The classical reception of Bacchus and Romantic critique in Midas by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35699/1983-3636.2025.59397Palavras-chave:
Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, Midas, Bacchus, Classical Reception theory, romanticismResumo
Drawing upon the findings of studies on Classical Reception, this paper employs an analytical approach to examine how Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley’s mythological drama Midas transcends the mere reproduction of ancient tradition, instead functioning as a critical and symbolic reworking of classical myth. The play incorporates literary and philosophical elements that express the Romantic and personal vision of the author, revealing her ability to reconfigure narratives of Antiquity to confront modern tensions, such as materialism and disconnection from nature. The present study investigates the representation of Bacchus as a Dionysian figure, in the Nietzschean sense, who reveals himself in Midas as a symbol of the Dionysian principle, life, intoxication, celebration, and transformation, in opposition to the figure of Midas and his pursuit of control, rationality, and material possession. Mary Shelley incorporates this duality and reinterprets the myth through an ethical and aesthetic lens, offering a renewed and critical perspective on the classical tradition while emphasizing the significance of embracing the Dionysian aspects of human experience.
Referências
ABRAMS, M. H. Natural Supernaturalism: Tradition and Revolution in Romantic Literature. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1971.
BAKOGIANNI, A. What Is So “Classical” About Classical Reception? Theories, Methodologies and Future Prospects. Codex – Revista de Estudos Clássicos, Rio de Janeiro, v. 4, n. 1, p. 96-113, 2016.
BERLIN, I. The Roots of Romanticism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999.
BLOOM, H. The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry. 2. ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
BRANDÃO, J. Mitologia grega. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1987. v. 2.
COMET, N. Romantic Hellenism and Women Writers. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.
COX, J. N. Staging Hope: Genre, Myth, and Ideology in the Dramas of the Hunt Circle. Texas Studies in Literature and Language, v. 38, n. 3/4, p. 245-264, 1996.
DETIENNE, M. Dionysos at Large. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989.
DOWDEN, K.; LIVINGSTONE, N. (ed.). A Companion to Greek Mythology. Oxford: Blackwell, 2011.
FROSCH, T. Psychological Dialectic in Shelley’s ‘Song of Apollo’ and ‘Song of Pan’. Keats-Shelley Journal, v. 45, p. 102-117, 1996. Available at: www.jstor.org/stable/30210341. Accessed on: Apr. 15, 2024.
HARD, R.; ROSE, H. J. The Routledge Handbook of Greek Mythology: Based on H. J. Rose’s “Handbook of Greek Mythology”. London: Routledge, 2004.
HARDWICK, L. Reception Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
KOSZUL, A. Introduction. In: SHELLEY, M. W. Proserpine and Midas. London: Humphrey Milford, 2021. p. V–XXXI.
MARASCHIN, L. T. O esplêndido e mísero rei: reflexões sobre as metamorfoses de Midas. Fênix – Revista de História e Estudos Culturais, v. 11, n. 2, p. 1-19, 2014. Available at: https://www.revistafenix.pro.br/revistafenix/article/view/602. Accessed on: June 20, 2024.
MARTINDALE, C. Redeeming the Text: Latin Poetry and the Hermeneutics of Reception. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
MCGANN, J. The Romantic Ideology: A Critical Investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983.
MELLOR, A. K. Mary Shelley: Her Life, Her Fiction, Her Monsters. New York: Routledge, 1993.
NIETZSCHE, F. O nascimento da tragédia ou helenismo e pessimismo. Tradução de José Antônio Fabiano Mendes. São Paulo: Hedra, 2007.
OVIDIO. As Metamorfoses. Trad., notas e comentários de Georges Lafaye. Paris: Société d’Édition Les Belles Lettres, 1994.
PASCOE, J. Proserpine and Midas. In: SCHOR, E. (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Mary Shelley. Nova York: Cambridge University Press, 2003. p. 180-190.
RIBEIRO JR., W. A. (ed.). Hinos homéricos: tradução, notas e estudo. São Paulo: Ed. UNESP, 2010.
RICHARDSON, A. Proserpine and Midas: Gender, Genre, and Mythic Revisionism in Mary Shelley’s Dramas. In: FISCH, A. A.; MELLOR, A. K.; SCHOR, E. H. (ed.). The Other Mary Shelley: Beyond Frankenstein. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. p. 124-139.
SHELLEY, P. B. Mutability. In: HUTCHINSON, T. (ed.). The Complete Poetical Works of Percy Bysshe Shelley. Londres: Edward Moxon, 1880. Available at: https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/54563/mutability-we-are-as-clouds-that-veil-the-midnight-moon. Accessed on: May 25, 2025.
SHELLEY, M. W. Proserpine and Midas: Two Unpublished Mythological Dramas. Londres: Humphrey Milford, 2021.
TORRANO, J. Sentido de Zeus: o mito do mundo e o modo mítico de ser no mundo. São Paulo: Iluminuras, 1996. Available at: https://repositorio.usp.br/item/000917547. Accessed on: Oct. 16, 2025.
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2025 Mellyssa Coêlho de Moura, Orlando Luiz de Araújo (Autor)

Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.



