Abstract

What gives these words power to speak to us even without the play? No doubt the story of Tereus and Philomela has a universally affecting element: the double violation, the alliance of craft and craft, and what the metaphor specifically refers to: that truth will out, that human consciousness will triumph. The phrase would not be effective without the story, yet its focus is so sharp that a few words seem to yield not simply the structure of one story but that of all stories in so far as they are tell-tales. Aristotle, in fact, mentions Sophocles' kenning during his discussion of how recognition scenes are brought about; and it is interesting that other examples cited by him share the characteristic of seeming to exist prior to the plays that embody them, as if they were riddles or gnomic words imposed by tradition and challenging an adequate setting. Take for example, "So I too must die at the altar like my sister". Or "I came to find my son, and I lose my own life". Or again, "Here we are doomed to die, for here we were cast forth". These phrases, overheard, bring about a recognition. Like "the voice of the shuttle" they have little meaning without a story that sets them. Yet once a story is found their suggestiveness is not absorbed but rather potentiated. And this, perhaps, is what archetype means: a part greater than the whole of which it is a part, a text that demands a context yet is not reducible to it.