promise from Menelaus that he
will not spare Helen and will make her a lesson for all the adulterous women by killing her. She thus tries
to have Helen pay for her deeds, who, according to Hecuba, is the true cause of Troy’s down fall.

However, in her moment of weakness, Hecuba also loses hope when she feels that she will never be able
to see her children again. This realization makes her exclaim that no man should consider himself happy
until he is dead. Again, when Cassandra speaks of the hope of revenge through her marriage to
Agamemnon in her frenzied state, Hecuba feels pity for her, considering her true prophecies as a phase of
madness. Hecuba’s doubt of Cassandra’s prophecy makes the situation rather paradoxical, as the latter
stands for true hope of revenge but remains unacknowledged.
The hope generated by the captive women and Hecuba is, however, repeatedly put off by the decrees of
Greek commanders. Talthybius, the Greek messenger, appears on the scene as if an agent to extinguish
hope for the captive women of Troy (Gilmartin 214). His first appearance removes the hope of Trojan
women to have cultured Athenian masters. He announces that they are all given to different masters,
obviously including the Spartans whom they hate. Then again, exactly at the moment when Hecuba is
trying to provide Andromache an incentive for hope through her child, Talthybius appears and announces
that Astyanax is ordered to be killed. It is again Talthybius who announces the decision of Greek
commanders to put Troy on fire. However, even with his ruthless announcements, Talthybius seems to be
a sympathetic person capable of “tact, compassion, kindness and humanity” (Gilmartin 216). The
evidence comes from his use of euphemism while announcing the death of Polyxana due to which the
message is misunderstood. Later, he admits his own distaste on being a herald of fatal news when he
announces Astyanax’ lot. He also comes with tear flowing eyes when he brings the dead body of
Astyanax. Thus he is a messenger, not the source of eliminating hope.

The gods also take part in the frame work of hope. After all the episodes of hope and its loss the Trojan
women once again turn to gods and wish that the Greek fleet might be struck with the bright, immortal
spear of thunder on its journey back home. At this point, unlike these women, the audience has the
knowledge of gods’ intentions and plans for the Greeks because of the dialogue of Poseidon and Athene
in the prologue. Hence, there is again hope that the Trojans will be avenged and the Greeks will suffer,
and this will eventually prove that “there is some justice in the scheme of things” (Lushnig 11). The gods
will make the equation of winners and losers apparent once again (Easterling 175).

That Euripides wants to show in this play “the folly of war and the emptiness of victory” through utter
destruction of Troy might be true (Lushnig 11). No one else but Euripides could draw the picture of
complete pain which is also completely human at the end of “The Trojan Women” (Hamilton 168). But he
achieves his goal with great mastery by balancing both sides of the case through a very interesting
labyrinth of hope and its loss. This balance is not lost even at the close of the play, where against the
feared proclamation of the chorus, the name of Troy has stood the test of time and is not ceased to exist
for its audience (Easterling 177).
 Works Cited

Easterling, P.E. “Form and Performance.” The Cambridge Companion to Greek Tragedy. Ed. P. E.
Easterling. Cambridge: U of Cambridge P, 1997.

Goldmartin, Kristine. “Talthybius in the Trojan Women.” The American Journal of Philology Vol. 91, No.
2 (Apr., 1970): 213-222. 11 Dec. 2010 <http://www.jstor.org/stable/293044>.

Hamilton, Edith. “The Greek Way.” New York: Norton, 1964.

Lushnig, C. A. E. “Euripides’ ‘Trojan Women’: All is Vanity.” The Classical World Vol. 65, No. 1 (Sep.,
1971): 8-12. 11 Dec. 2010 <http://www.jstor.org/stable/4347531>.

Poole, Adrian. “Total Disaster: Euripides' the Trojan Women.” Arion, New Series Vol. 3, No. 3 (1976):
257-287. 11 Dec. 2010 <http://www.jstor.org/stable/20163420>