Tragedy can be beautiful? Can beauty be tragic? How REALISTIC is that?
Friday, September 30, 2011
Read this post and begin discussion below:)
Euripides transformed Greek drama by making it conform to the realities of everyday life but, in the process, weakened the mythical structure and balance. Reflect upon the element of REALISM that Euripides interjects into his play. Post twice, commenting once on CHARACTER and once on CIRCUMSTANCE and the relationship between these facets of the play and REALISM. Please comment upon other postings as this will help you gain understanding and insight. Complete by 10/13.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
If you are posting as anonymous, make sure that you identify yourself in the posting. Also, I have been browsing some really cool YouTube Medea related stuff. The different interpretations lend some varied perspectives.
ReplyDeleteCODY FOSTER SAYS:
ReplyDeleteI think that the character of Medea is very interesting and very real. She comes off as very thoughtful and, in a way, dastardly. I saw this in her first discussion with the Chorus where she spoke of wanting to find a way to punish Jason and if she were able to, for the Chorus to keep quiet and let her do what she wanted. From there she went on to talk about how a woman is typicall seen and thought of as a timid creature but if "wronged in love", "there is no heart more murderous than hers". The use of the word murderous really showed her true, dark nature. I think it shows as well how women can be in real life. There is typicaly seen as sweet, timid creatures but can as well hurt some one like no other. This brings a true realism to the play. Like always said, "Hell hath no fury like a woman's scorn".
Emily Cocks
ReplyDeleteWhen I visualize Medea, the actress Maggie Q the woman who plays Nikita, pops into my head. Medea is supposed to be this beautiful but totally hardcore woman and Maggie Q would be a perfect fit. For me, Medea is more relatable than some of the other Greek dramas we have read because Medea is all about "girl power." She doesn't put up with any of Jason's shenanigans. She knows who the number one lady in his life should be and she will do anything to keep it that way. She also knows that she is underestimated by Creon and she uses that to her advantage. I think that being underestimated by men in that time was also kind of a power. I think women could use helplessness as an advantage in some situations. When men are completely open emotionally and are ready to help a woman, that is the time when a woman can strike and totally manipulate him. Desperate Housewives said it best, “You’re a woman, manipulate him, that’s what we do.” Medea is an example of this when she tells Creon that she needs time to get her children ready to be exiled. Creon, in his fear, allows an extra day. At this point, Medea is able to strike and cause turmoil for Jason.
The double standard attatched to Jason is very interesting. He has all the qualities of a hero, in his quest he had valor, courage, detrmination and dedication. However, he lacks sacrifice, loyalty and selflessness. The concept that a person can perform a heroic deed but not maintain heroic qualities is very human and real. A modern hero is not perfect either. A fire fighter may be devorced or a man who recieved honors in a war may have commited a crime as an adolescent. Jason's heroic deeds are concealed to Medea and the audience by his selfishness. The Princess and the rest of the city may be fooled by his heroic facade but Euripedes challenges us to look deeper than the myth and see the human.
ReplyDeleteI think all the characters in Medea are realistic, but I think the most realistic character is a minor one, the nurse. She is extrememly insightful and predicts Medea's moves accurately before Medea even decides to do it. For example, the nurse feared for the children before Medea decided to kill them. I think this is very realistic, because as a long-time servant of the house, she has probably gottne to know everyone in the household very well. Although as a servant no one really listens to her, she lives in the household and has insight that most of the others do not. She acts as a mother to the children, which is also realistic because she probably had more of a hand in raising them than Medea did.
ReplyDeleteI think that while Medea is using the power of underestimation to her advantage, I think her reasoning for using it is very weak. The only reason she is ruining not only her life, but her children's lives, is because Jason decided to find some new "shiny" girl. Medea lets this bother her to the point of destruction. There are other ways to get back at some jerk like Jason than to kill your children. I think that just shows that she is letting Jason see that he has ultimate power over her, and it makes him think he was the cause of her ultimate unhappiness. I think Medea's character is realistic in the fact that some women care way too much what a man thinks of them, and if the man moves on to a new relationship, the woman needs to realize he's a jerk and move on too. Not kill their kids. That never works out well.
