# data[].attributes.body
Roman plays, which were acted out by slaves, were still written by free poets. Could the poets have had any kind of social or political motivation in how specifically they portrayed slaves in their work, either in support of their rights or against them? -GL

# data[].attributes.body
In MacCarthy's article, what does she mean when she says that everyone is subordinated in some sense? Is this unique to Roman culture?

# data[].attributes.body
Did slaves taken from foreign lands take offense to portrayals in plays? What kind of impression would that make among the population (i.e. An Athenian slave viewing Casina)? Also, would this serve to manifest a form of nationalism among that population?

# data[].attributes.body
In Rome, everyone was held together by the power of Fides, which was like a social contract between slaves and masters, husbands and wives, sons and fathers, and cliens and patrons. It was taken very seriously, and anyone who broke fides was disgraced in the face of society. Could this concept of Fides be what held the society together, despite what was going on in the plays? -Annie

# data[].attributes.body
using humor in relation to the idea of the ascension of slaves above their traditional roles may undermine its ability to have a serious influence and convince the audience of any serious cause.

# data[].attributes.body
A single message may be written by a playwright, but an individual’s personal life experience nuances their perception of the outside world. As such, no one can possibly view a message the same way. In following this logic, an audience of varied background will be less likely to unanimously agree on a message or an  emotion conveyed by the play

# data[].attributes.body
where would the slaves sit during plays that depicted them in roles such as these?

# data[].attributes.body
I would imagine the audience would not have liked that the slaves were speaking poorly of their masters on stage. They could draw the conclusion that their slaves speak about them behind their backs

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the portrayal of slaves would not significantly or primarily serve as an agent for social change, nor disrupt the Roman institution of slavery. Rather, these portrayals would cause for reflection. I feel as though the comedic nature of these works off sets the serious nature of the institution of slavery.   - ST

# data[].attributes.body
The scene in which Messenio is "released" and then re-enslaved may have been less emotional for slaves in the audience due to the fact that the situation is presented as funny/ridiculous, with Messenio wanting to keep living in Menaechmus' house and eat his food, etc. Therefore, this may have been less divisive to the audience.

# data[].attributes.body
It seems that because the slaves are presented as, while seeking freedom, almost a bit absurd, it would be less of a dividing factor

# data[].attributes.body
the portrayal of slaves as having more agency would have strengthened the divide between master and slave due to the masters' fear and feelings of power being threatened.

# data[].attributes.body
With slave characters that were characterized within plays as bumbling and foolish, could this representation serve to sow resentment between slaves and masters?

# data[].attributes.body
Compared to the history of slavery and the master/slave relationship in America, can Roman slaves be considered to have better or worse relationships with their masters?

# data[].attributes.body
Did the slave actors feel comfortable portraying slaves on stage? How was that dynamic and who's slaves were the ones playing characters?

# data[].attributes.body
How is everyone subordinated in some sense other than on the day of the Saturnalian? How would masters ever be subordinated in comparison to a slave?

# data[].attributes.body
How would a Roman audience have received the depictions of the master and slave relationships presented on stage? - ST

# data[].attributes.body
Were the slave actors given more privileges than the slaves in the audience?

# data[].attributes.body
Did slave owners empathize more or less with the slaves after watching the interaction on stage?

# data[].attributes.body
It seems that, since plays were put on by wealthy officials and associated with the state, there would only be so much real subversion they could possibly achieve. If they were truly agitating and dividing the audience, it seems unlikely the state would allow them to continue.

# data[].attributes.body
How would the audience have felt about the slave having so many lines and such a large role in the story?

# data[].attributes.body
How might viewing the play have affected the relationships between slaves and masters?

# data[].attributes.body
How were slaves picked to be actors? Was there some sort of hierarchy of slaves in the process, did their masters volunteer them, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
There is some divide between the slaves and the masters during the plays in that the slaves are often reminded of their status. However, there is some unification between slaves and masters, as most of the masters rely heavily on the slaves to protect them or their interests. The relationship between Lysidamus and Olympio is one where the master commands the slave to follow his orders, but he also depends on Olympio being capable and trustworthy to set up the affair. -Annie

# data[].attributes.body
Did the way master/slave relationships were portrayed in comedies have any notable affects on the institution of slavery in Rome? - Gabby Lehotay

# data[].attributes.body
Would masters have felt threatened by expressions of insubordination by slaves?

# data[].attributes.body
In Messenio's speech on page 204, in the beginning, he talks about the hardships of being a slave, which would suggest that it would facilitate a divide in the audience, however, the character ends this small passage by saying essentially that his life as a slave isn't so horrible ("But I haven't much to fear; the time is near for something nice.") This passage alone would prompt a sort of unification among audience members of different classes.

# data[].attributes.body
Did the real slaves identify with the slaves portrayed in the play?

# data[].attributes.body
did plautus consider slaves as part of his audience when he composed menaechmi and cassina?

# data[].attributes.body
What can be a "slave literature" and is it not anachronistic to apply this concept to antiquity?

# data[].attributes.body
Division in the audience (masters/slaves/women/men/fathers/sons) or unification?