Soon Wai Hoe, Adisak (980428M-01)

Tertullian's prose reminds me of a speech that could easily be used on a Sunday morning in church. In an authoritative style extolling the sinfulness of "Public shows", he preaches his moral views in a way that suggests some kind of superiority over his listeners. A good example for this is this phrase "And you will hear, O Christian", that brings to mind the extremist image of a morality crazed preacher going on and on.

Tertullian's writings from "On the Spectacles" are plainly against the Theatre. The first point he makes regards a popular defense of theatre that the "heathens" use, that being that since all things are created by God and given for man's use, whatever man does with these things must be good since they came from a good source. Tertullian strives to make a distinction here between the Creator (God) and the Corrupter (People associated with the theatre). A good example he uses is the idea of murder. The instruments of murder, for example iron and poisonous herbs are God's creations, yet He plainly does not intend their use for murder with the commandment "Thou shalt not kill". Men who corrupt God's primal purity is severed from his Maker.

Then there is a criticism of the origins of Theatre in the Greek period that he claims sprang from idolatry. Theatre was used often as a means to celebrate ones ancestors and the Gods, all forms of idol worship since in his view, there was only one true God. Those who departed from this belief were in his estimation, not to be followed. With the very foundation of Theatre rooted in the motivation to idolatry, it was no doubt an evil thing.

Later he contends that theatrical exhibitions were also prone to lead to the corruption of the performers. In being able to summon the display of emotions at will was in itself some kind of mockery to those very emotions. In stimulating them, there is something unnatural that speaks of a hidden hypocrisy. Truth in feeling is displaced for the conventions of performance and there is a creation of pretence. Further corruption on the performers is shown in the roles created for the purposes of comedy and sexual titillation. He names buffoons in women's clothing and harlots as examples who "blush more readily on stage than in their home".

The audience who eagerly participated in Theatrical performances were also not spared his judgement. Because of the power of the Theatre to bring about extreme emotions, their display would lead to immodesty, since in an audience one laughs or cries together. Within such close quarters and experiencing emotions of such power there is a danger that an agitation of feelings could potentially explode to sin. Furthermore, some motivations for an audience attending a Theatrical performance were to "see and be seen". It is easy to see that from this the sins of Pride and Envy could be manifested.

A well-known convention of Greek tragedy was that it was about noble people who through an unfortunate error not with regards to their selves, suffers. Tertullian acknowledges that it is fine when we learn of evil people who come to bad ends, but what is the value of knowing about bad things happening to good people. Christian motivation towards a code of good moral behavior is based on the idea of a heavenly reward in the end. Tragedy's skewed convention throws this teaching to the wind.

Saint Augustine wrote "City of God" towards the end of Roman Empire. One needs to understand that much of the reason why constant reference of theatre is made to the Greeks during the Roman period was because the Romans were very familiar with Greek culture. The idea of the Greek Gods for example had interwoven into the Roman culture in a similar way and mirroring its function. The Greek Aphrodite for instance became the Roman Venus. Many of the other religions at around that time were preaching with heavy emphasis to Greek religion. Christianity however, was about a totally different idea from Greek and Roman religion. Christianity was a religion that involved a sense of feeling for one God who loves all humanity and is to be respected by all men. The concept of many Gods possessing human like traits, using men as their tools to further their own ends was one despised by the Christian viewpoint. Men were seen to worship out of fear rather than out of love for their Gods.

Saint Augustine was a social commentator and at the time theatre and drama was in fashion much like the movies are for us in these modern times. It was a social problem to the Christians and carried a stigma because of the richness of its perversity. The Romans were essentially a base society, and enjoyed plays that dealt with things like evil rulers killing many people and where there were mass orgies. It was a theatre rich in physical and mental stimulus and where sexuality for example, was allowed free rein. Some part of this desire for self-satisfaction came from the Roman belief in philosophy, clearly an area where the Greeks had much influence. It was thought that everything was subjective, where the Gods even though worshipped were vulgar representations of humanity and where actions were done to satisfy the self.

