BMCR 2009.01.26, Ahmed Etman, A Belle in the Prison of Socrates

Ahmed Etman, A Belle in the Prison of Socrates.  Newcastle:  Cambridge
Scholars Publishing, 2008.  Pp. xix, 100.  ISBN 9781847185273.  L24.99.


Reviewed by Jo Heirman, University of Amsterdam ([email protected])
Word count:  2051 words
-------------------------------
To read a print-formatted version of this review, see
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2009/2009-01-26.html
To comment on this review, see
http://www.bmcreview.org/2009/01/20090126.html
-------------------------------

"A Belle in the Prison of Socrates" is a play written by Ahmed Etman,
Professor of Classics and Comparative Literature at the University of
Cairo. Besides his scholarly activities he has translated Greek texts
into Arabic (for instance, the Iliad in 2004) and writes plays in which
figures from antiquity are dramatized. The play is a tragicomic
depiction of Socrates' life with his wife Xanthula and his students
till his execution. It is preceded by prefaces from several professors.

In the first preface Lorna Hardwick (Professor of Classics at the Open
University, UK) stresses two points in the play. First of all, she
points out the play's intertextuality. Indeed, there are many allusions
to Plato's dialogues (Phaedrus, Phaedo, Crito, Apology), and Xenophon's
Memorabilia, and a scene from Aristophanes' Clouds is inserted in the
play. Although these intertextual elements offer intellectual pleasure
to the reader, the knowledge of these ancient Greek texts is not
necessary for a full understanding of the play. The situation is thus
comparable with Umberto Eco's "Name of the Rose". Secondly, Hardwick
stresses the play's allusions to contemporary issues such as
environmental pollution, drugs, etc.

In the second preface the renowned Belgian scholar Freddy Decreus
(Professor of Classics and Theatre, Ghent University) discusses not
only the intertextuality, but also the play's deep engagement with
political issues. Etman criticizes what he sees as the fragility and
superficiality of democracy that has become demagoguery, mere
indoctrinating propaganda. This criticism, however, is not so overt or
one-sided as Plato's critique of democracy. Etman invites the reader to
be critical of every political regime that deceives people.

The hermeneutic task of the reader/spectator to grasp those hidden
thoughts is emphasized in the third preface, written by Fawzia El-Sadr
(Professor at the Ain-Shams University, Egypt), who translated Etman's
play from Arabic into English. Like Hardwick, El-Sadr points out the
contemporary issues the play deals with. The play functions as a mirror
for our own society, so that we are constantly going back and forth
from fifth-century Athenian society to our present society. In this way
Etman manages to bring ancient culture close to our own time. It has to
be noted, however, that El-Sadr inaccurately labels story, plot,
events, time and place as "theatrical techniques" (xiv), whereas these
are narrative techniques, not theatrical ones.

After a brief foreword by Etman himself, a list of the play's personae
is offered. One character, however, is forgotten in the list: Hedone,
the maid of Socrates and his wife "Xanthula", is not mentioned. Besides
this major failure, it has to be noted that this work is absolutely
brimming with typographical errors, which disturb the reading of the
play.

The play is divided into two acts, respectively consisting of three and
four scenes. Etman replaced Greek choral interludes with several poetic
songs (for example, the songs of the rhapsodic poet Ion). The play is
very suitable for performance, and the author's attention to
performance is stressed by numerous notes on details of staging.
Indeed, the present reviewer was fortunate to attend a performance by
an Egyptian theater group during the Ancient Greek Drama Festival last
summer at Paphos (Cyprus).

The first scene of the play depicts the contrast between the
contemplating Socrates and the down-to-earth Xanthula in a discussion
of whether or not Socrates needs new shoes or not for the Dionysia.
Thereafter, Socrates' friend Chaerephon enters and tells the well-known
story from Plato's Apology, that according to the Pythia  no man is
wiser than Socrates. As in the Apology, Socrates wants to challenge the
oracle's pronouncement by going out to look for someone wiser than
himself, and questioning artisans, poets and statesmen.

In the second scene Socrates first interrogates a "maker of gods'
statues". Socrates' criticism of the artisan's work is in line with
Xenophanes' rejection of the idea that the gods resemble humans in
form. Socrates believes that gods cannot be represented by statues,
since gods are everywhere and they have to be worshipped in our hearts.
The artisan's angry reaction at Socrates' opinions reveals him as no
wiser than Socrates.

After the artisan, Socrates questions a poet. The poet here is the
rhapsodic singer Ion of Plato's own dialogue. Etman brilliantly
interweaves the two Platonic dialogues and exploits the discussion
between Socrates and the rhapsode to stress the main point of Ion: Ion
has no expertise at all: he sings under the effect of some divine
inspiration, but with no understanding of the content of his songs.
Finally, Socrates interrogates Democratia herself and criticizes the
fact that democracy deceits people. Hence, the reader/spectator can
conclude that Socrates possesses the most wisdom.

The third scene focuses on Socrates' wife. In a comic dialogue between
Xanthula and Hedone, the latter expresses the desire to ask the oracle
if Xanthula is the most beautiful woman on earth. This scene can not
only be read as a comical reversal of Chaerephon's philosophical
question to the Delphic oracle, but also as an allusion to the
fairy-tale of Snow White ("mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the
fairest of them all?"). It has to be noted, however, that there is a
problem in the dialogue between the two women. Socrates did not tell
Xanthula that he was going out in search of a wiser man, yet Xanthula
reveals to her maid how much she is worried that Socrates has not yet
returned home from his quest. The question is how Xanthula knows what
her husband is doing. This is only one of many indications that this
play is a highly garbled piece, in which the playwright forgets which
characters have been doing what and so makes nonsense of their actions.

