What do you think?
Rate this book
Medea
One of the most powerful and enduring of Greek tragedies, Medea centers on the myth of Jason, leader of the Argonauts, who has won the dragon-guarded treasure of the Golden Fleece with the help of the sorceress Medea. Having married Medea and fathered her two children, Jason abandons her for a more favorable match, never suspecting the terrible revenge she will take.
Euripides' masterly portrayal of the motives fiercely driving Medea's pursuit of vengeance for her husband's insult and betrayal has held theater audiences spellbound for more than twenty centuries. Rex Warner's authoritative translation brings this great classic of world literature vividly to life.
Reprint of the John Lane, The Bodley Head Limited, London, 1944 edition.
Euripides' masterly portrayal of the motives fiercely driving Medea's pursuit of vengeance for her husband's insult and betrayal has held theater audiences spellbound for more than twenty centuries. Rex Warner's authoritative translation brings this great classic of world literature vividly to life.
Reprint of the John Lane, The Bodley Head Limited, London, 1944 edition.
59 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 432
839 people are currently reading
47k people want to read
About the author
Euripides
2,361books1,827followersEuripides (Greek: Ευιπίδης) (ca. 480 BC�406 BC) was a tragedian of classical Athens. Along with Aeschylus and Sophocles, he is one of the three ancient Greek tragedians for whom any plays have survived in full. Some ancient scholars attributed ninety-five plays to him, but the Suda says it was ninety-two at most. Of these, eighteen or nineteen have survived more or less complete (Rhesus is suspect). There are many fragments (some substantial) of most of his other plays. More of his plays have survived intact than those of Aeschylus and Sophocles together, partly because his popularity grew as theirs declined—he became, in the Hellenistic Age, a cornerstone of ancient literary education, along with Homer, Demosthenes, and Menander.
Euripides is identified with theatrical innovations that have profoundly influenced drama down to modern times, especially in the representation of traditional, mythical heroes as ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances. This new approach led him to pioneer developments that later writers adapted to comedy, some of which are characteristic of romance. He also became "the most tragic of poets", focusing on the inner lives and motives of his characters in a way previously unknown. He was "the creator of ... that cage which is the theatre of William Shakespeare's Othello, Jean Racine's Phèdre, of Henrik Ibsen and August Strindberg," in which "imprisoned men and women destroy each other by the intensity of their loves and hates". But he was also the literary ancestor of comic dramatists as diverse as Menander and George Bernard Shaw.
His contemporaries associated him with Socrates as a leader of a decadent intellectualism. Both were frequently lampooned by comic poets such as Aristophanes. Socrates was eventually put on trial and executed as a corrupting influence. Ancient biographies hold that Euripides chose a voluntary exile in old age, dying in Macedonia, but recent scholarship casts doubt on these sources.
Euripides is identified with theatrical innovations that have profoundly influenced drama down to modern times, especially in the representation of traditional, mythical heroes as ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances. This new approach led him to pioneer developments that later writers adapted to comedy, some of which are characteristic of romance. He also became "the most tragic of poets", focusing on the inner lives and motives of his characters in a way previously unknown. He was "the creator of ... that cage which is the theatre of William Shakespeare's Othello, Jean Racine's Phèdre, of Henrik Ibsen and August Strindberg," in which "imprisoned men and women destroy each other by the intensity of their loves and hates". But he was also the literary ancestor of comic dramatists as diverse as Menander and George Bernard Shaw.
His contemporaries associated him with Socrates as a leader of a decadent intellectualism. Both were frequently lampooned by comic poets such as Aristophanes. Socrates was eventually put on trial and executed as a corrupting influence. Ancient biographies hold that Euripides chose a voluntary exile in old age, dying in Macedonia, but recent scholarship casts doubt on these sources.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 4,159 reviews
February 9, 2024
Way back in the day, I was at a movie theatre watching a movie, and it was a really weird movie. I had no idea what was going on throughout the entire film. People were just getting up and walking out. At the end of the movie, someone explained it to me, and I thought, “Wow! That’s so interesting! But they really should have handed out a pamphlet before the beginning of the movie to explain it.�
That exactly describes my feelings about this play. It was written in 431 B.C. Before diving in, I read a bit of what this play is or else I would have been entirely lost.
Jason and Medea have an epic love story—Medea betrays her family and helps Jason capture The Golden Fleece. The two burn bridges, but they have each other. They wed, and Medea has two children, sons. However, the play begins as Jason has cast off Medea and his sons in favor of marrying the daughter of the ruler of Corinth. How will Medea handle this news?
This couple deserves each other; both of them are extremely selfish. They never accept ownership for their own actions but constantly bemoan how things would have been better if the other person had done something differently. This play is quite surprising. Medea is certainly not a meek, submissive woman who can be discarded carelessly. She is an impressive strategist.
Overall, this is a tragedy worthy of a read.
This book is one of James Mustich’s 1,000 Books to Read.
2024 Reading Schedule
Jan Middlemarch
Feb The Grapes of Wrath
Mar Oliver Twist
Apr Madame Bovary
May A Clockwork Orange
Jun Possession
Jul The Folk of the Faraway Tree Collection
Aug Crime and Punishment
Sep Heart of Darkness
Oct Moby-Dick
Nov Far From the Madding Crowd
Dec A Tale of Two Cities
Connect With Me!
That exactly describes my feelings about this play. It was written in 431 B.C. Before diving in, I read a bit of what this play is or else I would have been entirely lost.
Jason and Medea have an epic love story—Medea betrays her family and helps Jason capture The Golden Fleece. The two burn bridges, but they have each other. They wed, and Medea has two children, sons. However, the play begins as Jason has cast off Medea and his sons in favor of marrying the daughter of the ruler of Corinth. How will Medea handle this news?
This couple deserves each other; both of them are extremely selfish. They never accept ownership for their own actions but constantly bemoan how things would have been better if the other person had done something differently. This play is quite surprising. Medea is certainly not a meek, submissive woman who can be discarded carelessly. She is an impressive strategist.
Overall, this is a tragedy worthy of a read.
This book is one of James Mustich’s 1,000 Books to Read.
2024 Reading Schedule
Jan Middlemarch
Feb The Grapes of Wrath
Mar Oliver Twist
Apr Madame Bovary
May A Clockwork Orange
Jun Possession
Jul The Folk of the Faraway Tree Collection
Aug Crime and Punishment
Sep Heart of Darkness
Oct Moby-Dick
Nov Far From the Madding Crowd
Dec A Tale of Two Cities
Connect With Me!
March 17, 2025
I found Euripides' "Medea" text relatively easy to read for an ancient Greek tragedy. I must say that the writing and the place of the women's choir help us.
When Jason landed to conquer the Golden Fleece, Medea left everything to follow him. She resorted to her betrayal's worst stratagems to allow the triumphant hero to overcome his trials. Jason took her as his wife and took her on his escape to thank her. They had two children. But the fairy tale quickly turns into a drama, which is what the play tells us.
Back in Corinth, Jason quickly preferred the daughter of King Creon. This king, who gave his daughter to Jason, would ban Medea.
Inspired by the Argonauts' legend, Euripides tells how this magician of royal and divine origin becomes an evil murderer and an infanticide mother who slaughters their two boys with her hands. The fruits of this betrayed love.