ReplyDeleteCODY FOSTER SAYS:
ReplyDeleteAfter reading and finishing Medea, it seems as though, in a way, the situation and circumstance of the play is very relatable. No, most woman do not murder their husband, husband's lover, children, and lover's father if the husband cheats but it is close. Men cheat on women all the time and this, to our society, is very normal. Yes, Medea is going over the top with her reactions and decisions, but I can see where her bitterness, angst, and pain comes in with this situation. In a way, she has every single right to feel that way. The situation she is in is very hard and frankly sucks. Although she is a complete pyschopath, I have some pity for her. She was wronged and it is a shame to see her go through this. This goes on in our daily lives all the time, with boyfriends and girlfriends, husbands and wives, and is still just as saddening now as it was back in the time of Euripedes. Now, it just seems a little more commonplace.
So far this year, we have discussed a continual theme in literature. That is, whatever is un-natural or an abomination must be destroyed. In his own way, Creon is different than what is expected by the Greeks. Men were supposed to be brave and all-powerful, showing their dominance over women. When they listened to females or tried to place them on the same level, chaos ensued. (Oedipus and his mother). In the same way, Creon is actually afraid of Medea and doesn’t really stand up to her. He only lets her stay because he is more scared of what she would do if she didn’t get her way. Therefore, it makes sense that this un-natural representation of a Grecian man is killed in the end.
ReplyDelete@ Erin I agree with you Erin. It seems like Medea didn't think through all of her options. I understand that her children are mini Jasons and that she is ending his blood line. In addition, it is smart to kill everyone except for him so he is left to be miserable. Death would be the easy way out; he wouldn't be despair. However, Lydia and I mentioned in class that she should have castrated him. There is no force stopping him from having more children and ruining some other woman's life.
ReplyDeleteThe relationship between Jason and Medea points to a good rule about love. You shouldn't marry someone just because they spend money on you, or do nice things for you. You need to find a person who shares common interests and makes you feel like an equal. Relationships don't work when one person feels they are superior to the other.
ReplyDeleteOkay... Not supposed to comment, but @ Peter... yikes! Also, I am lovin the comment by Laura! Wooooohoooo! You will definitely have something to say when we move into the modern plays and later when we get to Ibsen. Some very powerful comments are being made here! I am proud of all of you:-)! Did anyone check out the YouTube clips? There is an animated Jason/Medea clip that gives some backstory on the relationship. You see Medea as a definite sorceress in that clip. I never really saw her that way... If you type Medea into the search, they all come up. I liked the clip with Creon and Medea as well as the one where Medea kills her children. Okay, that sounds bad... But you know what I mean.
ReplyDeleteOne more thing... Perhaps her lack of reason can be attributed to her madness?? Also, I LOVE that Laura focused on the Nurse. Very cool. I wish that Beth would comment on that one. I think she has the lowdown on the Nurse;-)!
ReplyDeleteSabine L.
ReplyDeleteI agree with both Peter and Erin. I feel that Medea is a strong female character, but her specific plan to get revenge on Jason weakens the power she asserts with her motivations for revenge. There are two sides to Medea, her emotional side and her logical side. Her strength comes from her logical side, when she reasons through why she wants to hurt Jason, but her weaknesses arise when her emotions take over and she decides to hurt Jason by killing her own children. I feel if she were to kill anyone, she should kill the person that most deserves it, Jason. Or, if she wants to live and suffer, she should just castrate him, like Peter said. Medea is strong, but she lets her emotions get the best of her.
