Themes
Key
LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in The Frogs, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.
Old vs. New
The Value of Art
Literary Criticism
Critique of Athenian Democracy
Appearance vs. Reality
Summary
Analysis
In Pluto’s palace, Xanthias and Pluto’s slave are working together on some tedious chore. Xanthias gripes about Dionysus, but Pluto’s slave thinks it’s pretty unusual that Dionysus didn’t beat Xanthias for pretending to be him. Xanthias says he’d make Dionysus pay if he did that, and Pluto’s slave brightens on hearing Xanthias disrespect his master—he, too, likes to trash-talk Pluto. The men bond over their mutual love of insulting their masters.
Though Xanthias enjoyed a turn playing Heracles, his transformation was only skin deep, and his glory was ultimately short-lived; now he’s relegated to enslavement once more, sent away to do tedious work with another enslaved person while more important characters tend to more important work.
Themes
The sound of nearby yelling interrupts Xanthias and Pluto’s slave’s conversation. Pluto’s slave explains that it’s Aeschylus and Euripides who are yelling: they’re presently engaged in something of a “civil war.” In Hades, whoever is the best in their field gets his own chair in Pluto’s great hall, and Aeschylus and Euripides are vying for this same coveted position. Aeschylus previously held the chair for tragedy, but ever since Euripides recently died and came to Hades, he’s been threatening to take Aeschylus’s chair away from him. Xanthias doesn’t understand what the problem is—surely Aeschylus is the best. But Pluto’s slave explains that common rogues and criminals (at this point he gestures toward the audience) decided that they could decide which was the better poet, and hardly any of them sided with Aeschylus. To settle the matter, Pluto has decided to hold a proper competition to test the poets’ skill.
Pluto’s slave establishes a context for the agon, the part of the play in which two speakers engage in debate or contest, with each arguing an opposing side and ending with one speaker being declared the winner. In this case, Euripides (the recently deceased tragedian Dionysus came to Hades to revive) and Aeschylus are debating the merits of their respective bodies of work, thus reinforcing the play’s broader focus on the practice of literary criticism (then called “reading”). Complicating their debate are the people available to judge it—the play’s audience. In claiming that the audience is full of rogues and common criminals, the play reaffirms Aristophanes’s critique of contemporary Athenian society, culture, and politics. He also establishes a link between a society’s cultural literacy and their morality.
Themes
Xanthias asks if Sophocles is also competing for the chair. Pluto’s slave explains that when Sophocles first arrived, he kissed Aeschylus on the hand and promised not to challenge him. However, if Euripides wins the chair, Sophocles will challenge him. Pluto’s slave explains that the competition will involve using a scale to “weigh” the poetry. He also says that it’s been hard to find anyone smart enough to be a judge, as Aeschylus “[doesn’t] see eye to eye with the Athenians.” In the end, it was decided that Dionysus will judge the competition. Xanthias and Pluto’s slave exit so that the competition can begin.
Sophocles’s move to kiss the hand of Aeschylus, the oldest of the three great tragedians, signifies his reverence for tradition. Meanwhile, younger newcomer Euripides’s move to immediately challenge Aeschylus’s authority demonstrates a lack of respect for tradition. Given the play’s consistent embrace of the old and condemnation of the new, the reader may already suspect that Aeschylus will be the winner of the contest.
Themes
Dionysus and Pluto enter and find their seats. Slaves carry in a scale and other tools to weigh and measure the poetry. Euripides and Aeschylus enter next, engaged in a bitter argument. Finally, the Chorus takes the stage and introduces Aeschylus, comparing his words to “weapons.” Next, the Chorus introduces Euripides, whose poetry is filled with “intelligence subtle and keen,” though he throws adjectives around willy-nilly.
The scale makes literal the figurative task of analyzing or “weighing” poetry to assess its literary, artistic worth. Comparing Aeschylus’s words to “weapons” suggests a certain clarity to Aeschylus’s poetry and the morals it espouses. Meanwhile, the Chorus’s observation of Euripides’s “intelligence subtle and keen” has a more negative connotation, suggesting that his poetry is stylistically or artistically sound but perhaps lacks the moral clarity of Aeschylus’s poetry.
