Dionysus is multifaceted, and therefore cannot be defined by a single name or culture. He is, as said by Percival Everett, “NOT [HIMSELF] TODAY.”
While there may be one fundamental “Dionysus,” different portions of his personality are expressed by his different titles (e.g. Bromius). These portions are known as “aspects,” and often represent shifting cultural understandings of gods. For example, according to Walter Burkert, Aphrodite was separated into two aspects in the fourth century: Aphrodite Ourania, who represented “higher love,” or the love that combined the people into one country, and Aphrodite Pandemos, “who [was] responsible for lower sexual life, and in particular for prostitution.” However, the original meanings for these titles were different, Aphrodite Pandemos initially representing patriotic love.
A small portion of Dionysus’ variety is illustrated in Frenzy: “Dionysos was Bakkos was Iakkos was Bromius was Dithyrambos was Evius” (Everett 1).
“Dionysus” (Dionysos) differs in more than just his name from the Roman “Bacchus” (Bakkos). According to the blog, Honor the Gods, “where Dionysus is extreme, Bacchus is restrained. Dionysus is intoxication, Bacchus enjoys a party. Dionysus is theatrical tragedy, Bacchus is poetry. Dionysus confers madness and healing from madness, Bacchus bestows revelry.” Dionysus is the Greek iteration of the god, and is fundamentally alien. He is mysterious and ambiguous, and represents a paradigm shift, a step away from the status quo. He symbolizes “religious ecstasy.” The revelry he brings is, however, accompanied by misery. While he liberates individuals from oppressive societal structures, the way in which he releases them also exposes their tragic flaws. In granting Agave “this gift of the vine,” Dionysus absolves Agave of her responsibilities and allows she and her sisters to “haze away the vision of [their] treatment” (Everett 44). In Agave’s ecstasy, she is so removed from society and the relationships that formerly define her (Everett 44) that she kills her son without recognizing him (Euripides 159). Dionysus does not liberate Agave for the sole purpose of freeing her from her problems; he also seeks revenge for the rumors she spread about his mother. Because she is freed on a temporary basis, her sober burden is heavier to bear, as she must grapple with having committed a filicide that she has no memory of (Euripides 163), and with the downfall of her family from its high status (Euripides 164). Bacchus, on the other hand, is a god of wine and intoxication. Bacchus is a tamer, amicable, more palatable version of Dionysus, and this change runs parallel to how Roman theology was adapted from Greek culture. By the time Roman culture had adapted elements of Greek culture, Bacchus had become a part of their traditions, assimilated into their culture. Bacchus is therefore more significantly associated with freedom and revelry without the negative “madness” of the Greek Dionysus. His personality is founded upon the value of his immutable traits in the perspectives of the cultures in which he is known; while the Greeks attached tragedy and hubris to Dionysus, Roman worshipers did not approach him with the same terror. Therefore, Dionysus is subject to being named and known by others. As a character, he aligns with the epigraph in that, as Percival Everett states, “[his] name is not [his] name.” While Dionysus is a paradoxical and mysterious figure, his mysteries and paradoxes are assigned by society.
The relationship between Dionysus and his worshipers goes both ways. As worshipers use his rites, they are permitting the version of Dionysus that they created to exert influence over them. This dynamic extends to the relationships between Dionysus and those who associate with him in The Bacchae and Frenzy. In Frenzy, for example, the Bacchants escaped Thebes in order to live out their socially unaccepted desires. They view Dionysus in whichever way fulfills their personal fantasies, and are thus able to leverage his power for their personal gain. However, Dionysus also acts on the Bacchants. While his actions and appearance are based on their fantasies, he also forcibly drives the Bacchants mad enough to act on these wishes. He compels Agave, Ino, and Autonoe to flee their homes because of his vendetta against them (Euripides 129). He later persuades Pentheus to express sexual desires that not only oppose his political policies but will lead to his death because Pentheus rejects and slanders Dionysus (Euripides 153). Although the objects of Dionysus’ wrath are drawn to him through urges they possessed prior to having associating with him, Dionysus warps the will of the repressed for his own sake.
I also use personae in order to express different, yet overlapping, parts of my personality. However, these personae do not exist in a vacuum, but relate to my perception of societal values and conventionality. In the past, I would have done anything to avoid personal writing assignments. I was never questioned about this aversion. In fact, people seemed supportive of my choice to stray from personal essays because this decision generally presented itself as me choosing to take AP classes and writing about literature rather than the “lowly” topic of myself. In my experience, personal writing is perceived as a lesser writing form, and I have felt pressured to only present the most academic, and therefore the most accepted, version of my writing. However, in failing to develop my personal writing skills, writing reflectively has become a greater challenge than it might have been had I faced it earlier. My goal is, therefore, to learn how to write personally for the public, and to make my complete self, rather than the most conventional aspects of myself, visible within my writing. I hope to learn how to experiment with my writing through this blogging project, and therefore grow from this process. Although I cannot hope to escape from convention, I hope that I’ll be more myself at the end of the day.