The Power of the Word in Sophocles' "Philoctetes" Podlecki, Anthony J Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Fall 1966; 7, 3; ProQuest pg. 233 The Power of the Word in Sophocles' Phi/oetetes Anthony J. Podlecki \' ~, '" G l\oyOS" OV)!aaTy]S" f-LEyaS EaTt)!, ORGIAS THE Philoctetes is a much-discussed play.1 Most of its critics feel that it is one of the harder of Sophocles' plays to make intelli­ gible to the modern reader, who tends to ask questions like: Is Philoctetes or Neoptolemus the hero? If Philoctetes, wherein lies his tragedy? What function does Odysseus serve? Such questions are embarrassing, perhaps unanswerable.2 There remains the possibility that they are the wrong kind of questions to ask about a play like the P hiloctetes. Perhaps we should try a different approach; the Philoctetes is a case­ study in the failure of communication, involving three individuals who fail to come to terms with one another because they are, in effect, speaking with different voices. Their tragedy, if you will, is a collective one: there is a breakdown in that communication which is at the basis of human society and which is epitomized by the Greek term Aoyos. To start with Philoctetes himself. He has lived for over nine years on 1 For earlier discussion see Schmid-Stahlin, GeschGriechLit I.Z (1934, repro 1959) 397--407; more recently, A. Lesky, Die tragische Dichtung der Hellenen 2 (G6ttingen 1964) 127-130; recent literature in H. Friis Johansen, "Sophocles 1937-1959," Lustrum 7 (1962) 247-255. The following throw some light on the play: S. M. Adams' chapter in his Sophocles the Playwright (Toronto 1957) 134-159; Karin Alt, "Schicksal und fPY2:12: im Philoktet des Sophokles," Hermes 89 (1961) 141-174; Harry C. Avery, "Heracles, Philocretes, Neoptol­ emus," Hermes 93 (1965) 279-297; Lilian Feder, "The Symbol of the Desert Island in Sophocles' Philoctetes," Drama Survey 3 (1963) 33--41; P. W. Harsh, "The Role of the Bow in the Philoctetes of Sophocles," AJP 81 (1961) 408--414; M. H. Jameson, "Politics and the Philoctetes," CP 51 (1956) 217-227; B. M. W. Knox, "Philoctetes," Arion 2 (1964) 424>0 (= The Heroic Temper, Studies in Sophoclean Tragedy [Sather Lectures 35, Berkeley 1964] 117-142) I. M. Linforth, Philoctetes: the Play and the Man (Univ. of Calif. PubIs. in Class. Philo!. 15, 3 [1956] 95-156); and R. Muth, "Gottheit und Mensch im 'Philoktet' des Sophokles," Studi in onore di Luigi Castiglioni II (Florence 1959) 6414>58. lOr they provoke answers which are misleading, as, for example, Weinstock's mis­ emphaSiS on Neoptolemus and his "Bildung" (Sophokles 2 [Berlin 1937] 9S-122). 233 234 ANTHONYJ.PODLEC~ Lemnos, an island which is, for dramatic purposes at least, deserted.3 His isolation is emphasized by the chorus (172, 183) and by Philoctetes himself (471,487). On one level, then, Philoctetes is unable to com­ municate with his fellow men because he lives entirely alone. The poet makes it clear that this impossibility of communication is keenly felt by Philoctetes and was one of his bitterest griefs. "To his bitter cries," the chorus say, "a ceaseless, distant echo alone responds" (189-190). And again, "he had no neighbor of his woes to whom he might pour out his lament and receive an answering cry" (694). So common a thing as that, AOYOL between men, the cheapest commodity in Athens; and yet the absence of this ordinary everyday converse through speech was one of Philoctetes' deepest sorrows. He could tell his pain to no one and hear no word of consolation in return. But the matter is more complicated than that. Even if there had been other humans on the island, Philoctetes would have found it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to communicate with them, for, a good part of the time, philoctetes' pain makes him incapable of rational speech. Bestial cries, vocal embodiments of pain, are all he can utter. Even before his actual appearance, the sailors who form the chorus say they hear "the far-off voice of a man destroyed" (208). "He comes not with trill of shepherds' pipes," they say grimly,4 "but his cry can be heard from afar ... His dread shriek goes before him" (213- 218). This man-destroying pain, an agony so blindingly intense that it makes rational discourse impossible, is a fact of Philoctetes' life. It results from the wound in his foot received ten years before when, on his way to Troy, he had transgressed the holy precinct of Chryse and was bitten by the sacred snake. It is