Themes
Get the entire The Frogs LitChart as a printable PDF.
Euripides speaks first, claiming to be the better poet. He argues that Aeschylus’s poetry is all flowery language and grand declarations. Aeschylus finally responds to Euripides, calling him a “son of the seed-goddess.” He criticizes Euripides’s plays for containing overly simple, unadorned language and for including common characters and depraved topics, like incest.
The insult that Aeschylus directs toward Euripides is likely a mocking reference to a line from one of Euripides’s plays in which Achilles is called “the son of the sea-goddess” (Thetis). Aeschylus is parodying the line to suggest that Euripides’s mother Cleito sold greens, or was of humble origins—though it’s not clear where this insult originated. His critique of Euripides’s unadorned language illustrates a common feature of Aristophanes’s plays—Aristophanes frequently criticizes Euripides’s plays for featuring characters who speak in everyday language.
Themes
Dionysus announces the start of the contest. He goes to the alter and lights incense and pours a drink into the libation cup. Then he turns to the Chorus and orders them to pray to the Muses. The Chorus invokes the Muses as the two competitors, one whose words are powerful, and one whose words are witty, prepare to duel. Aeschylus prays to Demeter. Euripides explains that he prays to “other gods.”
Aeschylus prays to Demeter because he was initiated into the Mysteries (recall the band of Initiates Dionysus and Xanthias encountered on their way to Hades). As an Initiate, Aeschylus aligns himself with Dionysus, a deity associated with the Mysteries. This perhaps suggests that he will be the contest’s ultimate winner. Meanwhile, Euripides’s choice to pray to “other gods” foreshadows his eventual loss.
Themes
The contest begins. Euripides insults Aeschylus some more, claiming that he “cheat[s]” his audience by relying too much on suspense, like introducing a veiled figure at the beginning of a play and then boring the audience with long speeches instead of revealing the veiled figure’s identity. Dionysus finds Euripides’s criticism convincing, and Aeschylus starts to moan and fidget in discomfort.
The contest begins, and with it, a live presentation of the practice of literary criticism. Euripides is specifically referencing two of Aeschylus’s lost plays, Niobe and Myrmidons, both of which featured characters who sat on stage in silence.
Themes
Euripides continues. He argues that he saved the art of Tragedy from the poor state Aeschylus left it in. He got rid of all the floral language and unnecessary detail and replaced it with logic and wisdom—he doesn’t tease his audience with non-linear timelines or rambling speeches. And every character in his plays—even the women, slaves, and old crones—serves a purpose. Aeschylus retorts that Euripides deserved to die for this, but Euripides says his death was merely “democracy in action.” He points to the audience and explains that he taught people to “observe” and “interpret” language, “to take nothing at face value…” He wrote about ordinary life that the audience could relate to. He didn’t confuse them with lofty language or “characters like Cycnus or Memnon[.]”
Euripides, in defending the logic and wisdom of his plays, aligns himself and his work with the teachings of Socrates, with whom Euripides’s contemporaries associated Euripides. The Socratic method involves people engaging in debate and asking questions to reach deeper understanding, critically observing their surroundings and taking no supposed truths for granted. He also defends his use of characters of lower social statuses—ordinary people to match the ordinary language in which he wrote.
Themes
Dionysus, responding to Euripides’s claim that he taught his audience how to think, mockingly says that Euripides is right: now, Athenians ask questions like, “Why is the flour jar not in its proper place?” and “Who’s been nibbling at this olive?” Without Euripides, they’d just be staring dumbly into space.
Dionysus mockingly disagrees that learning to question and doubt everything has been good for Athenian society. Now, people are too occupied with trivial matters like missing flour jars and half-eaten olives to care about what’s really important: reaching a peace settlement with Sparta in the ongoing Peloponnesian War.
