Great Books Ep 74. Sophocles - Trachiniae. The All Conquering Power of Love.

Heracles sacks a city and causes a lot of destruction because he falls in love with someone and wants to have her at any cost. Does all-consuming romantic love exist or is it fiction?

Photo by Cathal Mac an Bheatha on Unsplash

“.. the conquest of the whole city was due to love for this girl: the Lydian woman was not its destroyer, but the passion which this maid has kindled.”

~ ‘Trachiniae’ by Sophocles (Richard. C. Jebb translation. GB5 - p174)

Brief Summary:

Deianeira, the wife of Heracles, is anxiously awaiting her husband’s return. He has gone on long absences in the past also, but this time feels different because before he left, he told her how to divide his property if he were to die. She sends her son Hyllus to find information about his father. A messenger arrives and tells Deianeira that Heracles is alive and Lichas, his herald, is on the way to give more details. Deianeira is very happy that Heracles is alive. Lichas arrives with a group of maidens and tells Deianeira that Heracles was held captive for a year, and after that, he sacked the city of Oechalia, whose King Eurytus had insulted him at a banquet, and the women with him are the captives from the city. One of the girls looks noble, and when Deianeira asks about her, Lichas says he doesn’t know anything.

After Lichas and the maidens go inside, the messenger calls Deianeira to a side and says everything Lichas said was a lie, except for the sacking of Oechalia and being captive for a year. He says Heracles sacked the city because he was in love with Iole, the beautiful maiden Deianeira was asking about. Since her father, Eurytus, didn’t agree to give his daughter, Heracles attacked the city and sacked it. Deianeira is horrified by the news and says that even gods cannot go against love. She calls Lichas, who, though he denies this initially, agrees later, saying that he didn’t want to tell the truth for fear of hurting her feelings.

Deianeira is worried about being replaced by a younger bride and wonders how to get her husband back. She remembers the centaur Nessus giving her some of his blood as he was dying, saying that the blood had the power to act as a love charm that would bind Heracles to her, and he wouldn’t go with any other women. She swabs the blood onto a robe, gives it to Lichas, and says it is a gift for her husband. After Lichas leaves, she looks at the wool that she used to swab the blood on the robe and finds that it has crumbled into a powder. She realizes that the centaur had tricked her and gave the blood to her to poison Heracles since he was responsible for the centaur’s death.

Hyllus arrives and says Heracles is in great pain and is about to die and accuses his mother of planning to kill Heracles. Deianeira is deeply saddened by this and commits suicide. Hyllus comes to know that Deianeira was innocent and had been tricked, but it is too late. Heracles is brought to the palace, and there he tells his son to set up a funeral pyre on Mount Oeta and burn him in it. He also asks his son to marry Iole. Hyllus agrees to both since they are his father’s dying wishes.

My Thoughts:

The play starts with an interesting quote that one cannot rightly judge whether a person is good or evil till he is dead. Deianeira is judged as evil both by her son Hyllus and husband Heracles before they know the truth. I guess one can judge someone else, regardless of whether they are dead or not, only if one knows the right information about them. Can Heracles be judged as good or evil? He is hailed as a hero and legend in stories and myths because of his multiple conquests. But from the information in the play, one could say that he was not a good husband to Deianeira. Even when his son tells him that giving him the poisonous robe was a mistake and that she had killed herself, Heracles says in anger that he should have killed her himself. Heracles sacked the city of Oechalia, which caused the death of many people, including Eurytus, the king. To the people of the city, Heracles would be an evil man who brought destruction.

I guess the bigger theme in the play is the power of love, romantic, passionate, possessive love that is destructive. Deianeira seems to accept that once someone has fallen in love, nothing can be done. She says wise people don’t stand against love and that love also rules over the gods. Heracles sacks the city and causes a lot of destruction because he falls in love with Iole and wants to have her at any cost. Deianeira gives the robe with the purported love spell to get her husband back. Romantic love has been a theme in countless stories, plays and movies across cultures for centuries. Love as an uncontrollable force that pulls two people together has been portrayed in multiple ways, and people generally seem to acknowledge its power.

And yet, it doesn’t factor much in the day-to-day lives of people or the rules and laws that make society function. Does it play a prominent role in the practical aspects of culture and governance? Where does love between strangers factor into ethical philosophies like Utilitarianism, which focuses on the outcomes and social utility of things, or Deontology, which focuses on obligations and rules? Most religions preach loving each other, but when it comes to marrying someone outside one’s religion or sect, in most places, the first reaction is to dissuade the couple, citing potential problems in the marriage due to differing belief systems. We hear stories of honor killing and moving a girl or a guy away from a place to avoid marriages across cultures even now. Parents in many cultures brainwash their kids with the importance of marrying within their own culture from a young age. In those cases, it would be a marriage based on duty, not romantic love. In the story, Heracles does emotional blackmail and forces his son to marry Iole. I wonder how that marriage would turn out. Abiding by rules and laws and being heavily duty-bound are often at odds with the irrational nature of romantic love.