now so real as to be thought of as almost a companion of Philoctetes on his island, a mate for the rocks and the endless sea. These are the sub-rational cries for which, as we are told in the opening lines, he was put ashore on Lemnos: his "wild cries of ill-omen, shrieking, groaning" had interfered with the Greek sacrifices (8-11). And, as the play unfolds, we are given a moving por­ trayal of the actual breakdown of speech which prevents Philoctetes 3 This seems to have been an innovation of Sophocles'; see ]ebb's introduction, p. xiii, and his note on line 2. (Dio Chrysostom, Or. 52.7, remarks on the indifference of Aeschylus to the implausibility of bringing a chorus of Lemnians face· to-face with Philoctetes for the first time in over nine years.) For the loneliness of the Sophoclean hero, especially Philoc­ tetes, see Knox, Heroic Temper 32-33. 4 This is a favorite oxymoron, used by Sophocles of Philoctetes elsewhere: fL£AT} {1owv avaVAa Kat paK~p,a fro 699 P. For occurrences elsewhere in tragedy, see TAPA 93 (1962) 369 n.29. THE POWER OF THE WORD IN SOPHOCLES' PHlLOCTETES 235 from communicating with his fellows and dissolves his humanity in a torrent of meaningless cries. HCome on," Neoptolemus urges as they are making for the ship; "why are you silent for no reason?"5 Philoctetes' only reply is a shriek; he cannot explain his sufferings, he can only manifest them in his cries. When he cries out again, Neopto­ lemus asks impatiently, "What's the matter? Will you not speak out? Will you remain thus silent?" (740-741). Philoctetes begins to speak, in halting, broken phrases which are interrupted by one long, dread­ ful wail (746). As Knox well remarks, Neoptolemus here finds himself confronted with Philoctetes' "momentary obliteration of personality, of all traces of humanity, under the pressure of intolerable pain."6 His suffering is terrible, beyond words (756). In the course of the scene he suffers another attack which leads him to call upon death (797-798) and to long for immolation on the Lemnian fire. Isolation and pain: first the one and now the other prevent Philoc­ tetes' communication with his fellows. But these obstacles are over­ come in the course of the action: Philoctetes does find another human being with whom to communicate and his pain subsides sufficiently to make intelligible speech possible. Here we have the central paradox which is at the heart of the play's meaning: the boy with whom Philoctetes thought he could finally set up a bond of communication after so many silent years in fact turns out to be a liar. 7 True A6yos is impossible because of Neoptolemus' misuse of speech. That this is the final, crushing blow which sends Philoctetes back into the cave of his wounded self has not been fully appreciated. We have to go back to the point where his hopes of creating a speech­ bond are first aroused in order to comprehend the full effect of the dashing of those hopes. When philoctetes first saw Neoptolemus and his men he had said, "Your garb is Greek, but I wish to hear your voice" (224-225). "Speak to me ... answer. For it is not right that I should lack this of you nor you of me."B When they identified themselves as Greeks, Philoctetes burst out, "0 most beloved sound! 0 to hear the 5730-731, €t OUSEVOS- AOYOV U'W7T~S-, a slight pun. 6 Knox (supra n.1) 52 (= Heroic Temper 131). 7 Adams is eager to save Neoptolemus from literal untruth. EYen if his view (which, as he admits, is "open to objection," 140 n.5) be accepted, the boy's intent is to deceive; "der Trug ist herrschend, und nicht nur Odysseus ist der Falsche," as Reinhardt remarks (Sophokles [Frankfurt/Main 1933] 183). 8230-231; ill' av-raJ-L€I,pau()'· OU yap €lKOS- OUT' €J-L€ I UJ-LWV aJ-LapT€iv Toih-6 y' ovB' vJ-Las €J-Lofi. aJ-Lapniv in a deeper sense as well, cf 1012 and 1224. 