From then on, the ambitious Jason, desperate, will lose everything.
At first, revenge did not appeal to me because it was not my temperament. But this woman's strength of character took me beyond my prior knowledge. This passionate love, to the point of madness, ended up overwhelming me.
When Jason landed to conquer the Golden Fleece, Medea left everything to follow him. She resorted to her betrayal's worst stratagems to allow the triumphant hero to overcome his trials. Jason took her as his wife and took her on his escape to thank her. They had two children. But the fairy tale quickly turns into a drama, which is what the play tells us.
Back in Corinth, Jason quickly preferred the daughter of King Creon. This king, who gave his daughter to Jason, would ban Medea.
Inspired by the Argonauts' legend, Euripides tells how this magician of royal and divine origin becomes an evil murderer and an infanticide mother who slaughters their two boys with her hands. The fruits of this betrayed love.
From then on, the ambitious Jason, desperate, will lose everything.
At first, revenge did not appeal to me because it was not my temperament. But this woman's strength of character took me beyond my prior knowledge. This passionate love, to the point of madness, ended up overwhelming me.
January 22, 2018
“Stronger than lover's love is lover's hate. Incurable, in each, the wounds they make.�Euripides writes a masterpiece of love, betrayal and revenge. The theme of Medea is the extravagant hatred, for the once bewildering love of the heroine for Jason was transformed when he repudiates her to marry another. Medea had given up everything for the man she was led by the Gods to love above even herself. She saved him from certain death, she left the safety of her kingdom, she even killed her own brother. All in the name of her love for Jason. To be abandoned for another woman?
Medea does not passively sit back and accept the injustice of Jason’s actions; she is definitely not silent in the face of injustice. When she feels persecuted by man or men she asserts her own power, assuming she has just as much right to act in this way as any man does.
“Of all creatures that can feel and think,
we women are the worst treated things alive�
The play evolves from a heartbroken, melancholic Medea, betrayed wife who languished in bed and incapable of even raising her eyelids, apparently resigned to her fate, to an effervescent and sanguine woman with a terrible desire for revenge that will not stop at infanticide for the utter destruction of her once once-loved husband.
It is interesting to note that compared to the majority of Greek tragedies, in Medea the sins and errors committed by Jason and Medea are due to their own actions and not blame it on their destiny or on some avenging God.
Medea is certainly a terrible play, infanticide is not an easy theme, to read about a mother who kills her children is no easy theme.
“They are the sun that lights his world
So I will plunge him into darkness.�
But revenge here has assumes life on its own, and should prevail.
“I understand too well the dreadful act
I'm going to commit, but my judgement
can't check my anger, and that incites
the greatest evils human beings do.�
It is intimate, powerful and visceral. In the play Medea’s designation as a wife or mother is secondary to her own feelings as a woman. “A woman like me! What am I like that's different from you or any man." She appropriates an identity as an individual subject equal to the men who surround her, equally powerful and equally wrong. If she despises Jason for his ill use of her, does she not commit equal crime with so many innocents to obtain her revenge?
However, that is the essence of the play. Hard as the theme may be, this is the ultimate revenge drama. Once again, I couldn't help but be enthralled by the searing intensity of Euripedes' tragedy. Our tragedy, however, is that today we still witness crimes that remind us of this Greek play.
___
August 23, 2016
Medea, with her suffering, her hatred, her cruelty, has been present this week in my life. Her myth living in various guises of representation. And all engaged me in various degrees and manner.
It all started on Monday when, touring the Thyssen Musem in the search of paintings which had to do with the idea of ‘Travel�, I stopped to admire this painting, The Argonauts Leaving Colchis, by Ercole de Roberti (ca 1480). This depicts the earlier part of the Myth � the adventure in Colchis, . As the lovely Medea, in read, is already in the Argos, this represents the return trip with Golden Fleece on board. There is no hint of their dark future.
On Tuesday I watched Pasolini’s classic, from 1969,with the magnificent Maria Callas impersonating Medea. Pasolini’s account gives us the full myth, from the youth of Jason under the care of the Centaur, until the final gruesome deed perpetrated by Medea. What enraptured me of this film was Pasolini’s ability to portray an ominous barbaric kingdom. Sinister in all its splendour. For splendorous the filming certainly is. Just to admire his choice of locations is it worth watching this film. These are: ö in Capadocia, with those haunting caves and extended yellow land; the imposing and Aleppo fortress, which we may very well lose as Syria is now under the control of other dark forces; and parts of the delicate Camposanto in Pisa. Beautiful.
The only time Callas agreed to act without singing was for this Medea. She and her director succeed in giving us a cold hearted Medea, possessed by her hatred and full of feelings of revenge, but who is in control of hers and other’s destiny.
Disheartening.
Then I finally landed in and read a text, the major literary source, Euripides play. The tragedy begins at the end. This is Medea’s revenge. There were two aspects that drew my attention most in Euripides. One was his pride in the Greek civilization, for he justifies Medea’s barbarity as precisely that, the act of a barbarian. Impossibly expected from a Greek.
And second his lines on the plight of women. Medea’s lmost out of a feminist pamphlet, but this is Euripides� stylus.
Of all things with life and understanding,
We women are the most unfortunate,
First, we need a husband, someone we get
For an excessive price. He then becomes
The ruler of our bodies. This misfortune
Adds still more troubles to the grief we have,
Then comes the crucial struggle: this husband
We’ve selected, is he good or bad?
For a divorce loses women all respect,
Yet we can’t refuse to take a husband,
Then, when she goes into her husband’s home,
With its new rules and different customs,
She needs a prophet’s skill to sort out the man
Whose bed she shares...
My latest Medea was last night, when I attended a performance of Seneca’s version . This play focuses more on Medea’s abilities as a magician and zeroes in sharply into her hatred and rage than does Euripides. The quality of the performance wavered between some less convincing passages and some truly brilliant ones. I withheld my interest when hysteria took over the tragic, but there was an unforgettable representation of magical rites. If the play had begun with an astonishing enactment of the beginning of the Universe--the ancient Greek Big Bang--, when out of the amorphous chaos a series of deities emerged, the stage later offered Medea in her rage engaged in a metamorphosis through which she conjured up her powers. A frenzy of mud and voices, of dislocated movements and terrorizing tremors build up to a climatic trance, and Medea, becoming one with the goddess Earth, adjured the destruction of the Kingdom of Corinth.
To my astonishment I found myself gradually slouching in my chair, pulled down by my daze and holding my breath—clearly I could not resist being dragged by the intoxicating trance.
Unforgettable.
---------
There is at least one more Medea waiting for my attention...
..... for when I have recovered.
June 4, 2020
I wish Shakespeare had written a play where the Macbeths got divorced. You'd love to see what Lady Macbeth would have to say about it, right? The thing with marrying an asshole is, divorcing them isn't going to be pretty.