Then the question is, does romantic love, a love-at-first-sight kind of love, an intense and all-consuming love that one cannot get away from, does it exist? Is it a figment of the imagination of story writers across centuries? It is probably based on real human experiences and emotions, but is it exaggerated in stories? Are we setting ourselves up for failure if we expect it? Are we setting ourselves up for failure if we don’t expect it, and it suddenly catches us out of the blue and upends one’s life? Can it thrive in a period of abundance where everyone has everything, and there are too many distractions? Can it thrive in a war zone where no one has anything, and there are practical obstacles? Is it unique to humans? I guess not. I’ve heard stories of romantic bonding and love between elephants, penguins, birds and other animals. I wonder how similar or related it is to ‘imprinting’. I heard of this term for the first time when we got a puppy. The vet said the puppy might imprint on one of us, and it did - it imprinted on my wife, and he used to follow her everywhere and used to get anxious even if she went to another room. I didn’t see that strong bond with our second puppy, though. So, it may not be the norm.

I guess strong romantic connections and bonding are not the norm; they are rare, and one needs to search for instances among people to find them. The rare ones who have them are lucky and must cherish their good fortune while it lasts.

---

Gemini (AI Chatbot) Response:

Expanding on Your Thoughts and Answering Questions:

The Existence and Nature of Romantic Love: Your contemplation on the existence of romantic love, especially the intense, all-consuming kind, is a central question raised by "Trachiniae." While the play showcases love's destructive potential, it also hints at its allure and power. Deianeira's willingness to use the centaur's blood, despite her misgivings, demonstrates the lengths people will go to for love.

Whether this type of love is a cultural construct or an innate human experience is debatable. It's likely a combination of both, shaped by societal expectations and individual personalities. The play doesn't offer a definitive answer but invites us to ponder the complex nature of love and its varying manifestations.

Expectations and Love: You're right to question whether our expectations of love can lead to disappointment. Idealizing romantic love, as often depicted in stories, can create unrealistic standards that are difficult to meet in real life. Conversely, dismissing the possibility of intense love can also lead to missed opportunities for deep connection.

The key, as you suggest, might be finding a balance between openness to love and realistic expectations. Recognizing that love can be both exhilarating and challenging, and that it comes in many forms, might help us navigate its complexities more successfully.

Love in Different Circumstances: Love can indeed thrive in various environments. While abundance and distractions might make it harder to focus on nurturing a relationship, they don't necessarily prevent love from developing. Similarly, adversity can sometimes intensify love, as couples face challenges together and rely on each other for support.

Love and Imprinting: Your observation about imprinting is fascinating. While imprinting is a biological phenomenon observed in some animals, its connection to romantic love in humans is more complex. Some researchers suggest that early childhood experiences can shape our attachment styles and influence our later relationships. However, the notion of imprinting on a romantic partner, in the same way, a duckling imprints on its mother, is likely an oversimplification of the intricate dynamics of human bonding.

Rarity of Deep Romantic Connection: You're astute in suggesting that deep, lasting romantic love might be rare. While countless stories celebrate such love, real-life examples might be less common. This could be due to various factors, including societal pressures, individual differences, and the challenges of maintaining a long-term relationship.

Deeper Analysis of Themes and Symbolism:

• The Poisoned Robe as a Symbol of Betrayal: The robe serves as a powerful symbol of betrayal and deception. It represents Deianeira's misplaced trust in the centaur's words and her own desperate attempt to control love through manipulation. It ultimately becomes a vehicle for Heracles' agonizing death, underscoring the tragic consequences of misguided actions.

• The Chorus as a Voice of Reason: The Chorus, representing the collective wisdom of the community, offers commentary on the events and characters, often providing a more objective perspective. Their observations highlight the dangers of unchecked emotions and the importance of moderation and self-awareness.

• The Role of the Gods: While the gods are not directly present in the play, their influence is felt throughout. The characters frequently invoke the gods and attribute their actions to divine will. This raises questions about the relationship between human agency and divine intervention, as well as the role of fate in shaping human lives.

Thought-Provoking Questions for Modern Readers:

• How do societal expectations and cultural norms influence our understanding and experience of love?

• Can love be a destructive force even when it is well-intentioned?

• What are the ethical implications of manipulating or controlling another person's emotions in the name of love?

• How can we cultivate healthy relationships that balance passion, trust, and respect?

• Does the play offer any lessons about the importance of forgiveness and understanding in the face of betrayal?