Giulia Fiore
Università di Bologna, Dipartimento di Filologia classica e Italianistica - FICLIT, Teaching Assistant
Université François-Rabelais, Tours, Centre d'Etudes Supérieures de la Renaissance, Visiting PhD student
Università di Bologna, Dipartimento di Lingue, Letterature e Culture Moderne (LILEC), PhD researcher in Greek Language and Literature & Comparative Literature
Università di Bologna, Dipartimento di FIlologia classica e Italianistica (FICLIT), Graduate Student
I received a PhD in Classics and Comparative Literature in 2020 from the University of Bologna, where I graduated in Classical Philology in 2016, after spending a year at University College London. My research is concerned with Greek tragedy, Aristotle’s Poetics, and early modern reception of ancient drama and poetics (c. 1500 – c. 1700). I am especially interested in the emotional responses to tragedies, in the issue of tragic characters’ moral agency, and in the intersections between ethics, literature and cognitive humanities. I worked on my research project at the Centre d’Études Supérieures de la Renaissance in Tours, at the Warburg Institute in London, at the Archive of Performances of Greek and Roman Drama in Oxford and, as a Postdoctoral Fellow, at the Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Filosofici in Naples.
I am currently a teaching assistant at the University of Bologna and a high school teacher in Bologna.
Supervisors: Camillo Neri (University of Bologna), Peter Agócs (University College London), Simonetta Nannini (University of Bologna), and Sara Miglietti (Warburg Institute)
I am currently a teaching assistant at the University of Bologna and a high school teacher in Bologna.
Supervisors: Camillo Neri (University of Bologna), Peter Agócs (University College London), Simonetta Nannini (University of Bologna), and Sara Miglietti (Warburg Institute)
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (64)
Uploads
Publications by Giulia Fiore
The metatheatrical question τί δεῖ με χορεύειν; is balanced at the end of the antistrophe by ἔρρει δὲ τὰ θεῖα (v.910): “religion is perishing”. The locution τὰ θεῖα implies the entire range of divine and human interaction, the divine order, the observance of the cult and performance of rituals. Indeed, the failure of oracles to be fulfilled and the failure of sinners to be punished are seen by the Chorus as destructive of the entire polytheistic system. Eventually, neither failure occurs: the disastrous downfall of Oedipus will show that the divine is not perishing.
This paper aims to explore the presence/absence of the gods in the Oedipus Tyrannus, by starting from the second stasimon in order to discuss a number of core issues: is there a divine involvement in the Oedipus’ downfall? If so, what is the interplay between divine and human agency? And, lastly, how does the question τί δεῖ με χορεύειν; reflect the crisis of the polis-religion of fifth-century Athens?
La strofe si conclude con due versi, oggetto di un dibattito ancora aperto: δαιμόνων δέ που χάρις βίαιος / σέλμα σεμνὸν ἡμένων. La lezione που, accolta dalla gran parte degli editori, fa sì che il Coro dia un senso alla sofferenza umana, affermando che “c’è, forse, una χάρις concessa dagli dèi”. I codici più antichi, invece, tramandano un ποῦ interrogativo che negherebbe dunque l’esistenza di una giustizia divina – “dov’è la χάρις degli dèi?” – e metterebbe in discussione l’interpretazione tradizionale della trilogia eschilea.
Si intende fornire quindi uno status quaestionis intorno al problema testuale di Ag.182-183 per proporre poi un’interpretazione dell’Inno, della terminologia μάθος/φρονεῖν/σωφρονεῖν, dunque di alcuni aspetti essenziali del pensiero eschileo.
Talks by Giulia Fiore
The metatheatrical question τί δεῖ με χορεύειν; is balanced at the end of the antistrophe by ἔρρει δὲ τὰ θεῖα (v.910): “religion is perishing”. The locution τὰ θεῖα implies the entire range of divine and human interaction, the divine order, the observance of the cult and performance of rituals. Indeed, the failure of oracles to be fulfilled and the failure of sinners to be punished are seen by the Chorus as destructive of the entire polytheistic system. Eventually, neither failure occurs: the disastrous downfall of Oedipus will show that the divine is not perishing.
This paper aims to explore the presence/absence of the gods in the Oedipus Tyrannus, by starting from the second stasimon in order to discuss a number of core issues: is there a divine involvement in the Oedipus’ downfall? If so, what is the interplay between divine and human agency? And, lastly, how does the question τί δεῖ με χορεύειν; reflect the crisis of the polis-religion of fifth-century Athens?
