Hello,
I was wondering if someone could pls proofread over my essay and give me feedback on it as I have a SAC coming up very quickly. Please be as harsh as possible!!
The play Medea wins our sympathy for its monstrous central figure. To what extent do you agree?
Through the play Medea, first performed in 431 B.C. during the Golden Age of Athens and the rise of Hellenic values, Euripides explores the societal implications of presenting a female protagonist who portrays monster-like characteristics, simultaneously straying away from the traditional patriarchal Athenian norms. The idea of being a monster is presented as being cold, calculating, and knowingly committing barbaric crimes that may lead to devastating outcomes. The idea of being monster-like however is posited to evoke sympathy from the audience as the eponymous Medea’s heartbreak as a result of Jason’s unrequited love serves as the major cause for her heinous actions. The playwright frames Medea as a character who serves to force societal paradigm shifts in the representation and treatment of women, thus garnering the support and empathy of the Ancient Greek audience. Furthermore, the tragedian espouses the idea that one who is supported by the Gods is one who is to be admired and viewed as a hero, and should therefore be the receiver of sympathy. Moreover, the dramatist elucidates that the humane nature of the central female protagonist allows the audience to connect with her on a deeper level, particularly through the employment of The Chorus as the moral arbiters of the play.
The dramatist frames monstrous characteristics to be associated with heartbreak and unrequited love. This is particularly notable through the representation of Medea as a scorned woman as a result of her unjust treatment through Jason’s actions. The play Medea therefore explores the indignation that women are treated with, and through this the notion of ‘recompense for the female sex’ is put forth by Medea indicating a reversal of the fortunes of men and women. The playwright seeks to intimate that Medea’s monstrous actions come about due to other exterior influences rather than her sanity, namely the actions of her former lover Jason. In the patriarchal Athenian society, Medea herself challenges archetypal values in which women were expected to simply be birth-givers through her dismissal of men’s plights in comparison to women as she states that she ‘would rather face the enemy three times than bear a child once’. This dichotomy between the struggles of men and women highlights the significance of Medea as somewhat of an anchor for women’s rights and thus invites sympathy from the Greek audience towards women, and particularly her, regardless of her monstrous characteristics. The idea of being a monster is explored as one with menacing power, evident through the Nurse and Jason’s description of Medea as a ‘lioness with cubs’. This analogy also points towards her maternal instincts, therefore drawing the understanding of viewers as a character who simply seeks to create an optimal situation for her children, albeit in an unconventional manner.
The play Medea explores the idea that one who is supported by the Gods is one to be regarded as a hero and thus should invite sympathy. Medea’s position is seemingly enhanced through the representation of Jason as the villain of the text due to his reputation as one who does not abide by the sacred virtue of oaths. Therefore, in the eyes of the Athenian audience, Jason is tarnished as a hero and denied the kleos which he desires so strongly. As evidenced through Medea’s foreshadowing threat to Jason when she states that ‘it may turn out (and may the gods agree) that you are entering upon a marriage you will have cause to lament!’, the playwright seeks to convey that Medea, as a character with the unwavering support of the gods, is more morally just in her actions than Jason. The Ancient Greek concept of complete devotion to the Gods of the time further reinforces this and as a result places Medea in a position of power and deserving of respect, thus enabling the audience to feel sympathy for her when she is treated unjustly.
The dramaturge presents humanness in itself to be an admirable quality which is to be desired and connected with. The functioning of The Chorus as moral arbiters of the play who are initially supportive of Medea and her actions is prevalent through the first episodes of the play through the use of statements such as ‘the mind of a man is nothing but a fraud’ and ‘reverence will come to the race of woman’. The Chorus play vital roles in expressing the fears, hopes, and judgement of the polity, therefore their sympathy for Medea and her plights causes the audience to react similarly, garnering a sense of connectedness to Medea as a character who demonstrates many human-like characteristics under her monstrous exterior. Having human characteristics is to have flaws, as is ultimately demonstrated through Medea’s hamartia of excess passion. This flaw eventually leads to her heinous act of filicide, which inevitably detracts from the empathy that is drawn from the audience towards her. However, by this stage of the play, the audience has shifted to acknowledge Medea as a character who has been corrupted by excess passion and are thus still able to sympathise with her as a flawed character.
Ultimately, Euripides seeks to portray Medea, the monstrous female protagonist of the text as someone who is able to be sympathised with, even after taking into account the brutality of her crimes. She is a character riddled with flaws, however through the actions external characters and forces, her crimes may be able to be somewhat condoned and justified, therefore enabling her to garner sympathy from viewers.
Home
Help
Search
Login
