UDC 821.14'02-2:792.02(495] 792.02(495]:821.14,02-2
The article presents an example of how the social and political ideology of Greekness has determined the way the Greek audience and critics interpret performances of Aristophanes's ancient comedies. Starting from the comparison of the director Nikos Karathanos's performance of Aristophanes's The Birds (2016) with Karolos Koun's performance of the same name in 1959, the article argues that Koun's The Birds imposed a specific aspect on Greekness, functioning as "dominant rule" even today. The article, integrated into a sociological aspect on theatre, suggests that each theatre performance transfers much more extra-theatrical (mostly social and ideological) meaning than we may believe and the interpretation of each specific theatrical action/reaction also passes through the understanding of the society in which it belongs.
Keywords: Greekness, Aristophanes, The Birds, comedies, Nikos Karathanos, Karolos Koun, ideology, theatre, society
Tasos Angelopoulos is a theatre director and holds a PhD in Theatre Studies. As a Teaching Fellow at the School of Drama, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece, his research interests include: sociology and history of theatre, drama, education and theatre reception.
tasosangel@hotmail.com
Theatre Reception in Greece and the Ideology of Greekness
From Karolos Koun's (1959) to Nikos Karathanos's (2016) Performance of Aristophanes's The Birds
133
Introduction
In 1959, at the Theatre of Herodotus Atticus (on the southwest slope of the Acropolis, in Athens), some furious spectators started to yell "shame" and "stop the performance"; an actor, dressed as an Orthodox Christian priest, was singing a song reminiscent of the psalms of the Greek church and performing the opening ceremony of Nefelokokkygia (Cloud Cuckoo Land), the imaginary town built by the 'OpviGeg/The Birds in the eponymous comedy by Aristophanes. It is also the time the director Karolos Koun of The Art Theatre,1 the composer Manos Hatzidakis and the set designer/painter Giannis Tsarouhis set forth their candidacy to become the legends of the Greek theatre (as they indeed did). The next morning, the (Right) Greek government, using the still-existing censorship laws, banned the repetition of the performance, but the results of this decision were opposite to those expected; the performance was triumphantly repeated in Paris (1965) at the Festival of Nations, and its choreography by Zouzou Nikoloudi would be considered, even today, as the most classical choreography for the ancient Chorus (in Greece and elsewhere). By contrast, the government's act remained a monument of a reactionary and intervening political decision as far as art and theatre are concerned; the "loser" was not the performance and its contributors, but the government's vice-president and the one responsible for this decision, Konstantinos Tsatsos (also the first president of the Greek Republic after the restoration of Democracy after 1975), mocked by (the Left and moderate) critics and intellectuals; for many years, his caricature in newspapers and journals was presented carrying a ... chicken!2
In 2016, innovative director and actor Nikos Karathanos took over the presentation of a new performance of The Birds in a production of the Onassis Cultural Centre. The performance premiered in Epidaurus Theatre on 19 August 2016 and was repeated
1	A short biography of Karolos Koun may be found at his theatre's page: http://www.theatro-technis.gr/greek-art-theatre-karolos-koun/ The Art Theatre (Theatro Technis) was, until his death in 1987, the most innovative theatre in Greece; it is no exaggeration if we say that theatre in Greece after World War II, as far as dramaturgy and forms, was actually a "creation" by this troupe and Karolos Koun (Glytzouris 359 & 542 et seq.).
2	The word: "OpviGeg (Ornithes)], meaning Birds in ancient Greek is the plural mode both of the masculine o opvig (o ornis), which means bird and the feminine ^ opvig (i ornis), which means chicken - the two words sound the same, even though they have a different meaning. In addition, the word "chicken", as in many languages, is used in Greek to imply a cowardly person (slang).
134 in Athens in September 2016 and in New York, USA (at St. Ann's Warehouse) in May 2018. Not only did his innovative performance instantly become a modern reference for the revival of ancient Greek drama, if we take into consideration the attendance (sold out everywhere) and the official reviews by mainstream critics, but it was also subject to the most contradictory feelings and opinions. More importantly, the director seemed always to feel the need to respond to a widespread (especially through social media) critique: in an interview (Kaltaki "Nikos Karathanos"), he openly admits that his performance cannot compete against the one by Karolos Koun, almost 60 years ago!3 The same agony seemed to really bother all the official critics (in newspapers, etc.); everyone started his/her review with an "apology" to Aristophanes's play(s) or a reminder of Karolos Koun's The Birds (to, consciously or not, compare it with Karathanos's performance).4
So, we have a performance in 1959, which, in its time, did not seem to fit into the official norms on art and theatre, but which after some 60 years, has become the standard for another performance. We will discuss how this peculiarity cannot be explained according to purely theatrical terms (i.e., nowadays, it is widely believed that Karolos Koun's performance is "insuperable"); instead, we have to detect hidden ideological mechanisms under not only the reception (and critique) of ancient comedy in Greece, but also its production and direction. In addition, we will try to support that the disapprovals in both cases, although so far away from each other, actually derive from the same ideological source.
