| |
| | Bryn Mawr Classical Review 03.03.21 (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-04) |
 | | The general discussion of the dithyramb improves on Pickard-Cambridge by addressing a range of topics independent of chronology (contents, musical aspects, rhythm and dance, style and vocabulary, performance), but the results are exiguous. |
 | | The section on Pindar's dithyrambs is much more useful and detailed, particularly the full discussion of the four characteristics of Dionysius' austere style as exemplified by the dithyrambs of Pindar, Bacchylides and Simonides in opposition to Sappho fr.1, Dionysius' example of the smooth style. |
 | | More important, the discussion of the dithyrambic "I" is relegated to individual notes (49, 78, 195) even though the author (unwittingly?) offers a fundamental challenge to the usual interpretation of the dithyrambic "I" as choral. |
| ccat.sas.upenn.edu /bmcr/1992/03.03.21.html (1134 words) |
|