Here are some Medea links:
ReplyDeleteSet design http://www.rfdesigns.org/medea.htm
Pics from production http://www.glimmerglass.org/the-festival/2011-productions/medea/
Ninja pic http://ncccworldmythology.blogspot.com/2010/07/medea_22.html
Medea(1983) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zInoTXKyOvI&feature=related
Medea and Creon clip
ReplyDeletehttp://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=zInoTXKyOvI
Medea and Jason backstory (animated but interesting)
http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=I2594LgsflQ
I pasted a link! I'm a little proud of myself;-)
ReplyDelete@ Sabine. Loving the dual nature discussion! This hits home with the "true to nature" aspect of this play. Each of us has a dual nature. We just keep our reactions in check. I think that is the most frightening revelation yet. Do each of us have a "Medea" bubbling beneath the surface? Okay, I need to stop hanging out on this blog. This is supposed to be your place. I guess I enjoy chillaxing on the blog with you guys too much;-)
ReplyDeleteMedea kills het kids (claymation style)
ReplyDeletehttp://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=FdiFpGWQE8Q
Chris Z.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sabine. Medea is strong but emotions do get the best of her. I see this as being true in most cases with love. With love, the heart takes over the mind. I feel Medea's reaction to Jason's cheating can be a definite bridge to realism from Greek mythology without deviating far from mythology. As stated many times, society of the time accepts men to sleep around and women are not to have a problem with it. So Medea's outbursts are seen as defiant from the accepted. However, we see in Greek mythology that Hera becomes upset with Zeus for sleeping around and punishes the women knowing that would upset Zeus much as Medea punishes all those who surround Jason.
One other idea I thought to be interesting involves point of view. Lydia mentions often that she wonders what the princess is thinking throughout the novel. I wonder what the children think. Having parents that are divorced which is not common. I wonder if the children know the reason behind it because the nurse tries to keep them sheltered. Also, I would think they could tell their mom is somewhat insane but maybe not.
Today in class, we discussed loss of innocence as a theme in Medea. We talked about that loss being represented in both the death of Medea’s children and the death of the princess. I’d like to further compare Medea’s loss of innocence to the poisoning of Jason’s new bride.
ReplyDeleteI think of the princess as being very similar to a young Medea. When Medea first met Jason, he promised to always love and take care of her. She let her emotions rule her decisions, and resolved to go with him back to Greece, even if it meant she would have to kill her brother. Medea was naive then. If she had thought through her choice logically, she might have realized the huge sacrifice she was making for a “love” that may fade over time. Medea remained blissfully ignorant until Jason left her for another, younger woman. Now, this princess is behaving as Medea did earlier. She lets her love for Jason get in the way of her logical reasoning. The princess knows that Jason is leaving his wife for her, and she knows that the wife is upset by this turn of events, I’m sure she is aware that what she’s doing to Medea is cruel. However, she behaves like Medea did (and continues to do) and lets her passions override her reasoning. In this way, the princess represents a young Medea, and all the naivete of female youth. I think Medea can see that she was once like the princess, and that’s why she feels that Jason’s new bride must die. The princess is Medea’s carefree and trusting youth, and by extension, the carefree trust of all young women in the world. It is Jason’s heartless actions, and the actions of all men who make promises of love to women, that have killed her innocence.
I believe that Medea has just as much to be sorry for as Jason does, but I also believe that none if it is entirely her fault. Assuredly, Jason is the catalyst for this entire story, even before the part that we are privy to, in that he fundamentally manipulated Medea's emotions so that she would help him to complete the tasks for the golden fleece. However, Medea is not manipulated only by Jason, but she acts as a pawn to the gods as well. If Hera had not convinced Aphrodite to make Medea fall in love with Jason, Medea would never have forced him into a marriage that he did not desire, and she would not have been so driven by passion as to murder her brother in order to provide him an escape from her father. Hera uses Medea again in order to murder Pelias by having her trick his daughters into slaughtering him to pieces in front of a crowd while he was enchanted to look like a ram. Hera did not convince or guide Medea to murder Creon, the princess, or her children, but this mentality of committing unspeakable acts in defense of or in spite of love had been planted in Medea long ago. This manipulative and vicious side of Medea is entirely derived from her Godly influences and the fate that these Gods chose for her. Therefore, while I am inclined to punish Medea for her irrational actions, I cannot fully blame her for acting in the way that she did, because she was commissioned to act like that by a force she could never have defied. I think this is why she is granted the chariot by Helios in the end, as well, because it appears the Gods are able to recognize the monster that they themselves have created, and cannot fault her for her actions either.