The adventures of Attic Comedy's reception
The reception of Aristophanes's ancient comedies in contemporary Greek (theatrical or not) history is more complex than we may imagine - and, maybe, more passionate than the reception of the ancient Greek tragic plays. Throughout contemporary Greek history (from 1830 to today), the fights between those who insist that they "ought" to preserve the "true meaning" of these ancient classic plays and those who would like to "read" (translate, perform, edit) them in a different way, more close to their era and contemporary needs, compete with the major political and social fights and movements. In 1903, at the Oresteiaka (named after Aeschylus's trilogy Oresteia), a
3	Even the official site of the performance by Onassis Culture Centre mentions Karolos Koun's performance: http://www.sgt.gr/ eng/SPG1672/
4	Some examples: Sarigiannis: the critic titles his article answering all the censures of Karathanos on behalf of Aristophanes and Koun; Ioannidis: a critic and professor at the School of Theatre Studies of the University of Athens starts his review saying: "Since we all think the same thing, let's start from this", meaning the comparison with Koun's performance; Karaoglou, where she also starts saying: "I won't mention The Birds by Karolos Koun, because I believe there is no need to make a comparison with it"; Ragkousi, where she judges the division between supporters and criticisers of Karathanos's performance; Sykka, where she dedicates a whole chapter of her review to Koun; Anesti, where she answers to all these who judge Karathanos based on Koun's performance. The only critic who does not mention Koun is Arkoumanea, who, nevertheless, believes that Karathanos "changed" Aristophanes's play.
group of university students violently protested against the Royal Theatre in Athens 135 (afterwards the National Theatre) and its performance of Oresteia; it was the first time that the trilogy by Aeschylus had been officially performed based not on the original ancient Greek text, but on a translation. The protests resulted in one dead and many injured. The irony is that the translation was not in the spoken Greek language, but in the official language of the time, which was a cultivated mix of ancient and modern Greek.5
That characteristic episode proves that, apart from scholars and politicians, the public also tends to consider ancient tragic plays (and almost every written monument from ancient Greece) as a sacred inheritance, which should be protected against deformation, disrespect and alteration of the playwright's and the text's spirit. But, Aristophanes's comedies had been in a more disadvantageous position: they were not only treated as evidences of the Greek "tribe's" unchanged language and spirit (as the tragedies), but also with a sense of postponement as far as their scenic performance is concerned, due to their scurrility, their loose structure and their complex correlation with present situations. The first professional performance of an Aristophanes's comedy (Ne^e^eg/The Clouds) occurred only in 1900, by the satirical writer and intellectual Georgios Souris (Mavrogeni 74),6 when the first tragic play (Sophocles's Antigone) had been already presented by the University of Athens in 1867 for the celebration of the king's marriage. Even that performance was repeated in 1901, "with mitigated expression", appropriate for ladies [One detail here - that performance was presented during the carnival and ladies should wear masks! Some testimonies speak of only 15 (!) ladies who followed the show]. Since then, most of the performances were addressed exclusively by men; that was the case of the 1905 production of nXovTO^/Wealth by Royal Theatre7 and the 1904 production of EKKAnaidZouaeq/ The Assemblywomen by Konstantinos Hristomanos.8 Aristophanes's plays slowly found their way to the stage, but always after some kind of adaptation, which tended to "clean" the plays of their more provocative and scandalous elements, and some isolated serious approaches (such as The Birds directed by Spyros Melas in 1929, with Peistheteros played by the famous actor Vassilis Logothetidis) cannot change the general image, which, for many years, included representations of Aristophanic comedies from troupes on tour in Greek countryside. Throughout the interwar
5	On the Greek language question, the controversy between spoken modern Greek and that "made" language (katharevousa, which actually means: "cleaned") see also Beaton 369-449; Mackridge Language and National Identity 25-51; Frangoudaki 365-81; Babiniotis 1-16; Mackridge "Korais" 1-26; Horrocks, 438-70; Alexiou 156-92; Browning 49-68.
6	There were also previous performances in 1868: nXoxixoqIWealth by the professional troupe of Sofoklis Karydas, based on the edited text by Aimilios Hourmouzios, and a student performance of Ns^sXs^IThe Clouds, translated by Alexandros Rizos Ragkavis and under the exhortation of the king; but those performances met with indifference and bad reviews (Mavrogeni 38-46).
7	Directed by Thomas Oikonomou and translated by Themistoklis Solomos. This is the first attempt of a "state" revival of an Aristophanes play.
8	Konstantinos Hristomanos (1876-1911) is considered one of the most emblematic directors in Greece. For his contribution to modern Greek theatre see Papanikolaou 241-50.
136 period, Aristophanes, though a "classic", was considered to be brutish and vulgar, and a typical example of where he was classified is Auataxpaxn/Lysistrata, which was repeatedly portrayed by transgender Marios Rotzairon; a performance only for men (a 1924 promotional poster writes: "It is strictly forbidden for ladies to enter"), exploiting Aristophanes's "inappropriateness" to present taboo-free spectacles, with daring dances, gestures and costumes (Kaltaki "Is Aristophanes"). Even in 1951, when the National Theatre presented its first performance of Aristophanes with Ne^eAeg/The Clouds, the director Sokratis Karantinos preferred an aesthetics "resembling" the ancient one, with masks and kothornoi (the shoes with thick soles, worn by ancient actors) and in a translation by the poet Kostas Varnalis, where all provocative expressions and scurrility were "blunted". And, following that spirit, the National Theatre and its main director Alexis Solomos created, as Georgousopoulos and Yoyos (130) say, the "official" form for performances based on Aristophanes's comedies, a so-called civil, "elegant, polished and 'European'" tradition, dominant during the 1950s.
