Joseph Bondatti, Michaelmas 2015

Paper X: Racine Commentary: Iphigénie, Act II, Scene II

In Racine’s Iphigénie, Iphigénie herself does not appear until the beginning of Act II. In

this sense, it is arguable that Act I serves the function of creating a backdrop for her

eventual entrance; allowing for the dramatic tension to be drawn out of her naïve

exchange with Agamemnon, and for almost all of the lines in the passage in question to

take on a dual meaning; simultaneously showcasing both the innocence of Iphigénie, and

the reality of the dilemma with which Agamemnon is faced.

The caesura and chiasmus of the line ‘mais les temps sont changés, aussi bien que les

lieux’ conveys both the structure of the dilemma, and the extent to which Agamemnon is

torn between the two options which are available to him. Similarly, the structure of the

following line, line 3 of the passage, in which the sibilant ‘soin’ followed by the velar

‘cruel’ is mirrored by the sounds ‘ici’ and ‘combattue’, as well as the contradictory pair

‘soin cruel’ further accentuates the two parts of the dilemma.

The 10 lines from Iphigénie which follow are effectively a series of unknowing twists of

the knife on her part, given the pain caused by the highly ironic double meaning which

the lines take on for Agamemnon. The line ‘oubliez votre rang à ma vue’ is highly ironic,

given that if Agamemnon were truly to forget his rank, then Iphigénie would be saved.

Similarly, the line ‘n’osez vous sans rougir etre pere un moment?’ is intended somewhat

playfully, but takes on a significantly more profound meaning in the context of

Agamemnon’s conflicting duties as a father and as a king. Iphigénie begins referring to

herself in the third person, once again somewhat playfully, but this also has the effect of

painting herself as unquestionably innocent; of objectifying her, a process which, due to

her naivety, is permissible here, but were it not for the fact that she is unaware of her
 Joseph Bondatti, Michaelmas 2015

impending doom, might be interpreted as somewhat self-indulgent, or as a form of

pleading. It is the unique situation, which allows for Iphigénie to remain unaware of the

full extent of what is about to happen, which allows her to plead without knowing that she

is doing so. The use of synecdoche in line 15 ‘périsse le Troyen’ also allows Iphigénie to

formulate the dilemma in direct terms, with ‘le troyen’ acting in juxtaposition with ‘une

jeune princesse’ in line 7.

Whereas the majority of Iphigenie’s speech is in the present tense, Agamemnon seems to

actively avoid using it, ‘coutera’ ‘depuis un temps’ ‘puissé-je auparavant’ ‘vous y serez.’

He seems to be desperately fleeing the present moment, attempting to by-pass, or at least

postpone the inevitable decision which he will have to make by retreating into either the

future or the past.

Lines 15-20 are structured as three stichomythic pairs, all of which are initiated by

Iphigénie and responded to by Agamemnon, sharing the same rhyme, drawing attention

to the doubleness of the meaning of the content for the two characters on stage. Whereas

the ‘je ne puis’ rhymes with the ‘ennuis’ of line 13, the ‘je ne veux’ of line 21 initiates a

fresh rhyming couplet, marking Agamemon’s gradual transition from exclamatory

muteness to assertiveness, ending in the hemistichomythia of line 21, which represents

one of the few instances where Agamemnon uses the present tense. The playful

alliteration of ‘dieux daignent’ and the assonance of ‘surtout jours’ in line 17, is almost

mimicked by Agamemnon in the next line, borrowing the same alliteration as Iphigénie in

‘dieux depuis, but ending the line instead with the harsh ‘r’ sounds of ‘cruel et sourds.’

Exactly the same thing happens in lines 19 and 20, where Iphigenie’s playful alliteration

of ‘prepare un pompeux’ is mimicked with the plosive ‘puissé’, followed by the harsh ‘r’
 Joseph Bondatti, Michaelmas 2015

in ‘flechir leur injustice’, exposing Iphigénie’s playfulness as naïve, and replacing it with

the harsh reality of the dilemma with which he is faced.

The hesitation of Agamemnon, and his desire to prolong the point of making his decision

for as long as possible by fleeing the present is further conveyed by Agamemnon’s

reluctance to answer any of his daughter’s questions. In lines 6-13 of the passage,

Iphigenie asks 4 questions, to which Agamemnon responds with only ‘ah ma fille’ and ‘je

ne puis.’ In line 20, Agamemnon does not respond to Iphigenie’s mention of Calchas in

line 19, but rather seems still to be procuppied with the dieux cruels et sourds of line 18.

The conversation has moved forward; responses are demanded of him, and yet

Agamemnon refuses to give them. To Iphignie’s question in line 21, he responds with the

mysterious ‘plus tot que je ne veux’, which serves to illustrate his internal conflict; he

wants to tell his daughter, but can not bring himself to, and so this desire manifiests itself

in the form of obscure utterances with a dual significance.

Finally, to Iphigenie’s request to attend the sacrifice, at first he cannot bring himself to

answer, responding with another exclamatory ‘helas’ in place of a response. The ironic

opposition of ‘je ne veux’ and ‘joindre à vos voeux’ as a rhyming pair is unbearable for

him. Line 24 is split in three, mirroring line 14, imitating the structure, but showing us

that Agamemnon has come further towards a resolution. Whereas line 14 ended with the

trisyllabic ‘je ne puis,’ ten lines later, half of the alexandrine is reserved for

Agamemnon’s reluctant but effective death sentence ‘vous y serez ma fille.’ The decision

is teased out of him by Iphigenie herself.