8
edits
Medea: Difference between revisions
→Themes and Motifs
| Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
== Themes and Motifs == | == Themes and Motifs == | ||
== Right Message, Wrong Messenger == | |||
Curt Howard | |||
English 2111 | |||
Dr. Gerald Lucas | |||
April 10, 2005 | |||
Right Message, Wrong Messenger | |||
Euripides’ Medea, was the first in a series of plays in which vivid, powerful women appeared on the Euripidean stage. It was produced in the year that the Peloponnesian War began, and sought to play on the low morale of the public to restore the female sex in positions of social influence and power. Throughout the centuries it has been regarded as one of the most powerful of the Greek tragedies, and also one in which the theme of women was more important than most. It is in this play that Euripides could either restore or condemn the female populace in society (Pelling). | |||
Euripides questions many social norms of the period, but he uses a female such as Medea to convey his message. While Medea has no legal rights, she is the sorceress’ grandchild of the Sun God and therefore able to articulately explain her actions and passionately act on her plans. She is initially able to gain the sympathy and support of the Corinthian women for her plight by passionately pleading her case to the public at large. Medea’s passionate arguments fly in the face of the Greek tradition that only the male has the ability and right to lucid, rational argument. Jason although regarded as civilized by Greek society, is by contrast weak, compromised and cowardly. Medea also challenges ancient Greek society’s decree that the greatest glory for a woman was to bear children, provide sex and to fulfill the demands of her husband (Rassidakis 220-226). From the first compelling moments of this one-act play the audience is drawn into contradictions confronting Medea: to challenge injustice and betrayal or accommodate to it and the financial security and comfort it could bring (Pucci). Traditional behavior of women was a very important aspect of this play, and portraying Medea as both similar and different to fellow womankind allowed the audience to make judgment on the role of women as they knew it. Medea recurrently assaulted fundamental and sacred values and that gave the play much of its power and allowed Euripides to most persuasively portray her as an incarnation of disorder. Could any male audience possibly start to respect any woman that could crush basic human order? Euripides did not himself condemn Medea. Rather, he gave the audience a choice on whether to accept her character and actions. However by implication he is associating a breakdown in human order as being due to the wickedness in such a woman. Yet associating such a drastic event with women would imply that they had the power to be so destructive, and that was not an option of the times - especially when a war had just broken out, and unity was of great importance (McDermott). | |||
In the tragedy Medea, Euripides fails to rehabilitate the female sex. He chooses a semi-divine, foreign sorceress to voice the appeals of ordinary Athenian wives. She is a woman capable of murder, manipulation and deception, and she has no sense of remorse. In choosing her, Euripides appears to be sending out mixed signals concerning women. Her concerns are those that apply to the majority of women at the time, and an audience would no doubt have understood these; yet Medea deals with them in a way that is abhorrent for a woman of fifth-century Athens (Easterling). She invokes both pathos and disgust, and, for a male audience, she would encourage distrust and continuing ‘imprisonment’ and lower social status for women. Although Euripides may well have believed in promoting womankind, it would have been difficult to put this idea across to the male audience of the day, and that may be why he is unable to make any significant advances in the Medea. He had the right message, but used the wrong messenger (Strauss 237-270). | |||
Works cited: | |||
Rassidakis, Kristina. The origins of love, hate, and retaliation in Euripides tragedy; Medea: a psychodynamic approach. Changes: International Journal of Psychology and Psychotherapy 15, 1997. | |||
Pucci, Pietro. The Violence of Pity in Euripides’ Medea. Cornell University, 1980. | |||
Pelling, Christopher. Greek Tragedy and the Historian. Oxford, 1997. | |||
Ober, Josiah and Strauss, Barry. Drama, Political Rhetoric, and Discourse of Athenian Democracy in Winkler, John J. Athenian Drama in Its Social Context. Princeton, 1990. | |||
McDermott, Emily A. Euripedes’ Medea: The Incarnation of Disorder. University Park, PA. 1989. | |||
Easterling, P.E. The Infanticide in Euripides’ Medea. YCS 25, 1977. | |||
== Xenophobia == | == Xenophobia == | ||