La strofe si conclude con due versi, oggetto di un dibattito ancora aperto: δαιμόνων δέ που χάρις βίαιος / σέλμα σεμνὸν ἡμένων. La lezione που, accolta dalla gran parte degli editori, fa sì che il Coro dia un senso alla sofferenza umana, affermando che “c’è, forse, una χάρις concessa dagli dèi”. I codici più antichi, invece, tramandano un ποῦ interrogativo che negherebbe dunque l’esistenza di una giustizia divina – “dov’è la χάρις degli dèi?” – e metterebbe in discussione l’interpretazione tradizionale della trilogia eschilea.
Si intende fornire quindi uno status quaestionis intorno al problema testuale di Ag.182-183 per proporre poi un’interpretazione dell’Inno, della terminologia μάθος/φρονεῖν/σωφρονεῖν, dunque di alcuni aspetti essenziali del pensiero eschileo.
The metatheatrical question τί δεῖ με χορεύειν; is balanced at the end of the antistrophe by ἔρρει δὲ τὰ θεῖα (v.910): “religion is perishing”. The locution τὰ θεῖα implies the entire range of divine and human interaction, the divine order, the observance of the cult and performance of rituals. Indeed, the failure of oracles to be fulfilled and the failure of sinners to be punished are seen by the Chorus as destructive of the entire polytheistic system. Eventually, neither failure occurs: the disastrous downfall of Oedipus will show that the divine is not perishing.
This paper aims to explore the presence/absence of the gods in the Oedipus Tyrannus, by starting from the second stasimon in order to discuss a number of core issues: is there a divine involvement in the Oedipus’ downfall? If so, what is the interplay between divine and human agency? And, lastly, how does the question τί δεῖ με χορεύειν; reflect the crisis of the polis-religion of fifth-century Athens?
“Do you pretend to solve the issue of free will in one minute?” asks Tiresias to Oedipus in Cocteau’s 1934 La Machine Infernale. The issue of Oedipus’s fault, who unwittingly commits parricide and incest, is still unresolved and becomes the subject of the Renaissance debate on the tragic hero’s responsibility. Aristotle, in the Poetics (13 1453a7-16), locates the heart of tragedy in the ‘failure’ of human action: the concept of ἁμαρτία is the causal element productive of tragic hero’s misfortune. He affirms that the ideal protagonist of the best kind of tragedy, who is neither pre-eminently good nor bad, must arouse pity and fear by falling into adversity through a ἁμαρτία μεγάλη. Therefore ἁμαρτία, within the Aristotelian framework, is the hinge of a good plot. And the best kind of tragic plot, according to Aristotle, is Sophocles’ Oedipus Tyrannus. However, the notion of hamartia is the subject of a still-unresolved scholarly debate, since its semantic field is ambiguous and covers a wide range of nuance – “error of judgement”, “character flaw”, “moral fault” – and makes it difficult to determine the hero’s degree of responsibility.
The interpretation of Oedipus’ ἁμαρτία already played a crucial role in the Renaissance debate. Since Aristotle’s normative theory was considered the only authoritative key to understanding ancient drama, interpretations of tragedy and the Poetics were inextricably intertwined. The most significant difficulty, however, was the attempt of reconciling ἁμαρτία with Christianity: its indeterminacy, admitting the presence of the contingency and implying that human agency can never be entirely autonomous, is not acceptable from the point of view of Christian free will. This is (one of) the reason(s) why early Latin and vernacular translations and commentaries interpreted the term by showing a growing notion of moral responsibility and using different lexical variants, such as (Lat.) error/peccatum, (It.) errore/peccato, (Fr.) erreur/faute/péché, (En.) error/frailty/flaw. Moreover, Renaissance scholars, to explain the meaning of hamartia, often refer to the discussion of voluntary and involuntary actions from the Nicomachean Ethics, or indirectly to the notion of Aristotelian akrasia (the ‘weakness of will’). Hence, between the sixteenth and the seventeenth century, the theory of tragedy - mostly based on the (mis)interpretation of the Poetics – and rewritings of Oedipus’ myth (both Sophocles’ and Seneca’s) influence each other, thus giving birth to a fruitful debate on tragic hero’s moral responsibility and involving theological and philosophical issues, such as free will, determinism, predestination, Providence.