ReplyDeleteBoochi K.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what it is about these few plays, but for some reason I always like to talk about the chorus! I noticed another thing that I thought I would mention and see if anyone else saw. I feel like the actions of the Corinthian women who make up the chorus are almost EXACTLY like one of the stereotypes of women: the belief that women are subordinate, and never in power. The chorus doesn't take any action during the play, even when it seems like something should be done. This makes them completely powerless during the play. For example, when Medea basically lays down her plan for revenge to the chorus members, they respond by saying "Hey, you shouldn't do that!" However, they don't do anything to prevent her wrath. Also, the same thing happens when they hear the cries of the children being murdered from inside the house. They debate among themselves about whether they should intervene, but ultimately decide just to stand in front of the house and do nothing. It is hard to see the chorus members as anything but stereotypical women of the time. However, like how this contrasts starkly with Medea's defiance of the helpless women stereotype. I firmly believe that it was purposely done by Euripides, possibly to represent the shift from weak women to stronger women which was happening in his society.
CeCe G.
ReplyDeleteMedea manipulates not only her enemies, but also her friends. In modern terms, she could be considered a "frienemy" to Aegeus because she uses his friendship to protect herself. Medea seems to care only about avoiding blame and punishment for her horrifying plan of revenge, even though her presence in Athens could cause Aegeus undeserved harm in the future. It can be concluded that Medea could care less about friendship and uses every available option to accomplish her goals (even if it means potentially sacrificing an innocent friend to help herself).
Using friendship as a vehicle to help herself reveals a realistic aspect of Medea’s character. People still use other people to help themselves to this day. By highlighting Medea’s manipulation of her friend Aegeus, perhaps Euripedes was trying to make a statement about the complexity of friendship in real life.
CODY FOSTER SAYS:
ReplyDelete@Peter
I totally agree with you Peter. Even more relatable to today, we see relationships based on money, fame, or power all the time. It's become such a natural occurence that we don't even think anything of it anymore. I really love how Euripedes makes his play so relatable that it transcends his time and continues to be a part of our lives today. It makes it all the better to read. I love it.
ERIN ZINS SAYS:
ReplyDeleteToday in class when we we're discussing our opinions on the characters and who we pitted, I realized that I do sympathize with the daughter of Creon. Just as we discussed before she was just following her father's orders and the way the Greeks lived. She had no idea Medea would turn on Jason like she did and was tricked into thinking that Medea had accepted her and jason's marriage. I feel like at her age, it's hard to blame her for the cause of Medea's pain.
Looking at Medea's actions in realistic terms is a little difficult for me to do. On one hand, I understand that the circumstances that have arrived with Jason would be terrible. I understand that Medea would be extremely hurt to be replaced just like that after being the mother of Jason's children. However, I really believe that most logical women would not go to the extreme of killing their kids in that circumstance. I think that overall, Medea is overwhelmed by her emotions, and her logic is completely lost. I do not think that all, or even most women, are like that. I think that most women, put in that circumstance, would be realistic enough to think that killing their children might be taking it too far.
ReplyDeleteERIN ZINS SAYS:
ReplyDeleteLooking at the death of Jason and Medea's children, I know we have discussed their love for the children and why they have been killed, but I really do not believe that the parents ever had that parental love that most parents have for their children. Jason in my opinion has moved onto another woman, he is fully prepared to never see his sons again and have them exiled. He really only cares if his name lives on or not. With Medea, there should have been that special bond mother's have with their sons, I know my brother's definitly do with my mother. Instead she is driven so mad by her love of Jason she just decides to use them for her benfit by ending Jason's bloodline. As they say, some people should just never have children.
The circumstance that I would like to discuss is the situation in which Medea conspires with Aegeus for a safehouse and a place to live after her degradation in Corinth. In a way, I believe that this is the most realistic scene in the play. I find it very natural that Medea would make an offer with Aegeus (despite the supernatural quality of the deal they strike) and I find it realistic that he would reply well, because its a deal that benefits them both. Its clear that, while they may not be the best of friends, Aegeus and Medea are comfortable enough with each other to not ask questions and just accept the deal at hand.
ReplyDeleteI understand where @CeCe is coming from in saying that Medea is a 'frienemy' to Aegeus, but I don't think it matters to him so long as she fulfills her end of the bargain. Athens was a very strong city-state back in the day, and I think that his main goal was to continue his line and keep Athens strong. He was clearly aware of the consequences of his actions, as shown by his dialogue in that scene, but I feel like he mentally weighted the pros and the cons and found that the reward overwhelmed the troubles he would face.