Here's the ugliest breakup in history, the most famous play by the nastiest Greek playwright, the sly and vicious Euripides. The plot is, Jason of the Argonauts, this guy:
has married an asshole. It was a good idea at the time: Medea slew an actual dragon for him, and who doesn't get turned on by a good dragon slaying. But now that the adventures are over, Jason wants to leave her for a more politically advantageous wife. The thing with dragon slayers is you get back to your kingdom and they're sortof traipsing around looking scary and you're like well, I feel like you're not going to be amazing at throwing feasts. Jason tries to break it to her easy: he's like listen, I'm going to marry this princess lady but here's the good news, your sons will be princes now! No seriously, that's what he says. He's such an asshole, and that's one of the fun things about Euripides, he'll take a hero like Jason and be like "But what if he was a douche?" Here's Jason in a more honest moment:
"To me, fame is the important thing.
I'd give up all I owned for it.
What good is a voice like Orpheus
If no one knows it belongs to you?"
So what happens next is that Medea is miffed.
"Men win their battles
On the field but women are ruthless when the bed
Becomes the battlefield. We've lain
In our own blood before...and have survived."
Medea shocked everyone when it was first performed in 431 BCE; it came in last in the competition that year. It's like when Hardy wrote Jude the Obscure and everyone got so mad about it that he never wrote another novel. There's a level of darkness that people just can't handle, and when you go there they blame you for it. This play is a dark place.
Look, Greek plays are sortof spoiler proof. There's only one thing that happens in each of them, really. Their characters spend the whole play deciding whether to do the thing, and then they always do the thing, and then the chorus is like holy shit, they did the thing, that was nuts, and then that's the end of it. (Which is one of the nice things about them: they take like an hour and a glass of wine to read. Maybe two.) You shouldn't even read Medea if you don't know how it ends. But here it is: in order to get back at Jason, she murders his new fiancee. Which actually that part sounds almost reasonable, right? It's pretty gory: the fiancee's dad (not that Creon!) comes and embraces her corpse but she poisoned the corpse, wow, so he gets
"Stitched
To it like ivy to laurel,
Felt his flesh ripping from his bones."
But we're not at the bad part yet. The bad part is that she murders her and Jason's children, too. Murders her own two kids. Euripides doesn't make you watch it - you never watch murders in Greek tragedies, it's always just howling off stage, and here you get to listen to her kids yelling, "Look! A knife!" and then screaming. It's awful.
The chorus, always weird and ambiguous participants in Euripides' plays, tries half-heartedly to talk her out of it:
Chorus: Suffering so great you’ll kill your sons?
Medea: Yes, anything to make Jason’s suffering worse then mine
Chorus: And turn your grief into wretchedness and misery?
Medea: Who can say? The time for talk has ended.
It's an Iagoesque villainy: she's uninterested in thinking this through.
Medea is one of the starkest and cleanest of the Greek tragedies. Euripides in particular tends to have slightly messier plots, but not here: this is one cold dagger stroke to the heart. It's troubling and unforgettable. Its reputation has blossomed since its inauspicious beginning; it was the most-performed Greek tragedy of the 20th century, with a reputation for winning Tonies for its Medeas. And here's the chorus again:
"Stronger than lovers love is lovers hate
Incurable, in each, the wounds they make."
So just keep that in mind, next time someone slays a dragon for you. That was nice of them, but what happens when you run out of dragons?
Here's the ugliest breakup in history, the most famous play by the nastiest Greek playwright, the sly and vicious Euripides. The plot is, Jason of the Argonauts, this guy:
has married an asshole. It was a good idea at the time: Medea slew an actual dragon for him, and who doesn't get turned on by a good dragon slaying. But now that the adventures are over, Jason wants to leave her for a more politically advantageous wife. The thing with dragon slayers is you get back to your kingdom and they're sortof traipsing around looking scary and you're like well, I feel like you're not going to be amazing at throwing feasts. Jason tries to break it to her easy: he's like listen, I'm going to marry this princess lady but here's the good news, your sons will be princes now! No seriously, that's what he says. He's such an asshole, and that's one of the fun things about Euripides, he'll take a hero like Jason and be like "But what if he was a douche?" Here's Jason in a more honest moment:
"To me, fame is the important thing.
I'd give up all I owned for it.
What good is a voice like Orpheus
If no one knows it belongs to you?"
So what happens next is that Medea is miffed.
"Men win their battles
On the field but women are ruthless when the bed
Becomes the battlefield. We've lain
In our own blood before...and have survived."
Medea shocked everyone when it was first performed in 431 BCE; it came in last in the competition that year. It's like when Hardy wrote Jude the Obscure and everyone got so mad about it that he never wrote another novel. There's a level of darkness that people just can't handle, and when you go there they blame you for it. This play is a dark place.
Look, Greek plays are sortof spoiler proof. There's only one thing that happens in each of them, really. Their characters spend the whole play deciding whether to do the thing, and then they always do the thing, and then the chorus is like holy shit, they did the thing, that was nuts, and then that's the end of it. (Which is one of the nice things about them: they take like an hour and a glass of wine to read. Maybe two.) You shouldn't even read Medea if you don't know how it ends. But here it is: in order to get back at Jason, she murders his new fiancee. Which actually that part sounds almost reasonable, right? It's pretty gory: the fiancee's dad (not that Creon!) comes and embraces her corpse but she poisoned the corpse, wow, so he gets
"Stitched
To it like ivy to laurel,
Felt his flesh ripping from his bones."
But we're not at the bad part yet. The bad part is that she murders her and Jason's children, too. Murders her own two kids. Euripides doesn't make you watch it - you never watch murders in Greek tragedies, it's always just howling off stage, and here you get to listen to her kids yelling, "Look! A knife!" and then screaming. It's awful.
The chorus, always weird and ambiguous participants in Euripides' plays, tries half-heartedly to talk her out of it:
Chorus: Suffering so great you’ll kill your sons?
Medea: Yes, anything to make Jason’s suffering worse then mine
Chorus: And turn your grief into wretchedness and misery?
Medea: Who can say? The time for talk has ended.
It's an Iagoesque villainy: she's uninterested in thinking this through.
Medea is one of the starkest and cleanest of the Greek tragedies. Euripides in particular tends to have slightly messier plots, but not here: this is one cold dagger stroke to the heart. It's troubling and unforgettable. Its reputation has blossomed since its inauspicious beginning; it was the most-performed Greek tragedy of the 20th century, with a reputation for winning Tonies for its Medeas. And here's the chorus again:
"Stronger than lovers love is lovers hate
Incurable, in each, the wounds they make."
So just keep that in mind, next time someone slays a dragon for you. That was nice of them, but what happens when you run out of dragons?
September 23, 2020
حواستون باشه به زنی که براتون اژدها میکشه ، بخاطرتون به کشورش خیانت میکنه و برادرش رو میکشه؛ خیانت نکنید . چون قطعا میتونه برای عذاب دادنتون به راحتی حتی بچههاتون� بکشه و بره با رقیب ازدواج کنه.
April 9, 2018
Me encanta leer a los griegos. Los precursores de toda la literatura moderna, del teatro, la épica y el drama. Las tragedias griegas siempre me atrajeron luego de mi paso de un año y medio en la carrera de Licenciatura en Letras.
Allí pude leer varias obras de los aedos más famosos como Esquilo y Sófocles así también como las clásicas epopeyas de Homero, pero nunca había leído nada de Eurípides. Eurípides ganó el tercer puesto con esta obra en un certamen realizado en el año 431 A.C.