Alexis Solomos's idea of Aristophanes is based on this "cleaning" of the plays of every element which alienates the performance both from the playwright's spirit and from our era. As he says (14): "The satire of Aristophanes was not written for some people, but for man in general," so the term he proposed was not "revival" (of the plays) but "survival". In order to achieve this, he suggested that "we need neither to edit nor to misrepresent the play", but to use elements that are most closely related to ancient comedy, since all comic forms base their existence there, mainly epitheorisi.9
Solomos (14-15) mentions that: "Epitheorisi is today the only theatrical form of current affairs. It follows public life step by step and, by satirising it, it judges [...]", adding (395-98) that the Aristophanic comedy, of course, should not be fully identified with the Epitherorisi. On the contrary, while in Epitheorisi, the spectacle is more akin to the "stacking of comic scenes" (378), in ancient comedy, "despite the loose dramatic economy and the lack of solid plot, the rule seems to be a single dramatic creation" (401). And, he concludes (403) that, in addition to the "inspirational spirit and the blending of disparate elements, the folklore of modern Greek tradition can be a valuable array of information and correspondences to overcome the problem of the various ceremonies, etc., of which Aristophanes's plays are full."10
9	Epitheorisi (Em0e6pr|or|) (meaning: "revue"), was the most popular genre of theatre in Greece between roughly 1894 and the early 1930s. It was based in a sequence of comic scenes on everyday life, most times without any relation amongst them, and scattered with songs and dance. It was a variety show, which "appealed to audiences with its topicality and, initially, with its message of freedom from rules and conventions, both social and artistic", as Bacopoulou-Halls Aliki (269-71) mentions. See Hatzipantazis & Maraka 7-21.
10	All quotations taken from Greek sources have been translated by the author into English.
The ideology of Greekness
137
It seems now that we reach the core of our questioning: when Solomos speaks for Greek "folklore", tradition and origins, he is integrated into the widest and most vigorous ideological pathway, which, since the 1930s or earlier, features the notion of Greekness (zXkr\vvKOTr\Ta/hellinikotita - the ideology of being Greek) as the ultimate rule - or, better, the ultimate quest - for every political, social and cultural action in Greece. The identification of Greekness as a constant demand of modernity in Greece has been thoroughly analysed (Tziovas 19-39), and it is also connected with phases of contemporary political Greek history, even since the independence of the Greek state in 1830. After the catastrophe in Minor Asia (1922) and the establishment of a fascist dictatorship under Ioannis Metaxas (1936), Greekness replaces the "Great Idea" as the central political guideline11 - and Greekness itself turns to more conservative aspects, identified with the nation-state.12 But, this conservative turn is not completely reflected in the area of literature and culture: the writers from the so-called "generation of the 1930s" will bring innovation in forms, requiring a review of the past, and they will be responsible for the concept's new meaning, which includes folklore and popular aspects of everyday life.
Are we in front of a division, as far as the meaning of Greekness is concerned? More likely, we are in front of a single source with two conclusions, which energise each other, recycling the notion itself. As Mouzelis mentions: "the open passage from popular to ethnocentrism is more possible than we may believe and it can be traced in many occasions" (321). And, we must not forget that this connection, but not fully integration, of literature and an ideology with political and social aspects was not something peculiar or new in Greece; after all, as Tziovas explains: "Literature, due to the instability or inadequacy of political institutions, seems to be the most appropriate institution to express and stimulate Greekness, with the result that literary texts are proclaimed as national heirlooms and writers are strongly urged to underline their nationality. Literature thus takes on the role of the guardian of tradition, since chaotic political institutions cannot respond to this role" (14).
11	Megali Idea [MeyaA.r| ISsa ("the Great Idea")], was the central political ideology in Greece since the 19th century: it had as its goal the deliberation of Greek people living at the Ottoman Empire and their integration into one big Greek State, which would restore the Byzantium Empire. The "Great Idea" seemed to have found its completion after the Balkan Wars (1912-13) and World War I (1914-18), when Greece gained territories in Macedonia, Thrace, Crete and part of Minor Asia. But, the euphoria lasted only a few years; in 1922, the Greek army was defeated by the Turkish army, and, in 1923, the Greek population of Minor Asia (almost 1.5 million people, with origins from antiquity) was obliged to become refugees in Greece. It was the first time in history when an agreed exchange of population between two countries happened (almost 800,000 Turks were obliged to leave Greece for Turkey). This "catastrophe" was followed by a decade of political developments, which ended with the enforcement of a fascist regime (1936). See Kitromilides 25-34.