Chris Z.
ReplyDeleteMedea's horrific plan is another circumstance when Euripides deviates from the norm. As a general stereo type, women are usually the ones to think about their actions and reason through plans while men are quick to act. Although Medea's plan was not carried out immediately and she had time to ponder, it was still more of a revenge (quick to act) evil scheme. She at one point states she must hurry and kill her children before someone who does not love them does. She also may have wanted to hurry because she did not want to change her mind. I feel Medea began to realize the emotional trauma her plan would cause, but the rage would not let that feeling surface. This circumstance has a realistic aspect since the reader can relate to acting out of rage. When wronged by love, all people have a shorter fuse and are quick to act instead of think.
After reading all three of our Greek plays, I believe that Medea is the work audiences can best relate to. I noticed the difference between Medea and the previous plays as soon as we were introduced to the nurse. Her matronly behavior immediately adds humor to the story, which engages the audience in the exposition of the play. As a stereotypical wise, mothering figure, the nurse also feels familiar to audience members, so they are put at ease, as if they are listening to an old friend. In Sophocles’ plays, the shows jump right into the action, with a main character speaking urgently to others onstage. There is little to ease the audience into the story.
ReplyDeleteEuripides also addresses his characters’ human flaws more than Sophocles does. In Oedipus and Antigone, a mixture of pride and ill-starred destiny is what causes the downfall of the heroes. In Medea, the dismal outcome of the play is a result of the bad choices and uncontrolled emotions of Medea and Jason. Real people have character flaws, and by writing Medea and Jason as flawed individuals, Euripides makes his main characters relatable to an audience.
Finally, average people have had experiences more similar to the plot of Medea than the plots of Antigone or Oedipus. Like the chorus in Medea says, it was common for husbands back then to sleep around. It still happens today! Many women have gone through the same thing Medea is feeling, so her situation is accessible to them. Very few people have had to defy the law to bury a family member, and less still have ever killed one parent and slept with the other. Medea takes a common event that people can relate to, and intensifies it to teach us a lesson.
Emily Cocks
ReplyDelete@Sam- I love what you have to say about Medea and Aegeus. I hadn't realized how easy it was to relate to the two of them. They both want to better themselves in some way and I think that is the goal for most humans.
The think the whole concept of Medea is relateable to people. There is not really a particular circumstance, just the story as a whole. Medea is out for revenge against Creon. I think most people have felt revengeful against another person at some point in their lives. People aren't perfect and we all have different opinions. Eventually those opinions are going to clash and create problems. People can relate to being so angry with another person that they want revenge.
Medea's plan to kill her children is horrific and a hard subject to grasp. However, Euripedes slowly coaxes the audience into agreeing with Medea that this is the best punishment for Jason. First he shows us Medea's pain and anguish and makes us sympathize with her. One of the easiest concepts for a woman to grasp is another woman being wronged by a man.
ReplyDeleteEuripedes then demonstrates Jason's arrogance. As he and Medea talk about her impending exile he continuously treats her as a lesser person. At this point the audience is completely on her side.
Killing her children is difficult for the audience to agree with but it is easy for them to comprehend.
CeCe G.
ReplyDelete“And I declare that in this world those who have had no experience of paternity are happier than the fathers of children. Without children a man does not know whether they are a blessing or a curse, and so he does not miss a joy he has never had and he escapes a multitude of sorrows” (213-214).
The quotation above is, in my opinion, the chorus’ most insightful and powerful statement. In this short comment, the chorus describes the reality of being a parent and the risks involved with having children. Struggling as a parent is a realistic circumstance that Euripides incorporates into this play. Parenthood is something almost all people can relate to, even those who are not yet parents. Everyone has been a child before and has probably experienced a parent or guardian trying to parent them. We can learn from life and the chorus that parental love can be both rewarding and damaging.
Sabine L.