Lo que sorprende de Eurípides es que se sale un poco del molde tradicional de la tragedia con el personaje de Medea.
A qué quiero llegar con esto: a que usualmente en la Grecia antigua, las tragedias en general (no siempre), estaban reservadas para reyes y dioses mientras que las comedias se representaban a partir del resto de los mortales y clases bajas.
Y casualmente el personaje principal es Medea, una mortal con la única salvedad de que es nieta del dios Helio, el sol. De todas maneras, toda la trama gira alrededor de ella, Jasón, Creonte y unos pocos personajes más.
Más allá de que Eurípides dispuso ciertos cambios en la representación ante el público (sobre todo con el coro y en un realismo más marcado que Esquilo o Sófocles), todos los elementos que tan claramente nos enseña Aristóteles en su poética aparecen en Medea: eleos, phobos, hamartia, catarsis, etc.
Medea es una mujer movida por un deseo de venganza irrefrenable contra Jasón y lo lleva al extremo transformándose en una fría filicida. El realismo expuesto por Eurípides en la obra es total y creo Medea anticipa a algunos de los más tremendos personajes asesinos de muchas novelas y cuentos.
Me gustó mucho esta tragedia, aunque debo reconocer que es extremadamente machista y misógina. De todos modos y aunque paradójico, el feminismo de Medea es intachable, a pesar de reconocer que la mujer ateniense era controlada totalmente por hombre.
Espero este año leer más tragedias griegas, porque como dije previamente, me encantan...
Allí pude leer varias obras de los aedos más famosos como Esquilo y Sófocles así también como las clásicas epopeyas de Homero, pero nunca había leído nada de Eurípides. Eurípides ganó el tercer puesto con esta obra en un certamen realizado en el año 431 A.C.
Lo que sorprende de Eurípides es que se sale un poco del molde tradicional de la tragedia con el personaje de Medea.
A qué quiero llegar con esto: a que usualmente en la Grecia antigua, las tragedias en general (no siempre), estaban reservadas para reyes y dioses mientras que las comedias se representaban a partir del resto de los mortales y clases bajas.
Y casualmente el personaje principal es Medea, una mortal con la única salvedad de que es nieta del dios Helio, el sol. De todas maneras, toda la trama gira alrededor de ella, Jasón, Creonte y unos pocos personajes más.
Más allá de que Eurípides dispuso ciertos cambios en la representación ante el público (sobre todo con el coro y en un realismo más marcado que Esquilo o Sófocles), todos los elementos que tan claramente nos enseña Aristóteles en su poética aparecen en Medea: eleos, phobos, hamartia, catarsis, etc.
Medea es una mujer movida por un deseo de venganza irrefrenable contra Jasón y lo lleva al extremo transformándose en una fría filicida. El realismo expuesto por Eurípides en la obra es total y creo Medea anticipa a algunos de los más tremendos personajes asesinos de muchas novelas y cuentos.
Me gustó mucho esta tragedia, aunque debo reconocer que es extremadamente machista y misógina. De todos modos y aunque paradójico, el feminismo de Medea es intachable, a pesar de reconocer que la mujer ateniense era controlada totalmente por hombre.
Espero este año leer más tragedias griegas, porque como dije previamente, me encantan...
February 22, 2018
Medea is a play about society, and how it deals with people who do not fit into the dominant cultural code.
It is about power, marriage, betrayal, hate and revenge as well, but the most important aspect is the typical fate of a strong and intelligent woman, following her husband to his home country. She is treated as an intruder and danger to society, mainly because she is different, and knows things other people do not want to see. She is the witch that narrowminded provincial men like to hunt, the threat to traditional family structures that scares the community to the point of becoming evil. She is the wronged women who has to bear the shame and the consequences of her husband's weakness and treachery.
I have thought of teaching the play with a global citizenship focus after seeing recent developments in the world, as being "foreign" once again has a great impact on your life, your perception in "mainstream" society, and your outlook on the future.
Medea is the archetype of a person who won't accept injustice without fighting back. The way she chooses to do this, according to Euripides, causes acute nausea of course, which might explain why her social suffering and fight against an oppressive mainstream community has not become more well-known and symbolic.
Christa Wolf came up with an interpretation of Medea that took away the guilt of infanticide and left the failure of the strong, vocal woman as the main focus. I liked that idea, as it is more acceptable to modern readers.
However, nothing beats Euripides' complex Medea in my eyes! The brutality of her fate matches the brutality of human beings and their response to change and diversity.
It is about power, marriage, betrayal, hate and revenge as well, but the most important aspect is the typical fate of a strong and intelligent woman, following her husband to his home country. She is treated as an intruder and danger to society, mainly because she is different, and knows things other people do not want to see. She is the witch that narrowminded provincial men like to hunt, the threat to traditional family structures that scares the community to the point of becoming evil. She is the wronged women who has to bear the shame and the consequences of her husband's weakness and treachery.
I have thought of teaching the play with a global citizenship focus after seeing recent developments in the world, as being "foreign" once again has a great impact on your life, your perception in "mainstream" society, and your outlook on the future.
Medea is the archetype of a person who won't accept injustice without fighting back. The way she chooses to do this, according to Euripides, causes acute nausea of course, which might explain why her social suffering and fight against an oppressive mainstream community has not become more well-known and symbolic.
Christa Wolf came up with an interpretation of Medea that took away the guilt of infanticide and left the failure of the strong, vocal woman as the main focus. I liked that idea, as it is more acceptable to modern readers.
However, nothing beats Euripides' complex Medea in my eyes! The brutality of her fate matches the brutality of human beings and their response to change and diversity.
November 13, 2018
“I understand too well the dreadful act
I'm going to commit, but my judgement
can't check my anger, and that incites
the greatest evils human beings do.�
- Medea about to Kill her Children, Eugène Delacroix (1838.)
As terrible as Medea’s actions are at the end of the play, I can’t help but feel sorry for her (at least is some small way.) She murders her own children, but she was pushed to the brink of despair as the knife was placed in her hand by her own husband. And Euripides plays on this dynamic beautifully.
Does one wrong justify another? She gave absolutely everything to Jason. The gods compelled her to love him, and she did more ardently that I think she ever realised. She murdered for him, she fled her own kingdom and saved him from death. She bore his children and helped him rule. She gave him everything. Without her support he would have achieved nothing. And what does he do? He betrays her. Pity the man who would attract the ire of such a woman.
“Stronger than lover's love is lover's hate. Incurable, in each, the wounds they make.�
Medea is passionate and volatile, without any scruples, and when the person she loved most in the world abandons her for another woman, she only thinks of how she can get him back. She doesn’t care about what she will lose or who else she will hurt: she only wants to hurt him as he hurt her. And Jason is a fool for hurting her. He must have known how she was, and he should not have pushed such a woman to the brink of despair. He drove her mad, and she struck back harder than he could have imagined.
Her actions are, of course, inexcusable but they are not entirely her own fault. Her volatility erupted and she channelled it into the most ugliest and bloodiest of revenges. And it’s difficult to read about, but it’s also important to read about. Although Euripides, through his raw and visceral language exaggerates the tempest that becomes Medea’s mind, this is surprisingly real world because this does happen: it has happened. Despair can change a person.
