Euripides Medea The Myth Of Feminism

Medea the Myth of Feminism

“It is only males who are created directly by the gods and are given souls [...] it is only men who are complete human beings and can hope for ultimate fulfillment; the best a woman can hope for is to become a man” (Plato 90e). Euripides’ Medea was written in a time where even the word “feminism” did not exist and yet he gave Medea a role of substance and a stature of strength. It is a wonder whether or not Euripides knew just how much power he put into the hands of this woman as well as many more in the creation of her character. Perhaps not in his time and perhaps not by intention, but since then Medea the play and Medea the woman
In fact supported by Medea’s cries of anguish heard offstage she is first represented as emotional and submissive. By Euripides’ authorial intent, he lulls the audience into a state of pity where there should be fear. “Skillfully contrived is the choral passage in which we first hear the agonized voice of Medea from offstage. If we had been prepared to see a woman of monstrous power and witchery, a being of preternatural passion and resource, we are deceived” (Musurillo 54). Medea is first painted as nothing other than what you would expect of a woman, a merit of pity though not empathy, however when first seen she shifts to reasonable and calculating. Returning to analyis of her first speech, one can more deeply apply what she is saying to her situation. “Her eloquent first speech on the wrongs of women deceptively applies only in part to herself. For Medea is far from the passive victim of marriage and masculine brutality that she claims to be” (McDermott 259). Within the world of the play Medea’s deception makes sense in winning the approval of the chorus, however to spectators the mismatch of her words to her situation carries a different meaning. It paints a new picture and a new woman who is willing to exaggerate and lie in order to achieve her goals. It becomes
Carol Sorgenfrei provides this with her 1975 work, Medea: A Noh Cycle Based on the Greek Myth. Noh theatre, like many traditional Japanese theatre forms, prioritizes stylization above realism in performance, a practice that aligns well with a myth of murder and revenge. The stylization draws away from the brutal acts, allowing the audience a chance to accept Medea for her motives instead of unquestionably condemning her. “By adhering to the structure of Noh, Sorgenfrei creates a world where time, place, and gender are transcended in favor of larger-than-life emotions and issues” (Edelson 1). It is also worthy of note to state that Noh theatre is an all-male performance style (as it would have been in ancient Greece as well). One might take it upon themselves to understand by this knowledge that the theatre form is inherently sexist, “yet, since the 1960s, theater practitioners have drawn on these traditional forms to rediscover feminine and feminist messages” (2). Furthermore the stylization and art that go into the intricacies of embodying a female are no joke within the ritualistic practice. As denoted in the title, Sorgenfrei’s piece is a cycle play referring to the five different plays that would be performed in a traditional Noh performance. These plays are thematically based, in the order of God, Warrior, Woman, Frenzy, and Demon.