ReplyDeleteIf I were to try to justify Medea's actions, I would try to see it from her point of view. I think loneliness and subordination prevail throughout this play. Medea's circumstance of being subordinate to the other characters in the play, because of both her race and her gender, affect her actions. Because she is different than what is normal, it somewhat justifies the horrifying deeds she accomplishes (like killing her children). Her difference gives the audience a way to see her reasoning for taking revenge on Jason, and make her actions more realistic. Medea was so used to being not as respected as much as she should be, and she releases this anger in her plan to take revenge on Jason.
One point that was brought up in class was the audience's reaction to Medea's vile crime. Even though killing one's kids is seen as a heinous act, the audience can't help but root for Medea as she gets back at Jason for his actions. Even the chorus sides with Medea, although they do not endorse the way she seeks revenge. As I was pondering how I was lead to support Medea, I had a thought; what would the audience's reaction be if the roles of Jason and Medea were switched? Let's say that Jason was the one who alienated himself from his homeland by killing his brother and ran away to Medea's country. Then, Medea was the one who found a new husband, and Jason sought revenge against her by killing their children. Do you guys think that the audience would still support Jason? I personally think they wouldn't. I think the audience would never root for Jason like they would for Medea; in fact, I would go as far as to say that they would still view Jason as the bad guy, and Medea as a victim. Since women are supposed to be subordinate to men, Jason would be seen as a weak man for not having control over his wife. He would be a horrible monster for depriving Medea of her children by way of bloody murder. I feel like the audience would assume Jason should take the noble path by moving on, rather than kill their children. Also, if a group of Corinthian women overheard Jason speaking of a plot to kill his wife's new husband, his father, and his own children, they would not sit around and do nothing. They would most certainly alert someone that Jason is about to go on a murdering rampage. This scenario presents a very realistic idea that the stereotypes of women and men lead to them being held to different standards by society.
ReplyDeleteWe have talked about the idea of victim of circumstance a bit in class, and I really feel Medea is a victim of circumstance. Medea is such a strong women. Her sorcery gives her power. Not knowing much about the culture she comes from allows you to believe she held at least some power there as well. Due to the circumstances though she is thrust into a culture where she is seen as subordinate. I think her reaction may have been caused by suddenly losing control and not knowing how to respond to that.
ReplyDeleteI find all of the characters in Medea to be realistic. I think that there are characteristics in each of Euripides's characters can be found in everyone. I think Euripides's intentions were to make the readers realize that even those who are considered royal, or extremely beautiful, or different can be wronged. It is almost as if Medea is not just one person, but can represent all women. Throughout Medea, it feels like Euripides is a sort of spokesman for women, like he is saying "be careful, this could happen to you too."
ReplyDeleteWhile reading this I felt like I was reading something that was written recently. It is interesting to think that today and 431 BC share some societal issues. Today it is not unusual for relationships and marriages to end due to a spouse cheating. Back in the Euripides's time it was not uncommon for men to have certain escapades, women usually just looked the other way. This obviously was not the case with Medea. In recent times it is not uncommon for the spouse that was wronged in the relationship to be angry and let their actions represent their anger, but they usually do not kill their children. Medea represented the unnatural because she was from a foreign land, but also because she reacted in an unnatural way when Jason left her.
ReplyDelete@Boochi-
ReplyDeleteThat’s a really interesting idea! After thinking about it, I agree with you that the audience would definitely not react the same way to Jason if he were in Medea’s shoes. While the audience doesn’t condone Medea’s slaughterfest, they are able to sympathize with her on some level and rejoice when she finally punishes her husband. One reason that viewers are able to look past Medea’s heinous crime is that throughout the play, she is going through fits of intense emotion. She is so miserable that often times she seems out of her mind with passion. The messenger at one point even asks her if she’s sane. Medea’s out of control emotional state can be seen as an excuse for the irrational act of killing her children. Women, in general, are considered to be more emotional than men are. An over-emotional man is weak. This is why if Jason killed his kids in a fit of anger against Medea, audiences would be less likely to support him. They expect him to think rationally, and (like you said) “take the noble path.”
I think the idea of a girl getting dumped and replaced by someone else is a realistic circumstance. It happens in real life and the feelings of anger and betrayal that Medea feels are realistic in response to Jason's actions. However, Euripedes takes it one step further when Medea kills her kids. That part is something that doesn't necessarily happen every day, but has happened in our society and is therefore realistic. Also, the feelings that lead her to kill them are realistic.
