Pseudolus

Rome, at the end of the third century BCE, had surprising points of continuity and connection to America in the 1960. In A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum, Pseudolus has many interactions with the upper classes that simultaneously skewer 1960s American culture and ancient Roman culture. Pseudolus’ ability to lie and manage different situations renders the work an in-depth commentary on Roman culture that also skewers American racial and social relations in the 1960s. When Hero confides in Pseudolus about his love for Philia, the plot moves forward not just with a traditional caper or romantic comedy, but also with an interaction between social classes that offers commentary on both cultures. Keith Bradley emphasizes that slavery
was about more than the cruelty and horror of the practice; “....slavery at Rome has to be approached above all as a social institution.
Individual slaves were set free, sold, rewarded, or punished by their owners, the men, women and at times children who utterly dominated their lives, which means that the institution
itself has to be approached primarily in terms of the social relationship which bound slave and slave-owner together.” Clearly, Hero and Pseudolus have this kind of social relationship in which Hero sees him as enough of a person to confide in him. In America in the 1960s, these social relationships that crossed different class statuses were not uncommon, and if we understand Pseudolus as a stand-in for stock characters in 1960s America, many African American characters come to mind. As an individual who is part of a dispreferred class and stigmatized by social status, the 1960s viewer would immediately recognize in him many of the dynamics of 1960s America. In this time, “…African Americans, already burdened by the social and economic deprivations of slavery and Jim Crow, found themselves disadvantaged by employment practices and state policies that amounted to affirmative action for whites.” The African Americans who worked as servants or in other subordinate roles in which they had no economic opportunity, but in which they became confidants for the very people who oppressed them were people who had to negotiate many different social relationships, just as Pseudolus did. Pseudolus learns a great deal about the family that owns him, and they in turn depend on him. As a hapless slave who must adhere to their whims, he becomes privy to many of their personal peccadilloes, whims, and character flaws (this is especially true when it comes to Domina, the truly unlikable wife who seems to be in charge). For African Americans, many of whom continued to work for poverty wages as domestic help even in the mid-twentieth century, this was likely a very familiar and identifiable dynamic. The tragic situation in which Erronius’ children had been stolen by pirates in their infancy is more than a convenient plot device.
It is also a historical reference to the strange and complex global trade routes of the Mediterranean. The movement of people through the Mediterranean in this time was surprisingly complex and the area constituted an early global region in terms of its commerce and trade routes. Thus, it is believable that a well-off merchant might lose his children to pirates and they might become slaves. However, the connection to American life in the 1960s is also strong. Audiences could also understand Erronius, a very old man in the film, as a stand-in for the more gullible, older generations of Americans, most of whom did not understand the significant social changes occurring in this time. The divide between the older generation and the younger generation has seldom been more apparent in American history, and during this contentious decade, in which younger people rose up against the policies of the older generation through, for example, the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), and truly achieved change. Erronius is a benign old man in the film who searches for his lost children, which could be understood more wryly within 1960s America as the older generation truly losing touch with the younger generation’s mores and
values. Finally, the farcical sexual nature of the romance between Phila and Hero seems to touch upon some of the gender issues that were prevalent in the 1960s. The rise of feminism in this decade threw many social relationships out of balance, creating social uncertainty as women denounced the life of the housewife and sex outside of marriage became more normal and socially acceptable. The farce with Phila, who as a courtesan simply offers herself to the Captain because of her perceived obligation, is aligned with both Roman histories, in which women were especially vulnerable because of their gender and the American sexual revolution. The fact that Phila works against her own desires and pliantly moves forward with the relationships that are planned for her seems to offer a commentary on women’s autonomy, or the lack thereof, within American society of the 1960s. Despite the advances of feminism and the sexual revolution, women even today do not have equal rights as men and virulent sexism and misogyny dominates American life. Women are either pliant courtesans, as seen in the film, or hated shrews like Domina. The two avenues for feminine identity are especially depressing, but the film accurately portrays the schizophrenic American attitude towards women. Female slaves in Ancient Rome, meanwhile, had very little say in their own lives. Those who were fertile and able to return on their masters’ investments by producing children were valued more highly by their male masters, and it was to a female slave’s advantage to be sexualized, even though numerous pregnancies carried significant danger with them in this era before modern medicine.