The play also has powerful feminist undertones. Medea shouts to the skies that she is the equal to any man and when she has been wronged she will wrong back as a man would, recognising her own crime but committing it all the same.
And that’s her tragedy: she cannot look beyond her own pain and anger.
I'm going to commit, but my judgement
can't check my anger, and that incites
the greatest evils human beings do.�
- Medea about to Kill her Children, Eugène Delacroix (1838.)
As terrible as Medea’s actions are at the end of the play, I can’t help but feel sorry for her (at least is some small way.) She murders her own children, but she was pushed to the brink of despair as the knife was placed in her hand by her own husband. And Euripides plays on this dynamic beautifully.
Does one wrong justify another? She gave absolutely everything to Jason. The gods compelled her to love him, and she did more ardently that I think she ever realised. She murdered for him, she fled her own kingdom and saved him from death. She bore his children and helped him rule. She gave him everything. Without her support he would have achieved nothing. And what does he do? He betrays her. Pity the man who would attract the ire of such a woman.
“Stronger than lover's love is lover's hate. Incurable, in each, the wounds they make.�
Medea is passionate and volatile, without any scruples, and when the person she loved most in the world abandons her for another woman, she only thinks of how she can get him back. She doesn’t care about what she will lose or who else she will hurt: she only wants to hurt him as he hurt her. And Jason is a fool for hurting her. He must have known how she was, and he should not have pushed such a woman to the brink of despair. He drove her mad, and she struck back harder than he could have imagined.
Her actions are, of course, inexcusable but they are not entirely her own fault. Her volatility erupted and she channelled it into the most ugliest and bloodiest of revenges. And it’s difficult to read about, but it’s also important to read about. Although Euripides, through his raw and visceral language exaggerates the tempest that becomes Medea’s mind, this is surprisingly real world because this does happen: it has happened. Despair can change a person.
The play also has powerful feminist undertones. Medea shouts to the skies that she is the equal to any man and when she has been wronged she will wrong back as a man would, recognising her own crime but committing it all the same.
And that’s her tragedy: she cannot look beyond her own pain and anger.
October 8, 2017
Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
Although this was first written by William Congreve in 1697 (not the Bible) the distant origins of the sentiment is frozen in human memory; but its earliest dramatic expression may have originated with Euripides. I think he just gave it words; the instinct of some women to be vindictive carriers of hellish wrath is innate. I have handled more than a few divorces where all parties involved � both attorneys and the husband � stood in open mouthed shock and amazement of how bats*** crazy mad the wife could be.
Damn, girl. Let it go.
Some women cannot. She has been wronged and God and all the angels are going to know about it. In Medea’s defense, Jason had it coming.
Euripides has created an archetype, a template upon which over twenty centuries of artists have contributed and added variation. But the origin is forged in a woman’s soul, and God help you if you get sideways of this capability for vengeance.
As good to experience now, and as relevant, as it was centuries ago.
Although this was first written by William Congreve in 1697 (not the Bible) the distant origins of the sentiment is frozen in human memory; but its earliest dramatic expression may have originated with Euripides. I think he just gave it words; the instinct of some women to be vindictive carriers of hellish wrath is innate. I have handled more than a few divorces where all parties involved � both attorneys and the husband � stood in open mouthed shock and amazement of how bats*** crazy mad the wife could be.
Damn, girl. Let it go.
Some women cannot. She has been wronged and God and all the angels are going to know about it. In Medea’s defense, Jason had it coming.
Euripides has created an archetype, a template upon which over twenty centuries of artists have contributed and added variation. But the origin is forged in a woman’s soul, and God help you if you get sideways of this capability for vengeance.
As good to experience now, and as relevant, as it was centuries ago.
March 10, 2023
¿Es acaso Medea la segunda tragedia griega que leo y ya la considero mi favorita sin haber leído todo lo que me falta? Pues sí. Así es. ¿Es eso posible? A lo mejor no. Tal vez me estoy adelantando a los acontecimientos habiendo tantas tragedias todavía por leer pero no me importa porque Eurípides ha hecho una a la altura de lo que a mí me gusta encontrar en las letras: personajes femeninos que no están solo como decoración.
Me encantó multiplicado al mil como una mujer es capaz de llegar hasta lo más oscuro de su propia naturaleza para conseguir vengarse de la traición que ha recibido. Me recontrafascinó como hace uso de su inteligencia y el poder de manipulación para lograr su anhelado objetivo; que es bastante retorcido. Medea es una auténtica villana que no solo se rebela contra Jasón por haberla utilizado sino que lo hace también con la misma sociedad (a pesar de vivir oprimida) que lo único que espera de ella es que esta cumpla con ciertos roles que le han sido asignados por ser mujer.
Sencillamente estas son las lecturas que para su época me gusta siempre encontrar. ¡Una verdadera maravilla! Medea es inteligente hasta el punto de utilizar su "debilidad" (ser mujer) para lograr su maquiavélico fin; que es demasiado despiadado y a mí me parece el culmen de la venganza dentro de toda la literatura que he leído.
Me encantó multiplicado al mil como una mujer es capaz de llegar hasta lo más oscuro de su propia naturaleza para conseguir vengarse de la traición que ha recibido. Me recontrafascinó como hace uso de su inteligencia y el poder de manipulación para lograr su anhelado objetivo; que es bastante retorcido. Medea es una auténtica villana que no solo se rebela contra Jasón por haberla utilizado sino que lo hace también con la misma sociedad (a pesar de vivir oprimida) que lo único que espera de ella es que esta cumpla con ciertos roles que le han sido asignados por ser mujer.
Sencillamente estas son las lecturas que para su época me gusta siempre encontrar. ¡Una verdadera maravilla! Medea es inteligente hasta el punto de utilizar su "debilidad" (ser mujer) para lograr su maquiavélico fin; que es demasiado despiadado y a mí me parece el culmen de la venganza dentro de toda la literatura que he leído.