ReplyDeleteSo why is Medea so different from other girls who get dumped and just cry about it and then move on instead of killing their kids? I think it is because she gave up so much for him. When she killed her brother, she gave up her entire life and home for Jason. She must have thought he was pretty fantastic to do that for him, which meant that when he betrayed her it was much worse because she loved him so much. She had given up everything for him, and it was all for nothing. So I think that her madness was not just from Jason's betrayal but because the loss of her home and family were no longer worth it, so she was mourning that loss too.
@Hayley King
ReplyDeleteI agree that a lot of the characters in this play are relatable in one way or another. While there are aspects to each of them that is 'supernatural' in nature, their actions and the situations that they are forced into make them very real to us. I think its interesting that stereotypes like a wrathful scorned woman and a dumb blonde were used even back in the time of Euripedes!
I think a turning point in the play is when Medea makes her speech about how to go about killing the princess and Creon. She states that women can never be noble but have the capability to be evil. I think this is interesting because Medea is recognizing her evil and insanity, she has reached the point in her rage that she is able to disregard the opinions of other people and simply focuses on her revenge.
ReplyDeleteIn class we have pretty much agreed that Jason is a horrible person for what he has done and placed blame on him. I wonder however if jason being at fault is more of a modern conclusion. At the time Euripedes wrote would Jasons actions have been seen as acceptable? I know it was alright for men to take lovers but was it alright for them to leave thier wives and children like he did. Also with the hellenic culture viewing outsiders as they did, would Medea have been seen as a barbarian by the audiences?
ReplyDelete@Hayley: I really agree that reading this play was like reading something modern because of the universal quality of it.
ReplyDeleteThis play is relatable because of how realistic the circumstances are. Like Laura said, a girl getting dumped and replaced by another isn't uncommon; we can see and relate to emotions like Medea's all the time. Emotions such as betrayal, frustration, and anger are very common and understandable, which is why we side with Medea, even if we question or don't agree with some of the choices she makes. We relate to her on a human level and understand how realistic her emotions are.
@ Thomas R: I think that blaming Jason for the tragedy is indeed a modern conclusion. Remember in Mythology how women were always seen as the problem and how they were always blamed for everything men did? In Medea, the characters and Chorus point out that traditional view of their society, but in the end, the audience would most likely still pity and side with Medea, a female character. I don't think they would really feel as much sympathy for Jason. Therefore, in that regard, I see the ending as modern.
ReplyDeleteI liked how even though Medea was seen as barbaric, the women of Corinth were able to relate to her. I like how Euripides made her character to be so realistic that anyone can relate to her. Like Mrs. Edwards said, maybe there is a Medea in all of us. We wouldn't necessarily kill our children if we got upset, but maybe there's that universal quality of her character in all of us, especially the human tendency to let emotions get the best of us.
I like that Medea changes from acting like a stereotypical woman in the beginning of the play to a strong character at the end, even if it meant killing her children.(I don't support that though!) She starts off the play whining and wailing about Jason's infidelity, but then a switch goes off and she is more resolved. I think that a lot of people can relate to this type of change, especially the girls in the class, because right after something bad has happened you want to be really upset for a while and just get everything out, but then you start to think about what has happened, and may get really angry. Unlike Sophocles' characters, who don't really emote the way people do in life, Euripides' Medea is so relatable and emotionally fragile that I think it makes for a better character.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things that made me like this play even more was the appearance of really well timed coincidences and circumstances. Having several uses of Deus Ex Machina made some of the actions in the play, like Aegeus' arrival, very random, but I thought they were amusing. Medea's magical dragon chariot is another example that I think is just so perfectly "convenient" that it is amusing. Beth and I were talking after class one day about the circumstaces of Aegeus' arrival and what type of character he was, and we wondered if Euripides had tried to make the scene between Aegeus and Medea funny. We thought that if it was interpreted in a certain way, his scene would have been amusing in the middle of the tragedy. I think that the "crazy random happenstance" of Aegeus' arrival and Medea's dragon chariot can act as tension breakers as well as to further the plot.
ReplyDelete