12	This turn is not irrelevant with the refugee issue, in which 1.5 million people of Greek origin were trying to survive and be integrated into a Greek state of less than 5 million people. The inevitable conflicts between locals and refugees ended only with World War II. See Salvanou 120-38.
In the area of Greek theatre history, the period 1940-56 has been characterised by Grammatas (230) as the "period of Greekness", although some scholars disagree; Georgousopoulos argues that: "Greekness was an ideology without true meaning in the area of theatre; on the contrary, the theatrical tradition was repeatedly based on the 'naturalisation' of loans" (210), but, we have severe doubts if this remark has value in the area of the presentation of ancient (tragic or comic) plays. Tsatsoulis supports that:
The history of directing of ancient drama and art in general during the 20th century is related with the ideology of Greekness as it was concretised by the generation of the 1930s. Elements of geopolitics and ethnocentrism shaped the pre-war generations of the directors who were the first, after centuries, to re-approach ancient drama in its natural spaces. With European education and apparently influenced by the German romantic or classical directing school, they simultaneously sought to embellish their stage proposals with elements of Greekness coming from the immediate or distant past of Greece, such as Byzantium, thus revealing the inviolable mystical constitutions of historical species and Greekness as contained into the ancient texts. (367)
Koun's Aristophanes
Tsatsoulis (367) continues:
Karolos Koun creates a revolution in this tradition, not denying the ideology of Greekness, but looking for it in other paths. More in his theoretical texts and less in his performances, he emerges as a "researcher" of Greekness that could break the borders and, perhaps, touch the modern concept of interculturalism. The first texts and performances of Karolos Koun overrule the romantic perception of the direction of ancient drama, but they emphasise the need for a "Greek interpretation, bound with our origins" and the reference to the "popular" element as it is revealed "in life, island, our folk songs and more back, Byzantine hagiographies and ancient vases".
We are ready to comprehend now why Greekness is not only connected with the nation-state, but is also a very resistant notion, apart from classical political and ideological divisions, such as "right" and "left". It may refer to the nation, but it may as well integrate, and quietly cultivate, a more "left" concept for (Greek) people as creator of its history. And, we may conclude, as Tziovas does, that:
after the war, the representatives of the Left turn again to Greekness, as the only reliable ideological and cultural concept. However, the concept is being degraded and adapted to the new facts that are essentially based not on the nation but on the people. In this sense, Greekness means "the authentic expression of the oppressed and deliberately degraded potential of the Greek people". (25)
And that was exactly the difference between Karolos Koun's perception on 139 Aristophanes and Alexis Solomos's (and the National Theatre's) one, which may explain the disapprovals to the 1959 performance; from an Aristophanes appropriate only as a bourgeois spectacle (and in accordance with the country's post-civil conflict right-wing political and ideological situation), Koun seems not to reject the writer's self-evident Greekness, but to adopt a more "left" approach for his presentation.
Karolos Koun's performances of Aristophanes's comedies, starting from the element of "popular" and "folk", symbolised exactly this idea of Greekness referring to people. The Greek folk tradition and his daily, modern life would be his guide, against the "refined" (but, also, questing for Greekness) performance presented and supported by Alexis Solomos; here, we are in front of a "vulgar" and orgiastic spectacle, with memories of the pure Greek countryside and its simple inhabitants. In addition, the mask and its use, together with the emergence of the Chorus as a protagonist of the performance, will directly refer to the festive atmosphere of the ancient Dionysian worship. The grotesque element, comic anachronisms, references to the folk musical tradition, and the transcriptions of ancient rituals into modern Greek reality (as the priest mentioned above) will be Koun's rule, a rule that will create frictions and even scandals.
As for the scandal of The Birds, some scholars tried to explain it differently: Gonda Van Steen (160) argues that the scandal (and the ban by Konstantinos Tsatsos) actually came from the Left and anti-Western language of the translation (by Vassilis Rotas, a known left writer) - but, we may now integrate this (and some alike) explanation into the division between two aspects of Greekness, and on who will be its most original or modern representative in theatre (especially, as far as the transcriptions of the ancient drama on stage are concerned).13 The "victory" in this fight was definitely by the side of Karolos Koun; providing a new theatrical meaning in Greekness, and supported by writers and intellectuals (mostly those integrated into the Left ideology), he will be lucky enough to see his aspect becoming the most dominant as far as Aristophanes is concerned and creating a new tradition accepted and recycled not only by scholars, but also by the public itself. Mavromoustakos describes Karolos Koun's quest for a Greek way to interpret Aristophanes's plays (and the domination of this quest's results) as follows: "The search for popular ways will lead Karolos Koun to the systematic exploration of morphological elements that are directly perceived by some specific version of Greekness. These elements, combined with the exploration and creation of a Greek hypocritical code, will eventually create the tradition of The Art Theater" (82-83). He continues:
Each of the performances is characterised by an effort to explore an expression that
characterises the continuation of the Greek folk tradition. From the kompoloi [a kind of