September 8, 2016
در اشتباه نخواهید بود اگر بگویید مردمان اعصار دیرین احمق بودند و نادان نیز هم. آنانی که آوازهای جشن ها و جشنواره ها و میهمانی های شبانه را ابداع کردند. آوازهای شاد سرشار از زندگی. اما هیچ کس بر تمامی تارهای چنگ راهی نیافته تا رنج نفرت بار انسان های دردمند را بزداید. مرگ ها و تقدیرات شوم، که خانمانان را بر باد می دهند
برایم باور کردنی نیست که این شاهکار حدود 2400 سال پیش نوشته شده است. واقعا حرف بی جایی نیست که اوریپید را یکی از نوابغی بدانیم که دارای اندیشه هایی بسیار جلوتر از زمان خود بودند
وقتی نمایشنامه را با روایات متفاوت از زندگی افسانه ای مده� مقایسه می کنی، می بینی که اوریپید به عمد فقط قسمت های مخصوصی از این روایات را دستچی� کرده تا با آن بتواند منظور اصلی اش را برساند، یعنی ظلم به زنان در جامعه مرد سالار یونان
وی تاکید آنچنانی بر زشتی خیانت مده� به پدرش و همچنین دیگر جنایات او نمی کند تا خواننده یا بیننده نمایشنامه، فقط و فقط توجه اصلی اش بر خیانت شوهر بر زنی مظلوم که تمام زندگی و خانواده اش را فدای این مرد کرده، جلب شود
هنوز «وانهاده»ی سیمون دوبووار را نخواندم ولی طبق چیزایی که از دوستی درباره ی آن شنیدم می توانم بگویم اقتباسی از مده� است. و حالا توصیف حقوق زنان در یونان را با شرایط زنان در جامعه خودمان مقایسه کنید
در میان همه ی آفریدگان خدایان که زنده اند و دلیلی برای زندگی دارند، ما زنان از همه بدبخت تریم. نخست عشقِ مردی را با بهایی گزاف به دست می آوریم و سپس او را بر همه چیز خود، حتا بر بدنمان فرمان روا می داریم: این یکی ، سخت سوزاننده تر از نخستین است و حال چالشی بزرگ را فرارویمان داریم و آن، این که مردی نیک هنجار را برگزیده ایم یا پلید کردار
گذشته از همه ی این ها برای زنان، طلاق پسندیده نیست و رها کردن همسر نیز غیر ممکن است. اگر با رنجی سخت، کارمان را درست انجام دهیم و شوهر، زندگی مان را با ما قسمت کند، و یوغ ازدواج را بی خشونت تاب آورد، زندگی ما غبطه برانگیز خواهد شد. در غیر این صورت مرگ نیکوتر از این زیستن خواهد بود. اگر مردی در خانه اش احساس کسالت کرد، می تواند در خارج خانه برای دل آشفته اش درمانی بیابد
در جامعه ما برای چنین مردانی حتی قانون هم گذاشته اند؛ صیغه و چهار همسری
اما ما زن ها باید فقط به یک مرد تعلق داشته باشیم و تنها به او بنگریم. آن ها می گویند، ما زن ها در خانه، رها از مخاطره زندگی می کنیم، در حالی که آنان به جنگ می روند و با سپر و نیزه رویاروی می گردند. ترجیح می دهم سه بار در صف اول جنگ ایستادگی کنم، تا اینکه کودکی را در بطن خویش تحمل نمایم
این نمایشنامه انتقادی تندی بر جامعه یونان است که چنین ظلمی بر زنان را نادیده می گیرد و همچنین حمله ای به خدایان که مده� بارها آنها را برای این ظلم به یاری می طلبد ولی هیچ کدام به کمک او نمی آید. آخر سر خود با بدترین راه به هنجارهایی که بسیار مورد تایید جامعه هستند حمله می کند با فراموش کردن وظیفه ی مادری و نابود کردن خانواده
ملشینگر می نویسد: مدهآ� خود طغیانی است علیه ظلمی که در حق زنان، بی هیچ مجازاتی اعمال می گردد
:برخی اطلاعات عمومی از پی نوشت های مترجم
برای زنده نگه داشتن نام آجیوس پادشاه آتن، آب های میان یونان و آسیای صغیر را آیگه (اژه) نامیدند
سامبولون قطعه ای استخوان انگشت حیوانات بوده که به دو نیم می کردند و به عنوان نشانه برای شناختن فردی که آن را همراه داشته به کار می بردند. میزبان با تطبیق دادن دو قطعه و چسباندنشان به هم توانسته صاحب آن را بشناسد
Muses:
میوزها، دوشیزگان نُه گانه که بر کوه هلیکون می زیستند. انان در نُه هنر سرآمد بودند: داستان سرایی، نمایش، رقص، غزل، سرودخوانی، حماسه سرایی و ستازه شناسی. این نُه فرشته در یک هنر مشترک بودند و ان موسیقی بود. واژه ی موسیقی (معرب موزیک) یا میوزیک ازنام آنها گرفته شده است. آنان دستیاران ویژه ی آپولون بودند
:روانکاوی شخصیت مده�
تحلیل روانشناختی دکتر امیر حسن ندایی (مترجم کتاب) حاوی نکات جالبی است که به دلایلی درباره همجنس گرایی در برخی زنان و نفرت از مردان و همچنین یکی از دلایل آرایش زیاد و افراطی پرداخته است. در زیر جملاتی از آن را می آورم
August 1, 2024
|| 4.0 stars ||
This is the definition of female rage (gone wrong).
I was in a constant inner-battle with myself between hating Medea for every disgusting thing she’s done and rooting for her to take revenge on Jason. I kept coming back to the question whether my revulsion towards Medea rivaled the one I felt for Jason. I couldn’t quite make up my mind about what I was feeling, which made this all the more interesting.
If only Medea hadn’t taken her ire out on innocents�
This is the definition of female rage (gone wrong).
I was in a constant inner-battle with myself between hating Medea for every disgusting thing she’s done and rooting for her to take revenge on Jason. I kept coming back to the question whether my revulsion towards Medea rivaled the one I felt for Jason. I couldn’t quite make up my mind about what I was feeling, which made this all the more interesting.
If only Medea hadn’t taken her ire out on innocents�
March 11, 2022
JASON
"Oh children, what a terrible mother you had."
MEDEA
"Oh children, how you were destroyed by your father's disease."
Medea did what she had to do folks. did she girlboss a little too close to the sun ? maybe, but she's Helios' granddaughter, what did you expect ? 🙄
"Oh children, what a terrible mother you had."
MEDEA
"Oh children, how you were destroyed by your father's disease."
Medea did what she had to do folks. did she girlboss a little too close to the sun ? maybe, but she's Helios' granddaughter, what did you expect ? 🙄
February 7, 2022
3.5
تردید دارم که آیا این نمایشنامه آنچنان در راستای دفاع از حقوق زنان بود
از اون نمایشنامههای� هست که خیلی مورد استقبال گروههای� از فمینیسته� قرار گرفته. داستان راجع به زنی هست که بخاطر بیوفای� شوهرش که قصد ازدواج با کس دیگها� رو کرده
انتقام سهمناکی از مرد میگیر�. این درسته که طی نمایشنامه اورپید اومده و از زبان "مده�" بخشی از مظالم مردان علیه زنان رو برشمرده، اما بنظر من پایان کتاب رو به سختی میش� در راستای همون مساله حقوق زنان برشمرد.
مساله اینه که مده� یک نیمهخد� و مهمت� از اون یک بَربَر هست. وقتی در نظر میگیری� که مده� سابقا هم جنایتها� غیر قابل درکی در حق نزدیکان خودش کرده، از جمله کشتن برادر و پدر خودش برای ازدواج با "جیسون"، به سختی میش� اونچه که در پایان داستان انجام مید� رو در راستای "احقاق حقوق زنانگی خودش" تلقی کرد.
لذا در مورد اعمالی که از مده� سر میزنه� و با توجه به روح زمانه نمایشنامه، باید خارجی بودن و غیر� یونانی بودن مده� رو حتما لحاظ کنیم و اون تقابل "یونانیه� در برابر بَربَرها" رو در نظر بگیریم. جیسون مشخصا نمادی از یک مرد آتنی هست. مغرور و مدعی در منطق، چنانکه قصد خودش رو از ازدواج با دختر "کورنت" تلفیق خونش با خون اشرافی و زاده شدن بچه هایی ذکر میکن� که از طریق برادری بین اون بچهه� و بچهها� "مده�"، هم به فرزندانش و هم به خود مده� کمک کنه. اینجاست که البته مده� جیسون رو به لفّاظی متهم میکن� و ما هم از نوای "همسُرایا�" متوجه میشی� که این حرفای جیسون واقعا بهانه است. اما از طرف دیگه، از صحبتهای� که "آیگیوس"، پادشاه آتن، با مده� میکن� متوجه میشی� که داشتن فرزند مهمتری� دلیل ازدواج مردان یونانی با زنان هست. چیزی که در سرزمین بَربَرها اینگونه نیست.