Themes
Next, it’s Aeschylus's turn to argue. Aeschylus begins by asking Euripides to identify what constitutes a good poet. Euripides replies that good poets “teach people how to be better citizens.” Aeschylus accuses Euripides of portraying noble figures as brutes in his plays. Aeschylus’s plays, like Seven Against Thebes, by contrast, portray heroes as heroic, virtuous, and dutiful. Aeschylus thinks this is the point of poetry: to teach audiences a lesson. Orpheus taught people that murder is wrong, for example. Aeschylus only includes role models in this plays, unlike Euripides, whose plays are full of lustful women like Phaedra. Euripides says his plays never hurt anyone, but Aeschylus claims that “every decent woman” was so aghast at Euripides’s Bellerophon that she went home and poisoned herself.
Euripides’s answer to Aeschylus’s question brings a new degree of importance to this contest—whichever poet Dionysus deems the winner of this contest could have a hand in “teach[ing] people to be better citizens” and thereby restoring Athens to its former glory. Aeschylus has a similar answer to Euripides—he also thinks that plays should be instructive—but his idea about how to go about this differs from Euripides’s. Aeschylus critiques Euripides’s plays for involving lurid, immoral subject matters—he suggests that people learn by example, so plays that feature immoral characters, even if things end badly for them, can’t possibly teach audiences anything useful about morality.
Themes
Euripides says it’s not like he came up with the story of Phaedra. Aeschylus agrees but says poets should know not to talk about such vile stories. Instead, they should provide examples of how to behave—a poet is to their audience as the schoolteacher is to their students, after all. Euripides scoffs and asks Aeschylus if it’s better to teach people using lofty language or common, everyday language. Aeschylus says that “noble themes” require noble language—and that this is a matter of respect. Euripides’s plays have taught people to be immoral and lazy and stand around “babbl[ing]” and debating all day.
Aeschylus argues for a censorship of sorts, suggesting that it’s a poet’s responsibility to feed audiences only themes that will improve their morality and teach them how to act—everything that could corrupt audiences and sow discord, however, should be left out. He talks about the audience rather patronizingly, comparing them to impressionable young schoolchildren who must be fed clear, positive examples in order to learn. He also critiques Euripides’s association with Socrates once more, claiming that Euripides’s plays have taught people to stand around “babbl[ing]” all day, referencing the Socratic method, which centers around debate and interrogation.
Themes
Euripides next attacks Aeschylus’s prologues, claiming they don’t give the audience enough context. He cites the Oresteia trilogy as an example. Aeschylus recites the opening three lines of the play Choephori, in which Orestes stands over his dead father Agamemnon’s grave and speaks of his plans to avenge Agamemnon’s death. Euripides explains what's wrong with these opening lines. “For I have come back to this land and do return” is redundant, he claims, since coming back already implies a return. Dionysus agrees. Aeschylus replies that “come back” is more general, but that “return” specifically applies to something an exiled person would do. The poets argue back and forth, with Dionysus interjecting shallow commentary here and there.
So far, Euripides’s attacks against Aeschylus seem rather comically picky and unsubstantial. He’s dissecting Aeschylus’s poetry for minor stylistic choices he happens not to like, not necessarily for anything that would signify that Aeschylus is a deficient poet. It becomes increasingly clear that Euripides isn’t measuring up to Aeschylus. Given that Aeschylus is the older of the two poets, Euripides’s shallow criticisms further suggest the play’s central premise that the new is bad and the old is good.
Themes
Next, it’s Euripides’s turn to recite his prologue. He recites Oedipus Rex but can barely get through the first line about Oedipus being happy before Aeschylus cuts him off, arguing that this simply isn’t true: Oedipus was never happy, for Apollo had already predetermined that Oedipus would murder his own father. And from there, things just get worse: Oedipus is kept in a pot to prevent him from growing up and murdering his father, then he marries a woman old enough to be his mother, and then it turns out she is his mother. Then he blinds himself. Euripides maintains that his prologues are still good.
