One of the more interesting
technical aspects within Lysistrata was the covering up of one slightly flawed
plot with a very intelligent use of another plot. These two plots would be the
women’s plans of going on a sex strike with their husbands, and the other being
the older women taking over the Akropolis. The first of the two, the sex
strike, is between the dissatisfied women at home, and their husbands away
fighting a war. There is a flaw in the plot here because these women claim that
their husbands have been away and fighting for years. Therefore a sex strike
really wouldn’t be effective or practical considering they men are not even
home to be impacted. The plan is more of a comical plot that’s affectivity has
to just be assumed.
However, at the same time the other
women are taking over the Akropolis and this makes perfect sense for giving the
men something to be mad at. At this time, the Akropolis wasn’t an essential
building in the sense that leaders constantly occupied it, but its contents
were essential to the men of war, as it contained the treasury. So by taking it
over, these women are blocking a necessity to the men, which would guarantee to
be hurtful and noticed. This was a great
plot to show their dissatisfaction, whereas the sex strike could easily be
viewed as a flaw in the story.
The lack of consideration in the first plot against the men was something I missed at first! Without the second plot that was thoroughly thought out, Lysistrata would have never made even the smallest impact on the mens' lives. The first thought was a good idea- withholding a necessity from the men- however it just turns out stopping women from running the Akropolis proved to be of higher importance than sex.
ReplyDeleteYour point of view is very interesting. I was always under the impression that the Husbands' years away at war served as an exaggeration to further expound upon the significance of their absence; rather an artistic expression.
ReplyDelete