4--G.R.B.S. 236 ANTHONY J. PODLECKI address of such a man after so long a time! Tell me everything ... " (234-238). c/>ciWTJP.Cl, 7TpOUc/>0EYP.Cl, Y€YWVE-it is as if he were savoring the synonyms for the speech-act. This was Philoctetes' last chance, not only to get off the island-for that is really of secondary importance­ but to emerge from his physical and spiritual isolation into the world of men.9 Now his hopes to set up a human contact are dashed. He withdraws once again into himself and contents himself with his island, where he has only the harbors, the headlands, the wild moun­ tain creatures and rocks to call upon (938-39), ... I pour out these laments to you, my Customary company, for I do not know to whom else to speak ... What has led Neoptolemus to be a part of this evil scheme, this frustration of the speech-act? He has fallen under the influence of a man for whom AOYOS is not primarily intended as a means of truthful communication among men, but just another means to victory. "I was young once and had an inactive tongue," Odysseus tells Neoptol­ emus in the opening scene, "but I have now learned that the tongue, not deeds, leads all before" (96-99). Philoctetes tells Neoptolemus later, "I know that Odysseus would touch any evil argument with his tongue" (407-408). And when Philoctetes asks him of "a worthless man, but one quick and clever of tongue" (440), Neoptolemus not unreasonably thinks the reference is to Odysseus, although it turns out that Philoctetes was referring to Thersites. And later, after the "trader" has told his story, Philoctetes bursts out, "That Odysseus should hope to lead me off with soft words! ... I would rather listen to my worst enemy, the snake that bit me. Odysseus would say any­ thing . .. " (629-633). Odysseus would, indeed, say anything. And there are indications in the play that he has used his lies even on Neoptolemus. In Neoptol­ emus' story to Philoctetes, the lad says that Odysseus and Achilles' guardian Phoenix came to him with their own deceptive Aoyos-, saying that he was to have the honor of capturing Troy in his dead father's place, "and there was fair promise in their speech" (352). But when they arrived at Troy their AOYoS changed and became "most auda­ cious" (363): they offered him anything else of Achilles' but his weapons; these were now Odysseus'. Now, Neoptolemus has been • The undertones in this scene are well brought out by Reinhardt (supra n.7) 178-179. THE POWER OF THE WORD IN SOPHOCLES' PHILOCTETES 237 put up to telling this tale by Odysseus, and it may be that this detail ofNeoptolemus' being cheated out of his father's arms, as an element in it (62ft), is simply untrue. But it seems more likely that Neoptol­ emus has incorporated a true detail in an otherwise deceptive account,l° and when, towards the end of the play, Philoctetes refers to the Greeks "plundering him of his father's prize" (1365),11 the boy does not correct him. In any case we are presented in the opening scene with a clear example of Odysseus' deceit. Neoptolemus is won­ dering how he can overcome his innate aversion to lying and Odysseus insists that it is a matter of profit, K€p8o~: Troy is to be taken with Philoctetes' arrows. Neoptolemus asks in surprise, HAm I not, then, to be the sacker of the city as you said?" (114). It is only a hint, but an important one; Neoptolemus has himself been the dupe of a lying A6yo~ of Odysseus, who, however, hastily covers himself by saying that it is the combination of Philoctetes' bow and Neoptolemus' strength which is to prevail over Troy. Let us examine the process by which the young and pliable N eoptol­ emus falls under the spell of this Master of Deceit. As the play opens we see the lad being worked on by the wily words of Odysseus, the man of action who has no time for long speeches (11-12). At first, he outlines what Neoptolemus' part in the plot is to be only in vague terms: "you must steal away the soul of Philoctetes in speech with words."12 The boy is horrified at hearing the plot and his share in it. "Words which I am pained to hear I am loath also to do. It is not my nature to do anything by evil craft ... " (86-88). "What are you order­ ing me to do except tell lies?" he asks, and Odysseus replies: "I am telling you to take Philoctetes by guile" (100-101). "Do not you con­ sider it shameful, then, to teUlies?" Neoptolemus asks incredulously. For here is a world of values completely foreign to him. This misuse of the speech-act, this perversion of A6yo~, clearly goes against his grain. He is his father's son; all must be straightforward and above-board. But Odysseus succeeds in casting his verbal spell, and 10 As Adams. 137, maintains: "Urged to deceive. he is himself deceived." 11 Jebb followed Brunck in deleting the last part of 1365 and the following 1!- lines, on what seem to me insufficient grounds (see his Appendix, 251-252; his explanation of why they were inserted in the first place is unconvincing). But even if this deletion be accepted. the important words 1Ta-rpoc; y£pac; UV'\WVT£S", remain at the beginning of 1365. Neoptolemus' comment at 1373, My~tc; f