13 On Karolos Koun's modernism as far as Aristophanes is concerned, see also Kaggelari 367-73.
rosary, played by "tough" guys in Greece] and the gramophone with the folk melodies of UXOÚTO^/Wealth in search of modern Greek lyricism, Karolos Koun in Báxpaxoi/ Frogs will turn his reflection into the effort to display a ritual element formed by the connection of the oriental to the western tradition. We must perhaps observe that this performance completes a first circle of reflection of The Art Theatre on Aristophanic comedy. A new circle will open with the very important performance of the Axapvfq/ Acharnians: here the creation of a folk festival is combined with the codification of a play enriched with elements from the Greek shadow theatre, the Karagiozis. Karolos Koun will follow a similar approach in AuaLaxpáxn/Lysistrata, shifting the focus of his reflection on the exploration of Greek folk typology, while in Eipfvr|/Peace the various approaches that have so far been tested will lead to the promotion of a climate of popular worship, which will characterise, in the consciousness of the modern Greek spectator, the whole of the Aristophanist work.
Karathanos's perception on Aristophanes
It is now easier to understand not only the various "official" comparisons of Nikos Karathanos's performance with Karolos Koun's one, but also the, mostly unofficial, disapprovals, expressed through social media, on his interpretation on The Birds; it's not only that Koun - in the name of Greekness - managed to impose a specific perception on Aristophanes, but also that the audience has identified so much with Koun's perception (especially, after the restoration of democracy in 1975), that it is extremely difficult to watch and accept something different, even after 60 years.
On the contrary, The Birds by Karathanos tended to a more chaotic, inter-sex and post-modern expression, with references to European theatre (such as the entrance of the two leading actors under a scenic tree, like in S. Beckett's Waiting for Godot) and with a troupe, integrating the most controversial people, such as a famous Greek singer, a dwarf actress and a Special Olympics champion (playing the god Poseidon). The performance, after its middle, also lost its firm connection with the play itself; a giant lighting sphere was lifted at the Epidaurus's sky and the performance closed with a party, reminiscent of modern multicultural festivals. According to a discussion with the director, he suggested that these plays "are not meant to be performed, but rather to be celebrated". But, this celebration no longer has the same form as Koun's folk festival; the times and the world have changed, affecting Greek society, and Karathanos seems to know it very well when he states that his performance is a reflection of everyone's quest for utopia, which is always destroyed by him/herself (Kaltaki "Is Aristophanes").
For this and similar performances of Aristophanes's plays, Ioannidis (13 August 2018), argues that the modern trend on the revival of Aristophanes's plays includes "the 'rip'
of the 'mantle' of Greekness, for which great directors had worked in the past, but it 141 had become the 'patchwork for comedy performances". According to this perception, the Chorus of the birds in Karathanos's performance also does not represent a group with the same characteristics (like the imaginative category of Greek people), but, every one of us in a complex and diverse society. As Antoniou (8) supports, here, (and unlike Koun's performance), every bird had its own identity, since it follows its own kinesiological code. Or, according to Karathanos's words (qtd. in Antoniou 1): "We are all different from each other, we are full of minorities. We are not normal. Nobody. We want with our diversity to talk about something else."
It is obvious that with The Birds Karathanos challenged the real core of Greekness, as expressed by the tradition of Koun's performance; the perception that everyone living in Greek territory actually belongs to a historically defined group of people with common cultural characteristics. But the acceptance of the Greek society's contemporary diversity (not only in theatre) is as difficult as in all European countries. And how could it be differently, since, in 2018, Hatzipantazis (Greek Symbolism 10) mentions: "We have learned in schools to treat religiously the meaning of our national identity [Greekness] and not to accept the slightest deviation". Even today, the ideology of Greekness survives as reference and is constructed by "the use of self-stereotypes [and] by stereotypical representations attributed to others [...]" and even the contemporary economic crisis "is linked to changes in Greek national identity" and on the division of others into hostiles and friends (Athanasiadou & Figgou 2). Or, as Theodoropoulos concludes (13 January 2019): "since the 1980s, when the European flag was raised by the side of the Greek one, discussions on Greekness were focused not on what links us with European civilisation but on what differentiates us from it".
142 Epilogue
Analysing Koun's The Birds, Sampatakakis (12) emphasises that: "the audience -which came to the performance with specific cultural expectations, representational concentrations, scenographic desires and acting patterns - verbally expressed its frustration for the director's disrespect, precisely because those things were denied onstage". He continues, arguing that we have to take under consideration the imaginary dependence of the ancient play's attendance with the collective reception of a "sacred" national inheritance. After all, as he has already mentioned, referring to Althusser's analysis on ideology's mechanisms, the collective fantasies, which are produced by ideologies, regulate the "smooth adoption of cultural norms", stimulating reactions against artistic products, which escape from the predominant rule (8).
Greekness for the revival of ancient comedies has truly functioned for more than 60 years as an ideological mechanism of compliance, correction and punishment. With his performance, Koun was able to visualise his contemporary collective fantasy and give this abstract but always present ideology a specific shape and form. But today, his example remains more as a reference for comparison, grumbling and objections. Maybe this is a sign that Greekness has lost its essence and has survived only as a visual pattern, an empty sell? Perhaps yes. More certain is that the - sometimes harrowing - adjustment of Greek society to global social and cultural changes necessarily influences theatre and its practices (as it did with Karathanos's The Birds). And all that is left to persist is some old ideological patterns disguised as "insuperable performances".