The present dissertation discusses the reception of the notion of hamartia by analysing, from a comparative perspective, the theory and the practice of tragedy in Italy, France, and England. After a preliminary chapter discussing the origins of the debate in Antiquity, the following chapters explore the early modern understanding of hamartia throughout a) Neo-Latin and vernacular translations of and commentaries on Aristotle’s Poetics, b) the early modern theoretical treatises on tragedy, and c) the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century reception of Sophocles’ Oedipus Tyrannus and Seneca’s Oedipus.
Dal momento che l’àmbito semantico di φρήν/(σω)φρονεῖν ingloba l’intera sfera cognitiva dell’individuo, nella presente indagine analitica è risultato inevitabile il confronto con i due grandi temi del teatro eschileo: la responsabilità e la consapevolezza, inscindibilmente legati ai principi etico-religiosi sui quali si innestano le vicende del genos degli Atridi, il δράσαντα παθεῖν (Ch. 313) e il πάθει μάθος (Ag. 177). Se si segue il fil rouge delle occorrenze di φρήν e di (σω)φρονεῖν che percorre l’Orestea, è possibile toccare i punti nevralgici e di maggiore tensione della trilogia e, infine, riconoscerne gli elementi che permettono una ricomposizione e una riconciliazione finale.
I testi presi in esame sono l’Inno a Zeus (Ag. 160-183), il cosiddetto ‘dilemma di Agamennone’ (vv. 218-223), il terzo stasimo dell’Agamennone (vv. 875-1033), l’amoibaion lirico tra Cassandra e il Coro (vv. 1035-1330) e il kommos lirico-epirrematico tra il Coro e Clitemestra (vv. 1372-1577). Infine, l’ultimo capitolo prende in esame il tema del σωφρονεῖν – che riveste un ruolo chiave in relazione al πάθει μάθος – attraverso l’analisi puntuale delle occorrenze in tutte e tre le tragedie, al fine di comprendere se possa esserci un’unità, o persino un’evoluzione positiva di quei contrasti apparentemente inconciliabili, all’interno dell’Orestea.
Sono, altresì, ben accetti i contributi sulla ricezione dell’antico in epoca tardoantica e bizantina (http://unakoine.it/index.php/unaK).
Una / Κοινῇ - Journal of Classical Studies and their Reception in Modern and Contemporary Italian Literature intends to investigate the classical world from multiple viewpoints (linguistic, literary, philological), by combining the classical, modern and contemporary with an interdisciplinary perspective and simultaneously promoting a lively and fruitful debate. The journal aims to favor a diachronic and synchronic, theoretical and methodological reflection, which can move along a broad timeline. With these premises in mind, the journal welcomes contributions that concern both the classical world and its reception in modern and contemporary Italian literature, thus favoring intersectional and intertextual papers without restrictions of methodologies and analysis.
Contributions on the reception of the antique in Late Antiquity and the Byzantine Era will also be welcomed (http://unakoine.it/index.php/unaK).
Una / Κοινῇ - Rivista di studi sul classico e sulla sua ricezione nella letteratura italiana moderna e contemporanea intende indagare il mondo classico da molteplici punti di vista (linguistico, letterario, filologico), saldando la prospettiva classica e quella moderna e contemporanea in un'ottica interdisciplinare e promuovendo un dibattito vivo e ricco di spunti. La rivista si propone, infatti, di favorire una riflessione diacronica e sincronica, teorica e metodologica, che possa muoversi lungo un’ampia linea del tempo, ed accoglie contributi che interessino sia il mondo classico sia la sua ricezione nella letteratura italiana moderna e contemporanea, privilegiando i paper intersettoriali e intertestuali senza restrizioni di metodologie e di analisi.
Sono, altresì, ben accetti i contributi sulla ricezione dell’antico in epoca tardoantica e bizantina (http://unakoine.it/index.php/unaK).
Una / Κοινῇ - Journal of Classical Studies and their Reception in Modern and Contemporary Italian Literature intends to investigate the classical world from multiple viewpoints (linguistic, literary, philological), by combining the classical, modern and contemporary with an interdisciplinary perspective and simultaneously promoting a lively and fruitful debate. The journal aims to favor a diachronic and synchronic, theoretical and methodological reflection, which can move along a broad timeline. With these premises in mind, the journal welcomes contributions that concern both the classical world and its reception in modern and contemporary Italian literature, thus favoring intersectional and intertextual papers without restrictions of methodologies and analysis.
Contributions on the reception of the antique in Late Antiquity and the Byzantine Era will also be welcomed (http://unakoine.it/index.php/unaK).