همونطور که در جایی جیسون میگ� "هیچ زن آتنی نمیتونس� چنین کاری بکنه"، بنظر میاد مضمون نمایشنامه نه آنچنان تلاشی برای تغییر وضع زنان جامعه یونان، بلکه بیشتر تلاشی در جهت تبیین و درک موقعیت اونهاست. چنانکه در ابتدا "همسُرایا�" با مده� همنو� هستن ولی در آخر نمایشنامه علیه اون. و این رو باید به "عدم پذیرش بَربَرها از اونچه در یونان را��جه" نسبت داد. مده� در این سرزمین منزوی و بیگانست. برای او نه عقل و منطق، که عشق بالاترین جایگاه رو داره. آنچنان که همونطور برای رسیدن به عشق حاضره خون بریزه که برای انتقام از خیانت به عشق.
بنظر من در پس نمایشنامه، مفهومی نهفته است مبتنی بر اینکه خصائلی همچون انتقامجوی� و سنگدلی، که در میان پهلوانان مرد یونانی، عنصری کاملا پذیرفته شده و حتی ستودنیه، وقتی در قالب یک زن حلول میکنه� چقدر میتون� زننده باشه. با این همه، اورپید صرفا به نمایش اکتفا میکن� و نتیجهگیر� رو به بیننده واگذار کرده. و این بسیار ارزشمنده. در هر صورت، مدهآ� با فرارش از مهلکه به اون شکل در نگاه ما، کاملا به الهها� بدل میش� که وظیفها� برقرار کردن آیینی جاویدان (تعهد به ازدواج) تا ابد هست و در نگاه یونانیان، قضاوت خدایان ورای عقل بشریه.
تردید دارم که آیا این نمایشنامه آنچنان در راستای دفاع از حقوق زنان بود
از اون نمایشنامههای� هست که خیلی مورد استقبال گروههای� از فمینیسته� قرار گرفته. داستان راجع به زنی هست که بخاطر بیوفای� شوهرش که قصد ازدواج با کس دیگها� رو کرده
انتقام سهمناکی از مرد میگیر�. این درسته که طی نمایشنامه اورپید اومده و از زبان "مده�" بخشی از مظالم مردان علیه زنان رو برشمرده، اما بنظر من پایان کتاب رو به سختی میش� در راستای همون مساله حقوق زنان برشمرد.
مساله اینه که مده� یک نیمهخد� و مهمت� از اون یک بَربَر هست. وقتی در نظر میگیری� که مده� سابقا هم جنایتها� غیر قابل درکی در حق نزدیکان خودش کرده، از جمله کشتن برادر و پدر خودش برای ازدواج با "جیسون"، به سختی میش� اونچه که در پایان داستان انجام مید� رو در راستای "احقاق حقوق زنانگی خودش" تلقی کرد.
لذا در مورد اعمالی که از مده� سر میزنه� و با توجه به روح زمانه نمایشنامه، باید خارجی بودن و غیر� یونانی بودن مده� رو حتما لحاظ کنیم و اون تقابل "یونانیه� در برابر بَربَرها" رو در نظر بگیریم. جیسون مشخصا نمادی از یک مرد آتنی هست. مغرور و مدعی در منطق، چنانکه قصد خودش رو از ازدواج با دختر "کورنت" تلفیق خونش با خون اشرافی و زاده شدن بچه هایی ذکر میکن� که از طریق برادری بین اون بچهه� و بچهها� "مده�"، هم به فرزندانش و هم به خود مده� کمک کنه. اینجاست که البته مده� جیسون رو به لفّاظی متهم میکن� و ما هم از نوای "همسُرایا�" متوجه میشی� که این حرفای جیسون واقعا بهانه است. اما از طرف دیگه، از صحبتهای� که "آیگیوس"، پادشاه آتن، با مده� میکن� متوجه میشی� که داشتن فرزند مهمتری� دلیل ازدواج مردان یونانی با زنان هست. چیزی که در سرزمین بَربَرها اینگونه نیست.
همونطور که در جایی جیسون میگ� "هیچ زن آتنی نمیتونس� چنین کاری بکنه"، بنظر میاد مضمون نمایشنامه نه آنچنان تلاشی برای تغییر وضع زنان جامعه یونان، بلکه بیشتر تلاشی در جهت تبیین و درک موقعیت اونهاست. چنانکه در ابتدا "همسُرایا�" با مده� همنو� هستن ولی در آخر نمایشنامه علیه اون. و این رو باید به "عدم پذیرش بَربَرها از اونچه در یونان را��جه" نسبت داد. مده� در این سرزمین منزوی و بیگانست. برای او نه عقل و منطق، که عشق بالاترین جایگاه رو داره. آنچنان که همونطور برای رسیدن به عشق حاضره خون بریزه که برای انتقام از خیانت به عشق.
بنظر من در پس نمایشنامه، مفهومی نهفته است مبتنی بر اینکه خصائلی همچون انتقامجوی� و سنگدلی، که در میان پهلوانان مرد یونانی، عنصری کاملا پذیرفته شده و حتی ستودنیه، وقتی در قالب یک زن حلول میکنه� چقدر میتون� زننده باشه. با این همه، اورپید صرفا به نمایش اکتفا میکن� و نتیجهگیر� رو به بیننده واگذار کرده. و این بسیار ارزشمنده. در هر صورت، مدهآ� با فرارش از مهلکه به اون شکل در نگاه ما، کاملا به الهها� بدل میش� که وظیفها� برقرار کردن آیینی جاویدان (تعهد به ازدواج) تا ابد هست و در نگاه یونانیان، قضاوت خدایان ورای عقل بشریه.
September 7, 2022
Stronger than lover's love is lover's hate. Incurable, in each, the wounds they make."
� Euripides
Euripides" revenge drama retells the myth of Medea, who, smitten by Jason of Argonaut fame, gives up everything, family and country, to help him capture the Golden Fleece. She even kills her brother. She does all this in exchange for the promise of marriage.
After ten years and two sons, Jason decides to leave her for a more advantageous marriage to a royal princess. Then, in a rage, she orchestrates the death of the princess and, inadvertently, her father, the King. Finally, Medea realizes that her children may pay the price for her deeds and decides to kill them herself rather than leave the act to individuals who may enact revenge more cruelly. This action, she surmises, will devastate the unfaithful Jason.
From the view of tragedy and play structure, this is an excellent drama. However, I found both protagonists unsympathetic, which hampered my ability to empathize and enjoy the audio production.
