Can anyone please mark my Medea essay?

[pauliepeng]

  Thank you
Medea and Jason are equally repugnant characters and it becomes impossible for the audience to take sides. Discuss.
The Ancient Greek tragedy “Medea” written by Euripides in 431BC, explores the antipodal natures of the two leading characters ---- Medea and Jason. The playwright portrays Medea as a foreign princess with excessive passion and pride while Jason personifies a typical Greece man in a patriarchal society, pursuing social standing through reason and careful judgment. The pair's horrible consequence is caused by their extreme emotions and the fact that their actions stem from selfishness, makes the two abhorrent characters and therefore it is impossible for the audience to choose a side. Medea's actions, however, are more unacceptable than Jason's to some degree as they cannot be comprehended using simple logic and common sense. Jason's actions can be understood to be as a result of society and its pressure to follow a stringent set of rules at the time of the play. Ultimately, it is the result of both characters reckless behaviour that the tragedy occurs and forces the audience into neutrality.
The extreme personalities of Medea and Jason are equally unacceptable and indistinguishable. Through the monologue of the nurse, audience is able to witness Medea’s extreme passion firsthand. Not only did she break the scared bonds with her family and country but also persuaded Pelias’ daughters to murder their father, as “her heart transfixed by desire for Jason”. As she is “ruled by passion”, Medea does not even hesitate to kill her brother whose blood she shares, as well as the noble House of Creon. This shows that the immoderate passion is not only destructive but also rebarbative.  Moreover, the playwright demonstrates the excessive reason is also unsavoury.  The contrast between the heartbroken cry of Medea who wishes "if only [she] could die" with Jason's explanation of his betrayal communicates to readers his cold blooded nature. His excessive rationality is further illustrated by blaming Medea’s exile as her “own choosing”. This demonstrates his lack of emotion for Medea, his wife who “betrayed [her] own family” for him. In this case, Euripides suggests that both Jason and Medea are equally obnoxious and therefore become impossible to take a stance.

Medea’s love for Jason is just as same as his love for ambition, both stemmed from selfishness and thus made them equally undesirable. In order to achieve her shellfish love, Medea does not hesitate to hurt others, including those that are blood-related to her. Jason’s criticism to Medea at the end of play further highlights this as he describes Medea as a 'deadly passenger who had betrayed [her] father and the country that reared [her]'. Euripides suggests what Medea has done for individual desire --- love, is similar to what Jason did for ambition. Although love sounds like a better excuse than ambition, it cannot cover it is also stemming from selfishness. On the other hand, Jason’s decision to marry the princess of the Corinth who can bring him more benefit fully demonstrate his selfishness, ignoring the deep suffering of his wife who “seeks to please her husband in all she does”.  As well as his attempt to downplay Medea’s help to him by saying “Cyprian” is the “only person” that “lent success to his voyage”. Therefore, neglecting the human nature of gratefulness, the selfish nature of Jason is odious. The dramatist clearly reveals the selfishness of both character, therefore they are both equally detestable to the audience which make it impossible to take a side.

However, Medea’s crime is more condemnable than Jason to some degree as Jason’s action is more influenced by the social value in Ancient Greece. Through the comments from Chorus, Euripides clearly indicates that Medea’s inhumane action of murdering her own children is beyond human understanding. By requesting for God to “restrain her, hold her back, drive her from the house” and describe Medea as “the wretched woman whom friends have turned into a murderous Fury”, the chorus emphasises it is intolerable for a woman to murder kindred, especially 'the fruit of [her] wombs'. The question “how, then, shall the city of sacred streams…give you a home…the unholy one who would live among them?” further highlights that Medea’s filicide is not only cruel, but also goes against the nature of morality. Furthermore, Euripides suggests that Jason's actions can be understood to be as a result of the social value at Ancient Greece. When Medea feels deep grief for Jason’s betrayal, Jason explains that it is not because “[he] lost [his] desire for [Medea]” but only “wants [them] to live comfortably” and to “raise [his] son in a manner worthy of [his] house”, which seems justifiable in a polygamous society. Jason was similar from the rest of mankind back in his society, making Medea's actions more inexcusable than his to an extent.
Medea is a play that explores the extreme of antipodal natures between the two juxtaposes protagonist, one with excessive passion and one with excessive ration, but both share the same nature of selfishness and are equally distasteful. It consequently becomes impossible for audience to take sides, as neither of them is of virtuous nature.