While chatting about the fancy clothes Xanthula bought for the
Dionysia, the women notice Socrates and his students entering the
house. The end of the scene has the women make funny comments on the
men's meditations, while Socrates is being dressed up for the upcoming
Dionysia.

The core of the first act's last scene is a play within the play.
Socrates and Xanthula watch Aristophanes' Clouds at the Dionysia. This
is surely one of the (comic) highlights of Etman's play. In the 'play
within the play' Aristophanes plays the role of 'Socrates' talking to a
peasant. In the dialogue between the two, 'Socrates' tries to teach
philosophy to the farmer, but, of course, the peasant does not
understand what Socrates is talking about. We see here theoretical
knowledge opposed to practical skills. A second part of the play within
the play -- loosely connected with the first part -- deals with the
opposition between Right and Wrong. This reminds us of Aristophanes'
critique of the sophists (of whom Socrates was one according to Clouds)
for turning right into wrong or wrong into right.

The first scene of the second act begins with a dialogue between
Xanthula and Hedone. We are suddenly in the middle of the war between
Athens and Sparta. The opening has a more tragic tone, since the women
are talking about the grief the war causes. The dialogue ends with the
return of the Athenian soldiers defeated by the Spartans. Socrates is
with them after, apparently, leaving his front position during the
battle. Xanthula blames Socrates for the shame his desertion has caused
to her family. While Socrates is defending his 'action', the orator
Andocides enters on stage and reports that Socrates has to stand trial
for atheism, corrupting youth and resisting the democratic system. It
is important to note that the third reason does not occur in Plato's
Apology. This addition emphasizes Etman's critique of democracy as a
fragile and superficial form of government, and easily turned into
demagoguery. After his entrance on stage, Andocides proposes to write a
speech in defence of Socrates, but the latter refuses his support. The
scene ends with Xanthula whispering in the orator's ear to write a
defence speech. The rational reaction of Xanthula seems rather strange,
considering the emotional attitude she adopts throughout the whole
play.

The second scene is about Socrates' trial. Andocides has switched
sides: despite taking Xanthula's money, he now speaks on behalf of the
prosecutors. It is Lysias, whose speech on love is discussed in Plato's
Phaedrus, who proposes to defend Socrates, but the latter refuses,
again. Xanthula asks her money back from Lysias, but it is not clear
why, since she only gave money to Andocides.

Andocides gives two reasons for Socrates' accusation: his corruption of
young men and his atheism (the most important reason, i.e. Socrates'
anti-democratic stance, becomes clear at the end of the scene). To
these two main reasons Andocides later adds some comical ones, that
Socrates would have instigated youngsters to use drugs and to keep
rats. After Andocides' speech it is time for Socrates' defence. The
reader/spectator who is familiar with the Apology of Plato (and of
Xenophon) will be surprised at Socrates' words. Here, Socrates is not
the triumphing philosopher, but a very weak person, who even wants to
weep at the end of the scene. We might see this as an evocation of the
frailty and impotence of the individual in the face of the state
system. The scene ends with the verdict: the votes for acquittal are
equal to the ones for the death sentence, but the judge (Democratia
herself) has the last word. She condemns the philosopher to death. The
conclusion has a clear political message: in the end it is democracy
itself that condemns an individual to death.

While the last scene of the first act is a comic highlight, the last
scene of the second act is a tragic highlight. We are now in Socrates'
prison. The situation recalls Plato's Phaedo, but what happens is
totally different. A demonstration has taken place in Athens calling
for Socrates' release. Socrates disapproves of the chaotic and violent
situation in the city, and we might see here Socrates depicted as an
ancient Gandhi or Martin Luther King. Because of the anarchy that rules
the city as a result of the people's call for Socrates' release,
Democratia comes to visit Socrates in prison. Playing the role of
Plato's Crito, she offers Socrates to flee into exile. As in Plato's
dialogue, Socrates rejects the offer. He does not want to violate the
law, for he wishes to be a model for society.

A comic interlude is provided by the entrance of Xanthula and her maid.
Now his wife truly is "A Belle in the Prison of Socrates". This meeting
is comic, for, when Hedone sees Socrates together with Democratia, she
thinks the two are having an affair. Like Democratia, Xanthula tries to
persuade Socrates to escape, but again he does not agree.

Next, Socrates has another guest: Plato himself. Like the encounter
between Socrates and Aristophanes, this is a highly pleasant meeting
for classical philologists. An intertextual joke is made at the
beginning of the dialogue between the two philosophers: Socrates'
question if his pupil is still ill reminds of the opening of Plato's
Apology, in which is said that Plato could not be present at Socrates'
trial, since he was ill. Afterwards, Plato says he is planning to
travel to Egypt to gain wisdom. This is an allusion to the legend that
Plato went away from Athens for a while after Socrates' death.

After Plato has left, together with Socrates' wife, maid and children,
Socrates' guard (well-known for the warm relationship he has with
Socrates in Plato's Phaedo) reveals that he has instigated a revolution
and thrown off Democratia. Now that he is in power, he wants to set
Socrates free. Socrates does not agree, for he considers the usurpation
illegitimate. In accordance with Crito, Socrates wants to carry out
what the law has condemned him to do, and so he drinks the cup of
poison and falls dead.

Hence, the comedy has become a true tragedy, showing what democracy can
do to people who oppose to the system. An evolution is certainly
evident, throughout the play, in Socrates' attitude to democracy. While
Socrates' criticism of democracy is light at the beginning of the play,
the piece progressively acquires a more bitter tone. The play ends with
Socrates' determined opposition to the democratic system. The play thus
develops from what first seems a mere comedy towards a tragedy, in
which the dangerous sides of democracy are emphasized.