In critiquing Euripides’s portrayal of Oedipus as (at least at first) “a happy man,” Aeschylus reaffirms his argument that Euripides’s plays don’t instill good morals in audiences, scandalizing them with the notion that someone who engages in the taboo of incest should be “happy” at any point in his life. In defending his prologues, Euripides suggests that the literary merits of his poetry outweigh whatever scandalizing, immoral themes they broach.
Themes
Aeschylus claims that Euripides’s poetry is rhythmically bad. In fact, Aeschylus can “demolish any prologue […] with a little flask of oil.” To demonstrate this, Aeschylus asks Euripides to recite the opening lines of a prologue—then Aeschylus completes them with the phrase “lost his little flask of oil.” Aeschylus does this four times more, much to Dionysus’s amusement. Dionysus tells Euripides that he’s probably lost this battle and should move on and address Aeschylus’s lyrics instead.
Here, Aeschylus moves away from critiquing the lacking moral or educational value of Euripides’s work, focusing instead on a stylistic concern: the predictable rhythms of Euripides’s prologues, comically showing how the predictability of Euripides’s use of iambic meters in his prologues allows each line to end with “lost his little flask of oil.”
Themes
Euripides says that Aeschylus’s lyrics are all the same; contrary to their popularity, there’s nothing all that special about them. Euripides then mockingly sings excerpts from Aeschylus’s lyrical writing, ending each excerpt with the phrase “Ai, ai, we’re struck! Come quickly to the rescue!” much as Aeschylus did with the “flask of oil” bit. Aeschylus counters that he might use “traditional elements in [his] lyrics,” but they all serve a specific artistic purpose. Aeschylus then criticizes Euripides’s solo arias, singing a song that starts out sounding serious but ends up being about the theft of a cockerel.
Here, Euripides mocks Aeschylus’s frequent use of dactylic rhythm, or a long syllable followed by two short syllables. Though the poets mock each other’s work to a specific, picky degree, their exercise in literary criticism has an instructive as well as entertaining effect on the audience, helping them to gain a deeper understanding of the mechanics at play in the poets’ respective works.
Themes
After Aeschylus finishes the aria, he suggests it’s time to use the scales to decide which poet’s “poetry is the weightier[.]” Dionysus calls the two poets to stand before the scale’s two pans. He instructs them to each hold onto a pan and recite one line of their own poetry, then when he calls, “Cuckoo!” the poets should let go. They both do this, and the result is that Aeschylus’s side of the scale slides down lower. Euripides demands they try again. Once more, Aeschylus’s poetry proves weightier.
In deeming Aeschylus’s poetry physically “weightier,” the scale also suggests that Aeschylus’s poetry will have a heavier influence on Athenian citizens and be better equipped to get them back on track morally and politically.
Themes
Euripides isn’t ready to accept defeat. He argues that “Persuasion” ought to carry weight. Dionysus disagrees, calling Persuasion “hollow” and meaningless. Euripides considers something weightier he can offer, but Aeschylus interrupts, saying the “line-against-line business” is pointless—even if Euripides hopped inside the pan with his whole family, Aeschylus would still outweigh him. When it’s time for Dionysus to decide the winner, he struggles. One poet is wise, but he “just love[s]” the other poet. Pluto says that Dionysus should just pick a poet; he can take the poet he picks back to earth with him, and that way he won’t have wasted his time.
Euripides’s argument that “Persuasion” should carry weight references his evocation of Socratic argument, as he focuses on the way his plays incite audiences to ask questions about the world and take nothing for granted. But Dionysus dismisses “Persuasion” as “hollow,” suggesting it is lightweight and not intellectually valuable or politically or socially useful. Pluto raises the stakes when he declares that the winner of the contest will return to Athens with Dionysus—now, the winner will have the opportunity to put the power of poetry to the test, seeing if it’s possible to educate the passes through poetry and, in so doing, restore Athens to its former glory.
Themes
Dionysus turns to the poets and explains that he came to Hades to “save” Athens. Therefore, whichever poet can offer the best advice to save Athens is the poet he’ll choose. He poses a question to the poets: “what should be done about Alcibiades?” Euripides recites lines of verse condemning citizens who act selfishly and harm their country. Aeschylus recites lines of verse about how unwise it is for states to raise a lion cub—but that if they do, they should “tolerate its own peculiar ways.”