Bibliography
143
Sources in English
Alexiou, Margaret. "Diglossia in Greece". Standard languages: spoken and written, edited by Haas William, Manchester UP, 1982, pp. 156-192.
Babiniotis, Giorgos. "A Linguistic Approach to the 'Language Question' in Greece", Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, vol. 5, no. 1, 1979, pp. 1-16.
Bacopoulou-Halls, Aliki. "The Theatre System of Greece". Theatre Worlds in Motion. Structures, Politics and Developments in the Countries of Western Europe, edited by Van Maanen H. & Wilmer S.E., GA: Rodopi, 1998, pp. 259-308.
Beaton, Roderick. An Introduction to Modern Greek Literature, Clarendon Press, 1994.
Browing, Robert. "Greek Diglossia Yesterday and Today". International Journal of the Sociology of Languages, vol. 35, 1982, pp. 49-68.
Frangoudaki, Anna. "Diglossia and the language situation in Greece: a sociological approach to the interpretation of diglossia and some hypotheses on today's reality". Language in Society, vol. 21, no. 3, 1992, pp. 365-81.
Horrocks, Geoffrey. Greek: A History of the Language and its Speakers, Addison Wesley, 1997.
Kitromilides, M. Paschalis. "On the intellectual content of Greek nationalism: Paparigopoulos, Byzantium and the Great Idea". Byzantium and the Modern Greek Identity, edited by Ricks Davis & Magdalino Paul, Centre for Hellenic Studies, King's College, 1998, pp. 25-34.
Mackridge, Peter. "Katharevousa (c.1800-1974). "An Obituary for an Official Language". Background to Contemporary Greece, edited by Sarafis, Marion & Eve, Martin. The Merlin Press Ltd., 1990, pp. 25-51.
Mackridge, Peter. "Korais and the Greek language question". Adamantios Korais and the European Enlightenment, edited by Paschalis M. Kitromilides, Voltaire Foundation, 2010, pp. 127-49.
—. Language and National Identity in Greece, 1776-1976, Oxford UP, 2009.
Salvanou, Emilia. "The First World War and the refugee crisis: historiography and memory in the Greek context", Historein, vol. 16, no. 1-2, 2017, pp. 120-38.
Steen Van, Gonda. "From Scandal to Success Story: Aristophanes's Birds as Staged by Karolos Koun". Aristophanes in Performance 421 BC-AD 2007, edited by Edith Hall & Amanda Wrigley, Modern Humanities and Research Association and Maney Publishing, 2007, pp. 153-178.
Varakis, Angeliki. "The Use of Masks in Koun's Stage Interpretations of Birds, Frogs
144	and Peace". Aristophanes in Performance 421 BC-AD 2007, edited by Edith Hall
& Amanda Wrigley Modern Humanities and Research Association and Maney Publishing, 2007, pp. 179-193.
Sources in Greek14
Anesti, Katerina. "I came for Bofiliou", Protagon, 22 August 2016. [AveaTn, KaTepiva. "Eyw yia Tnv Mno^iAiou ^pGa", Protagon, 22 AuyouaTou 2016].
Antoniou, Michaela. The "other" world in Nikos Karathanos's Birds. Proceedings of the 6th PanheUeni Theatrological Conference "Theatre and diversity: theory, dramaturgy and theatrical practice" Nafplio, 17-25 May 2017(forthcoming). [AvTwviou, MixaeAa. 0 «dAAoq» Koa^oq aTouq 'OpviGeq tou Nlkou KapaGdvou, npaKTiKd ET 0eaTpoAoyiKou EuveSpiou "©eaTpo Kai eTepoTnTa: Gewpia, Spa^aToupyia Kai GeaTpiK^ npaKTiK^" (uno eKSoan)].
Arkoumanea, Louiza. "Birds without politics, only with love", To Vima, 28 August 2016. [ApKou^avea, Aoui^a. "AnoAiTiKoi 'OpviGeq, novo |ie aydnn", To B^a, 28 AuyouaTou 2016].
Athanasiadou, Elizabeth & Figgou, Lia. "(Self)Stereotypical Constructions of Greekness during the Crisis: An analytical Approach", Scientific Annals - School of Psychology AUTh, vol. 17, 2017, pp. 1-29. [AGavaaidSou, EAiaad^eT & Oiyyou, Aia. "(AuTo)ETepeoTuniKeq KaTaaKeueq Tnq EAAnviKOTnTaq Tnv nepioSo Tnq Kpianq: Mia AoyoavaAuTiK^ npoaeyyian", EmaTn^oviK^ EneTnpiSa T^^aToq ^uxoAoyiaq An©, to^. 17, 2017, a. 1-29].
Georgousopoulos, Kostas & Yoyos, Savvas. Epidaurus: the ancient theatre and performances, Militos, 2002. [rewpyouaonouAoq, Kwaraq & r^yoq, Edp^aq. EniSaupoq: To apxaio GeaTpo Kai oi napaaTdaeiq, MiAnToq, 2002].