Because he was a social commentator, he understood that the ideas of Christianity would not be easily accepted by people so used to the concept of a heaven populated by many Gods. The only way he could influence them was by alluding to the Romans and the Greeks and in particular the way the Theatre was treated in their respective societies. A third category of people aside from the aforementioned are implied in the discussion; the Christians, for whom Saint Augustine argues for.

His argument in the "City of God" is a more difficult one to ascertain than Tertullian's because of the irony he peppers throughout the argument. Without the benefit of realizing that he is a Christian Saint, one would have difficulty in the beginning of uncovering his stand on the issue of Theatre. But it is clear enough after careful reading that his argument though strongly based in Tertullian's is less a commandment to his readers but more a series of statements calculated towards a conclusion that we as intelligent readers should learn and discern from. And so there are three groups mentioned the Greeks, the Romans and the Christians. In this very same order goes his estimation as to the worth of their morality. He implicates the Greeks and the Romans and points out the flaws that make them inferior to the Christians.

St Augustine's attack begins by attacking the fundamental fact that both the Greeks and the Romans worshipped many Gods. And worse of this was how the Gods themselves embodied human vices in their actions. Being further created out of anything they fancied, Gods of such frivolity like of wine and song and dance were able to come into existence. And because they were Gods not necessarily committed to a moral good, man could use their base actions as justification for committing evil. There was no rigid moral standard with so many gods. Furthermore, that these Gods made it a commandment upon humanity to celebrate them through the Theatre despite the display of their own vices was unbecoming. To be celebrated was in itself is an honorable thing, but not when vices and sins are also allowed to be displayed for public mockery. Saint Augustine asks then what kind of Gods would allow something like that.

For all that both were guilty for, the Greeks were in a more "immoral" position, as he specifically mentions twice in the text of "City of God". First of all they made it a law to say what is to be said of people by name in a comedy. The problem Saint Augustine has with this is that poets become the judges for man's character. A man whose name in made fun of either in jest or in malice has no recourse to blame. This ultimately affects the stability of the society since comedy may offend. The Romans were one better on this point since is was forbidden for "any living man to be praised or blamed on the stage" An example of Saint Augustine's irony is revealed at this point when he says that the Greeks though immoral were more logical. A seeming attempt at praising the Greeks one might say, but by the allowance of humiliation to both humans and Gods on the stage followed through on the idea that the Greeks were the basest of the lot. The Romans it seems just didn't know better. The Greeks, because of the liberty accorded to the playwrights in slandering living persons allowed man's vices to show through in their theatre. This is similar to Tertullian's argument that in a nutshell suggests that we are what we watch. Vices on stage corrupt the spectators.

Finally the Greeks, unlike the Romans accorded high civil honors to actors. The idea was that in being the Men who pleased the Gods, they should likewise be rewarded for their efforts. Saint Augustine's remark that acknowledges the logic of this argument nevertheless makes a snide at the very Gods who are pleased. The Romans on the other hand debarred actors from offices and even did not recognize them as citizens. Despite the fact that the plays they out up were in honor of the Gods. Roman sensibility was in an illogical way pompous enough to make allow Gods and not themselves to be slandered on the stage. Saint Augustine's seems to see this as an evolutionary trait, and Rome was one short of being in the ideal situation. Perhaps in a way it could have been seen as a good thing since pagan Gods were not to be respected. Taken in another light however, it could have been bad if all or any God was taken in estimation in the same way. The only Greek Saint Augustine praises is the philosopher Plato, who was himself very much against the theatre. That he was their only saving grace made him in Saint Augustine's opinion better than the Gods that being worshipped at the time. Plato was truly a man ahead of his time with his forward views that coincided with Saint Augustine.

Both arguments though preaching a similar message would be more persuasive depending on the recipient. God fearing Christians who would not question the sometimes illogical arguments of Tertullian would have easily been swayed by them. Saint Augustine's argument on the other hand would have been more to the liking of a God disowning Roman society. Disregarding the identity of the recipient of both arguments, I feel that Saint Augustine's argument is more persuasive. It allows the recipient more room to deliberate on the ideas expressed in them by allowing points of comparison. Allowing this freedom to decide also draws you in on the author's side and makes what he might have to say more attractive.