Alcibiades was a former Athenian general who was a contentious figure at the time of the play’s first performance—he’d been arrested for profaning the Mysteries, then reinstated following his involvement in defeating the oligarchs who overthrew Athenian democracy in 411 B.C.E., and then he had his titles taken away once more by his enemies. Athens was divided on what to do about Alcibiades, a position that The Frogs seems to share—while Euripides advocates for Alcibiades’s punishment, Aeschylus adopts a more ambivalent stance toward the disgraced former general.
Themes
Dionysus can’t decide which poet has given the better answer, so he poses another question: how should Athens be saved? Euripides thinks Athenians should question everything and everyone—even the people and ideas they trust. Aeschylus thinks Athenians are doomed unless they stop electing “hypocrites and swindlers” over noble people, and they need to be prepared to give up land to strengthen their navy.
Euripides doubles down on his embrace of the Socratic method and so dooms himself—by this point, it’s well established that Aristophanes holds Socrates and anyone associated with him in contempt. Meanwhile, Aeschylus, with his practical suggestion that Athenians re-learn how to be better judges of character and start electing better people to office, seems to solidify his place as the victor of this competition.
Themes
Pluto says it’s time for Dionysus to decide which poet he will take back with him. Dionysus explains how he will pick the winning poet: “I shall select the man my soul desires.” Then he picks Aeschylus. Euripides, irate, calls Dionysus “shameful” and a “traitor.” He asks if Dionysus is really going to leave him here to remain dead, and Dionysus replies mockingly, asking how one can know what life and death really are. Euripides struggles as he’s removed from the arena.
Though both Euripides and Aeschylus have just presented a compelling argument that each is the better poet and that each is better suited to save Athens, Dionysus instead chooses to “select the man [his] soul desires,” or the man whose poetry most moves him. With this, The Frogs perhaps suggests that engaging with literature in a critical, focused manner can deepen a person’s appreciation for it. Indeed, after hearing Aeschylus and Euripides make their respective arguments, Dionysus goes back on his initial impulse to bring back Euripides, opting to revive Aeschylus instead. This, it seems, is the result of having spent time thoughtfully considering Aeschylus’s work, ultimately suggesting that this kind of careful rumination can change a person’s mind (since Dionysus originally came to bring back Euripides, not Aeschylus).
Themes
Pluto orders Dionysus and Aeschylus inside to entertain them before they leave. The Chorus stays behind and praises Aeschylus’s “sharp intelligence,” anticipating all the good he will do for Athens. By contrast, “it’s not smart to sit and chat / With Socrates,” nor is it smart to sacrifice “Artistic merit” for “quibbling and pretentious talk,” which is what Euripides does.
Once more, Aristophanes, speaking through the Chorus, criticizes Euripides for promoting Socrates's ideas, which Aristophanes equates to “quibbling and pretentious talk.” Athenians have gotten their priorities mixed up and have learned to doubt the system and one another, and this is partially why Athens has lost political power. To Aristophanes, it’s Aeschylus’s plays, which give audiences clear examples of noble themes and character, that have true “Artistic merit.”
Themes
Pluto, Aeschylus, and Dionysus emerge from Pluto’s palace. Pluto bids his guests goodbye and tells them to return to Athens and “Educate the fools.” Aeschylus asks Pluto to have Sophocles keep his chair away from Euripides while he’s away. The Chorus escorts Aeschylus to Athens, wishing him a safe journey and success in saving the city.
Pluto tells Aeschylus to “Educate the fools” of Athens, which is more or less what Aristophanes sets out to do in The Frogs. In addition, the particular phrasing the Chorus invokes to wish Aeschylus a safe journey is based on lines from the Exit-Song of Aeschylus’s play Eumendies, in which Athena gives Athenians her well wishes. In closing The Frogs with this literary allusion, Aristophanes pays homage to the old, dying Greek art of tragedy and the traditional values and conventions it represents.
Themes