Georgousopoulos, Kostas. "Greekness and theatre". Hellinism-Hellenicism. Ideological and experiential axes of modern Greek society, edited by Tsaousis Dimitris, Vivliopoleion tis Estias, 1982, pp. 205-210. [rewpyouaonouAoq, KwaTaq, "EAAnviKOTnTa Kai GeaTpo". EAAnvia^6q-EAAnviKOTnTa. ISeoAoyiKoi Kai piw^aTiKoi d^oveq Tnq eA^nviK^q Koivwviaq, em^. Taaouanq An^rpnq, BipAionwAeiov Tnq EaTiaq, 1982, a. 205-210].
Glytzouris, Antonis. The Directing Art in Greece. The rise and establishment of the director's art in modern Greek theatre, Elllinika Grammata, 2001. [rAuT^oup^q, AvTwvnq, H aKnvoGeTiK^ Texvn aTnv EAAdSa. H avdSuan Kai eSpaiwan Tnq Texvnq tou aKnvoGeTnq aTo veoeAAnviKo GeaTpo, EAAnviKd rpd^aTa, 2001].
Grammatas, Theodoros. History and theory in theatrical research, Tolidi Brothers,
14 Citations from these sources have been translated from Greek into English by the author.
1992. [rpa^aTdg, ©eoSwpog. IaTopia Kai Gewpia Tnq GeaTpiK^g epeuvaq, A^oi 145 ToAiSn, 1992].
Ioannidis, Grigoris. "The Birds leave the ground", Efimerida ton Syntakton, 22 August 2016. [IwavviSnq rpnyopnq. "Oi OpviGeq anoyeiwGnKav", E^n^epiSa twv EuvTaKTwv, 22 AuyouaTou 2016].
Ioannidis, Grigoris. "Performance with great names, but without nerve", Efimerida ton Syntakton, 13 August 2018. [IwavviSnq, rpnyopnq. "napdaTaan ne neyaAa ovo^aTa, aAAd xwpiq veupo", E^n^epiSa twv EuvTaKTwv, 13 AuyouaTou 2018].
Hatzipantazis, Thodoros. Greek Symbolism. Crossing of popular folk tradition and European avant-garde in contemporary Greek theater. Or, Theatre and national identity in Greece. University Editions of Crete, Herakleion, 2018. [XaT^nnavTa^q, 0oSwpoq. Pw^aiiKoq Eu^poAia^oq. AiaaTaupwan eyxwpiaq Aaik^q napdSoanq Kai eupwnaiK^q npwTonopiaq aTo veoeAAnviKO GeaTpo. 'H, 0eaTpo Kai eGviK^ TauTOTnTa aTnv EAAdSa, navemaTn^iaKeq EKSoaeiq Kp^inq, HpdKAeio, 2018].
Hatzipantazis, Thodoros & Maraka, Lila, The Athenian Epitheorisi, Vivliopoleion tis Estias, 2003. [XaT^nnavTa^q, 0oSwpoq & MapdKa, AiAa, H AGnvaiK^ EniGewpnan, BipAionwAeiov Tnq EaTiaq, 2003].
Kaltaki, Matina. "Is Aristophanes inappropriate for minors?", LIFO, 4 September 2016. [KaATdKn, MaTiva. "Eivai o ApiaTo^dvnq aKaTdAAnAoq Si' avnAiKouq;", LIFO, 4 EenTe^Ppiou 2016] .
—. "Nikos Karathanos explains why he performed Birds like this", interview, LIFO, 30 August 2016. [KaATdKn, MaTiva. "O NiKoq KapaGdvoq e^nyei yiaTi avepaae Touq OpviGeq eTai", auvevTeu^n, LIFO, 30 August 2016].
Karaoglou, Tonia. "High Flights", elculture, 22 August 2016. [KapdoyAou, Twvia. "^nAeq nT^aeiq", elculture, 22 AuyouaTou 2016. www.elculture.gr/blog/article/ ^nAeq-nT^aeiq, Accessed date: 20 August 2018].
Kaggelari, Dio. "Terms of the Modern in the Contemporary Greek Stage". Relations between modern Greek theater and the European: Reception procedures in the history of Greek dramaturgy from the Renaissance since today. Proceedings of the 2nd Panhellenic Theatrological Conference (18-21 April 2002). Department of Theatre Studies of the University of Athens, edited by Konstantza Georgakaki Ergo, 2002, pp. 367-73. [KayyeAdpn, Anw. "Opoi tou ^ovTepvou aTnv veoeAAnviK^ aKnv^". Exeaeiq tou veoeAAnviKou GedTpou ^e to eupwnaiKo: SiaSiKaaieq npoaAn^nq aTnv iaTopia Tnq eAAnviK^q Spa^aToupyiaq ano Tnv Avayevvnan wq a^epa. npaKTiKd B' naveAA^viou QeaTpoAoyiKou EuveSpiou (18-21 AnpiAiou 2002). T^^a 0eaTpiKwv EnouSwv naveniaTn^iou AGnvwv, em^. KwvaTdvT^a rewpyaKdKn, Ergo, 2002, a. 367-73].
