It is Jason, not Medea, who gains the audience’s sympathy.’ Do you agree?
Still recognized in modern society, the ancient Greek play Medea by Euripides is set in Corinth, Greece and explores the themes of revenge and conflict and through the usage of characters Euripides demonstrates the troubles of women in Ancient Greece as well as the conflict there is between emotion and reason. Medea also portrays the story of how the protagonist ‘Medea’ is abandoned by her former beloved ‘Jason’ and what she does and goes through to achieve her goal of seeking vengeance and inflicting pain on him. Jason’s character could be seen to garner the viewer’s sympathy but at the same time this could be said for ‘Medea’ as well. However, there are times when neither of the two leads gain the audience’s sympathy but rather the viewer’s sympathy lies with other minor characters who fall victim to ‘Medea’ and ‘Jason’s bickering.
Jason primarily gains sympathy from the audience due to his plight. Even the chorus’ words “Jason you are to be pitied” demonstrate how the they take note of his situation. ‘Jason’s story in the play has a tragic and heartbreaking end as he loses everything he holds due to his vengeful wife, ‘Medea’. His abandonment of his family for ‘Glauce’, daughter of ‘Creon’, king of Corinth can be as reasonable at a time when males were considered as the superior sex. ‘Jason’ defends his actions by stating that he was only “looking into [Medea’s] future” by marrying the princess of Corinth. He reasons that he was looking after his family. ‘Jason’s actions and reasons for doing do can be seen as reasonable to the audience as he is trying to fulfil his role as a father by ensuring his children’s “perfect safety”, so he cannot be blamed for wanting to keep his children safe from any harm and looking out for them. ‘Jason’s betrayal of ‘Medea’ is the result of wish to ensure that his family could “live comfortably and not go without anything” and if he ended up marrying a princess he would eventually be wealthy enough to support his family. The audience sees ‘Jason’ play the role of the family breadwinner and provider like many of his Ancient Greek counterparts and he role as the archetypal Greek male also makes his relatability to the audience mostly consisting men stronger. Therefor he gains sympathy from the viewer because all of his hard work and plans for the future of his family are destroyed due to ‘Medea’s need for revenge. ‘Jason’s distraught at what has happened during the end scene in the play gains him the audience’s sympathy as it is made explicitly clear by Euripides that he loved and cared for his children tenderly. Because of the homicide of his children by ‘Medea’ leaves ‘Jason’ is ultimately left as a broken man. This positions the reader to feel ‘Jason’s sorrows and side with his as he only did what he did to protect his family and eventually give them the best life they could have possibly had.
‘Jason’ is not the sole beneficiary of the viewer’s sympathy as his ex-wife, ‘Medea’ also manages to gain some form of sympathy from the congregation. Euripides make is clear from the beginning of the play that ‘Medea’ is the woman in distress who is a victim of Greek society. “Abandoned” and homeless because of her exile from Corinth as well as a “cruel husband’s plaything”, she is powerless to stop ‘Jason’s betrayal for her. ‘Medea’s role in the begging of the play is a reflection of the troubles encountered by Ancient Greek women. She is unable to deny ‘Jason’ his new marriage and cannot bear the force or thought of divorce as it “brings disgrace on women”. It can be seen that Euripides attempts to open his audience’s eyes to ‘Medea’s condition as it highlights the troubles that Ancient Greek women encounter. Euripides included the abandonment scene in his play to demonstrate how ‘Medea’ gains affinity from his crowd because her unconditional love for ‘Jason’ is rejected in favour of a princess and the promise of power. ‘Medea’s position is compounded by the fact that she, as a foreigner is distrusted and looked down upon by locals and is consequentially isolated from society. She laments that she has no one to turn to for help, therefor deepening gallery’s feelings of sorrow for her plight. ‘Medea’s confinement from society mirrors the troubles that foreigners encounter in Ancient Greek times. This displays some of the issues both parties (consisting of women and foreigners) are greeted with through the eyes of ‘Medea’.
While ‘Jason’ and ‘Medea’ are sympathetic characters at various points in the play, they are also seen to be completely un-relatable and un-sympathetic characters to the viewer. They share similar characteristics between them as they are both manipulative, disloyal and murderous. Jason’s casual betrayal of his family proves that “loyalty to love ones is not his way”, while ‘Medea’s passion which is “master of [her] reason” leads to her committing the unthinkable/atrocious act of filicide. These two characters succumb to their own interest therefor audience’s sympathy is then transferred to other minor characters who are not mentioned that often; ‘Glauce’, ‘Creon’ and the children of ‘Jason’ and ‘Medea’. All these minor characters can be said to fall victim of the war between the two leads as they get caught in the middle. Creon’s death by the hands of ‘Medea’ occurs due to the fact that his love for his daughter ‘Glauce’, compelled him to exile ‘Medea’ from Corinth as he hears that she is “making threats to do some harm”. In this situation ‘Creon’ is acting perfectly reasonably and carefully as he places his daughter’s safety over anything else. Both ‘Glauce’ and ‘Creon’ gain sympathy from the observer as his attempts to save his daughter from harm backfires badly, leading to both his and his daughter’s death. While these two characters deserve some sort of sympathy, it is often perceived that children are the prime victims of this, them being affected the most. They are by far, the most innocent of any crime and have not done any wrong in the play thus ‘Medea’s decision to end their lives put the audience in a deep shocked status. They were so young and they possibly had a bright future ahead of them. Unable to fulfil their lives to the fullest, the death of two good kids as a result of their parent’s arguments and actions encourages the audience to question who the real victims and villains are. Euripides could also be using this situation as a springboard to highlight the social conflict that occurs between two parties and the end results of it. The killing of the kids can be seen as a statement by ‘Medea’ destroying all ties to her disloyal husband ‘Jason’, as well as destroying the next generation of oppressors, therefor proving the point that ‘Jason’ and ‘Medea’ are not the only characters that gain the sympathy of the spectators.
Conflict has always existed in society and will continue to exist in the future and the actions taken are primarily motivated by self-interest. Euripides’ Medea can be interpreted as a case study into the human nature and its role of creating and spreading conflict. While they are many victims of betrayal and abandonment that deserve sympathy, the very same people could also possibly be the cause of another’s misfortune. As demonstrated by Euripides, the real sufferers of an argument are not always clear-cut and well-defined but nonetheless each party should deserve sympathy of some sort in their own way.
Hi, I was wondering if anyone could mark my essay out of 10 and give me as much feedback as you can.
Thank you so much for taking the time to read my essay, it really means a lot to me as I am looking for ways to improve because my goal is to get at least a raw study score of 30 in EAL. Have a good one
Home
Help
Search
Login
