The gods enforcing punishment upon mortals is not an uncommon occurrence in Greek mythology, many may even argue that some of the most important interactions between mortals and gods stemmed from a place of vengeance or discipline. Dionysus is no exception to this, especially not as he is portrayed in Euripides' Bacchae. With his questionable moral compass and high level of what could only be described as pettiness, it's incredibly difficult to label him as good or evil. Consequently, I believe that, as he is depicted by Euripides, he is neither a positive nor negative force in human life.

Dionysus has a very two-sided personality that presents a sort of duality, simultaneously representing both one thing and its antithesis. He is both divine and human, Greek yet foreign, masculine yet effeminate, even referring to himself as "most fearful and yet most kind to men." (Euripides, Bacchae, 1058). Dionysus' aliases also give an insight as to how others viewed him, the name Lysios meaning "god of letting go" and Bromios meaning "roaring one". Even his gifts of wine and theatre are double-edged swords. They enable mortals to let go of troubles and express themselves freely through art, allowing them to experience a sense of freedom and relief, but without self -control, these gifts can lead to a loss of sanity and better judgment. This divine side is opposed by Dionysus in disguise, the embodiment of self-control. While Dionysus is depicted as an enabler, encouraging and influencing wrongdoing, the Stranger is depicted as self ­ possessed and patient. He stands out from the mortals surrounding him by displaying wisdom and self -control, advising Pentheus by saying "I warn you-you shouldn't tie me up. I've got my wits about me. You've lost yours." (Euripides, Bacchae, 629-630). Whilst capable of turning men mad, he remains the picture of sanity, thus suggesting that mortals are the cause of their own bloody discord. However, no matter how reasonable and wise Dionysus may seem when in disguise, his true destructive nature seems to outweigh the positive attributes.

It's relatively clear for most that Dionysus surpasses the standard case of divine retribution by a long shot, leaning closer to pettiness than righteousness. He indulges in mindless overkill in an apathetic way by not only punishing Pentheus with death, but also doing so in the most degrading way possible. It is painful, both physically and mentally, as he is killed by the hands of his own brainwashed mother. Pentheus is assailed and undermined through what he cares about most, and he dies participating in a cult he intended to disband from the beginning.

To make matters worse, punishing Pentheus alone is not enough for Dionysus. On top of forcing Agave to kill her own son and parade his severed head around whilst in a trance, Dionysus decides that it's only fair to exile her and the other maenads from Thebes. Additionally, Dionysus,  despite the fact that Cadmus had been honouring him and attempting to convince Pentheus to do so as well, orders for Cadmus and his wife to be turned into snakes and lead barbarian armies, cursed to destroy the cities they once belonged to. Although, it can be argued that Cadmus was disingenuous in honouring the god because when attempting to convince Pentheus he said "For if, as you claim, this man is not a god, why not call him one? Why not tell a lie, a really good one?" (Euripides, Bacchae, 424-426). If this were true, then it could be assumed that Dionysus was able to see through Cadmus' false pretence and see it just to punish him accordingly. Those around him acknowledge Dionysus' harshness as well, Cadmus stating that "Angry gods should not act just like humans." (Euripides, Bacchae, 1723) and the chorus leader showing pity towards Cadmus, saying "I'm sorry for you Cadmus-you're in pain. But your grandson deserved his punishment." (Euripides, Bacchae, 1642-1643). Despite everything, Dionysus shows himself to have no mercy, even when repentance is shown he forgives none and punishes all, just or not, seemingly as a final demonstration of power.

Even though Dionysus' egocentric outlook controls his rational mind and causes him to act in a decidedly evil way, it's argued that he can be excused. Having only just arrived in Thebes -his place of birth-as a young god, he wishes to spread the word of his power and religion. Therefore, when he is met with people discrediting his divinity and spreading lies about his mother, it's a relatively reasonable response for him to be angry at Pentheus. Equally, when this continues, he is provoked to enact revenge upon those who refuse to respect and acknowledge his status. Man is fundamentally selfish and given that the gods are not immune to these mortal inclinations, it's safe to assume this trait carries on amongst the divine. If anything, it should be expected due to the characterisation of the gods and their egocentric tendencies, on top of the fact that honour is essentially a sacred concept to the Greeks.

The easiest way to judge whether Dionysus is good or bad in this play is to analyse how he interacts with others, mainly Pentheus. The issue with this is that Pentheus himself is not the most likeable person, making it harder to fairly judge whether or not he deserved what happened to him. In the same way that Dionysus' actions can be deemed justifiable  or not, Pentheus' are as well. He is portrayed as a young man, far too passionate about proper behaviour and order. Like Dionysus himself, Pentheus is neither fully good nor fully bad in my eyes, and he manages to have enough good in him to gain sympathy from the audience when he is torn to shreds.

Pentheus stands for reason while Dionysian ecstasy stands for the irrational, and when he is faced with nature's irrational force, he tries to solve it with human rational measures, which is ultimately his downfall. As many do, he has his moment of anagnorisis right at the end of his life, as the trance he's in clears and he realises his wrongdoings, but it's not enough for Dionysus who once again presents his lack of mercy.

Despite the possible justifications  for their actions, Dionysus is still driven by an almost childish need for revenge and the extent of his wrath is so extreme to the point of being irrational, while Pentheus is simply too obstinate and arrogant for his own good, or that of his people. The entire story can change solely based on who the reader identifies as the protagonist and the antagonist, and in this example, I don't believe either is set in stone. I would state that they are both equally as negative and positive as each other. The notion of positive and negative, good and evil, right or wrong depends too much on an individual's moral standing to come to a concrete conclusion. As with any good story, there are two sides, and the individual must decide whether they sympathise with Pentheus and his family for their losses or with Dionysus for the disrespect he was shown.