Abraham Sacrifiant, a dramatization of God commanding Abraham to sacrifice his son, previews the great psychological tragedies to come in the 17th century. The greatest difference, clearly due to the religious differences, is the presence in Abraham Sacrifiant of an external motivator, God, who instructs Abraham on his actions. A comparable psychologically intense tragedy of the 17th century, Phaedra, subjects the title character to a purely internal struggle between rationality and passion. Contrarily, Abraham's decision is whether or not to obey the external force which has commanded him to kill his son. Abraham’s struggle of faith is demonstrated in his conversations with his wife, which Phaedra mirrors in her discussions with Oenone. The essential difference between the two is that Abraham’s plight is essentially reactionary whereas Phaedra’s is actionary. Certainly, her decisions are a reaction to the news that her husband is dead, but nothing other than her internal actions forces her hand. Because Abraham is merely reacting emotionally to his situation, there is no real build to the plot. From the moment the angel arrives to the replacement of the lamb, the state of the play is static in Abraham’s sorrow. External motivators leave the protagonist with no true choices, eliminating any sort of rising action, which renders much renaissance French drama a purely poetic exercise.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Jennifer KellettM.A. French Literature Florida State University Archives
June 2021
Categories |