Mavrogeni, Maria. The Stage production of Aristophanes's comedies in modern Greece,
146	PhD Thesis, Department of Philology, University of Crete, 2007. [Maupoyevn, Mapia,
0 Apiaio^avnq ain vea eAAnviK^ aK^v^, AiSaKiopiK^ Aiaipi^, T^^a OtAoAoyiag, navemai^io Kp^inq, 2007].
Mavromoustakos, Platon. "The ancient Greek drama in the modern Greek scene: from the Persians of 1571 in the approaches of the 20th century". Performances of ancient Greek drama in Europe during the modern years, edited by Platon Mavromoustakos, Kastaniotis, 1999, p. 77-89. [Maupo^ouaiaKog, nAaTwv. "To apxaio eAAnviKo Spa^a aTnv veoeAAnviK^ aKnv^: ano Toug nepaeg iou 1571 aiig npoaeyyiaeiq iou 20ou aiwva". napaaiaaeig apxaiou eAAnviKou Spa^aiog aTnv Eupwnn Kaia Toug veoiepoug xpovouq, em^. nAdiwv Maupo^ouaiaKog, Kaaiaviwinq, 1999, a. 7788].
Mouzelis, Nikos. Modern Greek Society. Aspects of Underdevelopment, Exantas, 1978. [MouZeAnq, nlko$. NeoeAAnviK^ Koivwvia. 'O^eig inq unavanTu^n?, E^aviag, 1978].
Papanikolaou, Vania. The contribution of Nea Skini to the configuration of the modern Greek theatre, PhD Thesis, Department of Philology, University of Crete, 2012. [nanaviKoAaou Bavia An^ipiog, H au^poA^ inq Neag EKnv^g aTnv e^eAi^n tou veoeAAnviKou Geaipou, AiSaKiopiK^ Aiaipi^, T^^a OtAoAoyiaq, navemai^io Kp^inq, 2012].
Ragkousi, Pepy. "Birds in Stegi, chicken on the roof", Ta Nea, 19 September 2016. [PayKouan, nenn. "'OpviGeg ain Sieyn, Koieq ainv Tapaiaa", Ta Nea, 19 Eenie^Ppiou 2016].
Sampatakakis, Giorgos. "'Huns go away...': Theatre Scandals in Epidaurus", Theatrou Polis, 3-4 (2017-2018), pp. 8-21. [Ea^naiaKaKng, Tiwpyog. ""E^w oi Ouvoi...': Ta GeaipiKa aKavSaAa ainv EniSaupo (B)", ©eaipou noAiq, tx. 3-4 (2017-2018), 8-21].
Sarigiannis, Yiorgos. "Ok, don't act like this. or, don't judge for not to be judged", To Tetarto Koudouni, 1 September 2016. [Eapnyiavvnq, Tiwpyog. "KaAa, unv Kaveie Ki eiai. r\, nn Kpiveie iva unv KpiGeiie", To Teiapio KouSouvi, 1 Eenie^Ppiou 2016, totetartokoudouni.blogspot.com/2016/09/blog-post.html. Accessed date: 20 Aug. 2018].
Solomos, Alexis. The Living Aristophanes from his to our time, DifTos, 1961. [EoAo^oq, AAe^ng. 0 Zwviavog Apiaro^avng, Ai^poq, 1961].
Sykka, Giota. "Flights of joy above Epidauros", I Kathimerini, 24 July 2016. [£ukk&, riwia. "ni^aeiq xapaq navw ano inv EniSaupo", H KaGn^epiv^, 24 IouAiou 2016].
Theodoropoulos, Takis. "The lost honor of Greekness", I Kathimerini, 13 January 2019. [0eoSwponouAoq, TaKnq. "H xa^evn Ti^ inq eAAnviKOTniaq", H KaGn^epiv^, 13 Iavouapiou 2019].
Tsatsoulis, Dimitris. "Looking for origins: from Karolos Koun's Greekness to Bacchae
(direction: Theodoras Terzopoulos) and Antigone (direction: Giorgos Kimoulis) 147 as examples of intercultural scenic writtings", Paravasis, no. 6, 2005, p. 367-77. [TaaxaouÀnç, An^Tpnç. "AvaÇnTwvTaç PÎZ£Ç: ano t^v eAlnviKOT^Ta tou KapoÀou Kouv aTiç BaKxeç (aK^voGeaia: ©eoSwpoçç TepZonouÀoç) Kai ai^v AvTiyovn (aK^voGeaia: Tiwpyoç Ki^ouÀ^ç) wç napaSeiy^aTa SianoÀiTia^iK^ç aK^viK^ç ypa^ç", napd^aaiç, 6, 2005, a. 367-77].
Tziovas, Dimitris. The transformations of nationalism and the ideology of hellenicism during theInterwar Period, Odysseas, 1989. [TÇioPaç, An^Tpnç. Oi ^eTa^op^waeiç Tou eGviKia^ou Kai to iSeoÀoyn^a T^ç eÀÀnviKûTnTaç aTo MeaonoÀe^o, OSuaaéaç, 1989].