With a distinctive role as an anomaly in the triangle of the greatest tragic playwrights, comprising of also Aeschylus and Sophocles, Euripides functioned as controversial figure through his flexibility in the role of women during the period of male dominance in Greek history. Though argued to be a misogynist, as evident when he exacerbates the female actions in his plays, Euripides’s defiance of societal norms of a woman enables a more ept characterization of being considered towards pro-feminism. With his potent Greek background, Euripides’s understanding of the gender hierarchy system served as his model for restructuring the female dogma. “He loved Athens, but loathed her arrogant exclusion, loathed her subjugation of women, loathed
…show more content…
Medea, deceived by her husband with his second marriage and then banished from Corinth with her two sons, sought revenge by ultimately killing her own children, her husband’s new wife, and King Creon. Euripides in this tale initially gains sympathy from the audience for the seemingly unfortunate fate of a cheated wife, but later counteracts the stereotypically weak nature of women by having her commit such heinous acts that would seem otherwise unfeasible. Though it can be argued that such demonstrates misogyny, he is able to create a picture of a woman who was able to defy the dictations of man to seek the rightful revenge for all the injustice she incurred. “Medea attacks contemporary injustices not only to women but also to foreigners; children of foreign wives were not regarded as legitimate citizens” (Hadas 92). Euripides’s work served as a powerful composition in augmenting the common perception of undermining …show more content…
“Instead, it would seem that Euripides wrote in Medea a rather strange play which is completely dominated by the protagonist, Medea, even though the actual pithos or scene of suffering seems to belong primarily to Jason. The conflict, which is so essential to all good drama, becomes then not a conflict between two philosophies of life, two prevailing attitudes, both essentially right, but, rather, a conflict between two Medeas, the one the demon witch who thirsts for blood and vengeance, the other the tender mother whose children have become flesh of her flesh through the mystery and pain of childbirth” (Palmer 49-50). Euripides’s contrasts her role as a cold blooded murderer, bringing out the misogynist point of view, with the soft aspect of her being a mother, gaining sympathy from the audience at the extent of her plight. She hadn’t minded isolation from the rest of Corinth, but was deeply against being sent away completely. However, the motherly part quickly disintegrates when she had murdered her two sons. The master playwright reveals his own conflicted nature regarding his interpretation of women in literature. Though, with enough substantial and subsequent reflections of his pieces afterwards, the reader is able to fully comprehend the nature of the wrongdoings and how necessary there were in order to accomplish the ultimate resolution
Medea, deceived by her husband with his second marriage and then banished from Corinth with her two sons, sought revenge by ultimately killing her own children, her husband’s new wife, and King Creon. Euripides in this tale initially gains sympathy from the audience for the seemingly unfortunate fate of a cheated wife, but later counteracts the stereotypically weak nature of women by having her commit such heinous acts that would seem otherwise unfeasible. Though it can be argued that such demonstrates misogyny, he is able to create a picture of a woman who was able to defy the dictations of man to seek the rightful revenge for all the injustice she incurred. “Medea attacks contemporary injustices not only to women but also to foreigners; children of foreign wives were not regarded as legitimate citizens” (Hadas 92). Euripides’s work served as a powerful composition in augmenting the common perception of undermining …show more content…
“Instead, it would seem that Euripides wrote in Medea a rather strange play which is completely dominated by the protagonist, Medea, even though the actual pithos or scene of suffering seems to belong primarily to Jason. The conflict, which is so essential to all good drama, becomes then not a conflict between two philosophies of life, two prevailing attitudes, both essentially right, but, rather, a conflict between two Medeas, the one the demon witch who thirsts for blood and vengeance, the other the tender mother whose children have become flesh of her flesh through the mystery and pain of childbirth” (Palmer 49-50). Euripides’s contrasts her role as a cold blooded murderer, bringing out the misogynist point of view, with the soft aspect of her being a mother, gaining sympathy from the audience at the extent of her plight. She hadn’t minded isolation from the rest of Corinth, but was deeply against being sent away completely. However, the motherly part quickly disintegrates when she had murdered her two sons. The master playwright reveals his own conflicted nature regarding his interpretation of women in literature. Though, with enough substantial and subsequent reflections of his pieces afterwards, the reader is able to fully comprehend the nature of the wrongdoings and how necessary there were in order to accomplish the ultimate resolution