Differing Interpretations
I read the play as part of a course on Greek Tragedy and was surprised to learn that Medea did NOT murder her children in the original myth. Instead, according to the lecturer, Euripides added this action for dramatic effect. So I researched and found that contemporary retellings (Stephan Fry and Gustav Schwab) use Euripides as their only source. However, Robert Graves tells a different tale. He says that the Corinthians, enraged by the Princess's and King's deaths, stoned the children to death. Graves states:
'Mislead by the dramatist Euripides, whom the Corinthians bribed with fifteen talents of gold to absolve them of the guilt; many pretend that Medea killed two of her own children." (p.558).
� Euripides
Euripides" revenge drama retells the myth of Medea, who, smitten by Jason of Argonaut fame, gives up everything, family and country, to help him capture the Golden Fleece. She even kills her brother. She does all this in exchange for the promise of marriage.
After ten years and two sons, Jason decides to leave her for a more advantageous marriage to a royal princess. Then, in a rage, she orchestrates the death of the princess and, inadvertently, her father, the King. Finally, Medea realizes that her children may pay the price for her deeds and decides to kill them herself rather than leave the act to individuals who may enact revenge more cruelly. This action, she surmises, will devastate the unfaithful Jason.
From the view of tragedy and play structure, this is an excellent drama. However, I found both protagonists unsympathetic, which hampered my ability to empathize and enjoy the audio production.
Differing Interpretations
I read the play as part of a course on Greek Tragedy and was surprised to learn that Medea did NOT murder her children in the original myth. Instead, according to the lecturer, Euripides added this action for dramatic effect. So I researched and found that contemporary retellings (Stephan Fry and Gustav Schwab) use Euripides as their only source. However, Robert Graves tells a different tale. He says that the Corinthians, enraged by the Princess's and King's deaths, stoned the children to death. Graves states:
'Mislead by the dramatist Euripides, whom the Corinthians bribed with fifteen talents of gold to absolve them of the guilt; many pretend that Medea killed two of her own children." (p.558).
May 11, 2022
پیش از این میخواست� بعد از خوندن مده� بیام و از پیشرو بودن اوریپید نسبت به جامعه� خودش صحبت کنم و این که چگونه 2500 سال پیش وجوهی از حقوق زنان رو مطرح میکن� که الآن هم زنه� دنبالشن اما میانه� راه به این فکر کردم که آیا واقعاً انسانه� در طول تاریخ رشد کردند و ما نسبت به گذشتگانمون از آگاهیها� بیشتری برخورداریم؟ یا تاریخ فقط یک تسلسل بیپایان� که خواستهها� اونه� رو شبیه به خواستهها� ما میکنه� و آیا 2500 سال دیگه اگه کسی آثار دوران ما رو بخونه از حقخواه� نسلمون خنده� میگیر� و یا آیندگانمون هم به دنبال پیدا کردن همون حقوقی هستند که امروز ما دنبالشیم؟
July 2, 2024
از سری ریویوهای غیبت صغری (خطر لو رفتن)
راسیتش با نگاه یه انسان مدرن نتونستم این اثر رو بخونم و زمانها� که ازش دم میز� برام مهمت� بود تا فمنیستی که به کرات اشاره میشد.
وقتی دو نفر از دو جامعه� گوناگون به هم میرس� و تفاوته� رو در نظر نمیگیرن� به طغیان و عصیانگری میتون� چنگ بزنن و موجبات رو به زوال رفتن حتی انسانیت رو به ارمغان بیارن. چرا؟ چون عشقشون دیگه شعلهو� نیست و تازه فهمیدن انتخابشون از چه قرار بوده. منطق وقتی حکمفرم� میشه، تازه دوزاری عزیزان میافت� که فقط عاشق گل روی بزرگوار شده بود و جوانب رو نسنجید. ازدواجی هم که کورکورانه و با کشت و کشتار شکل بگیره، سرانجام خوبی هم نخواهد داشت (البته طرف خیلی کور باشه میتونه همچنان ادامه بده). به همین خاطر، اعمال مده� برای من خواننده زیاد جالب نبود. چون درک و پذیرش در عشق بین این دو نفر، انگار وجود خارجی نداشت و هیچ ایدها� از دنیای همدیگه نداشتن (که البته اوکیه و قرار هم نیست زوجین فهمیده و باشعور باشن).
وقتی یکی از پایها� ترین مسائل روابط در این بین وجود نداشته باشه، تغییر (شاید اغراقآمی�) مده� و عشقی که به نفرت تبدیل شد، چنین بلایایی هم در پیش میگیر�. به همین خاطر، بال و پر دادن به احساسات و کمرنگ شدن منطق به قیمت هر چیز و کسی، از مده� برای من شخصیت مقبولی نساخت (منطق سگی فقط رو من جواب میده و طغیان احساسات رو با این شدت نمیتونم نقطه� قوت به حساب بیارم).
اگرچه دغدغههای� که بیان میکر� و مقایسها� که از جایگاه زن و مرد ارائه میداد� احترام من رو به خودش زیاد میکر� اما از طرفی هم رویها� که در پیش گرفته بود برخلاف نگرش منه و انتظار داشتم زیرکانه عمل کنه، نه به بهای از دست دادن همه� پلها� پشت سرش (اون هم چه پلهای�!).
زن بربر و یونانی تفاوتها� قابل توجهی دارن. اگه خواننده مطلع نباشه فکر میکنه که مده� حرکت شگفتانگیز� زده و برخلاف زمانه و ساختارشکن رفتار کرده. اما خب اینطور نبوده و با بخشی از مقاله� مربوطه، واضحت� منظورم رو میتونم انتقال بدم:
The concept of the transgressive female was important in the construction of the barbarian, both supernatural and human alike. The supremacy of the Athenian man over the Athenian woman was an integral part of the social fabric and was just as crucial in the process of construction of selfhood as supremacy over non-Greeks. The so-called female traits of insatiability (both sexual and materialistic), disorder, irrationality, and unpredictability were traits projected on Persians and centaurs alike. These traits were epitomized in the figure of the Amazon warrior, representative of the very antithesis of everything the Greeks (and especially the Athenians) stood for: a barbarian gynaecocracy.
خلاصه که انتخاب پارتنر همتای� خیلی مهمه. البته از اون مهمت� این هست که نگرش طرف مقابل و ابعاد زندگیش هم لحاظ کرد. با احساس نمیشه یه زندگی رو شروع کرد چون با همون احساس هم تموم میشه. به علاوه، شخصیت به شدت عاطفیا� که منطقش هم به گوز بند شده نمیتونه من رو درگیر کنه. منطق به جای خود و احساس هم به همین ترتیب. وقتی یکی غلبه کنه، زندگی جای قشنگی برای زیستن نمیشه. تعادل میتون� چنین چیزی رو به ارمغان بیاره.
از سارای بیبدیل� متشکرم که دوران عید رو به نمایشنامهخوان� اختصاص داد و تونستم تجارب خوبی رو با گروهی که برگزار کرد رقم بزنم.
پ.ن:واقفم که ریویو هیچ نظمی نداره و مثل ذهنم مشوش و ژولیده هست. فقط خواستم تا تهموندهها� حافظه به باد نرفته ازش کمی بگم و کمالگرای� هم سر نوشتن کنار بذارم.
November 18, 2022
Euripides shapes the Jason/ Medea myth to his own ends in this one hour (plus a few minutes) Ancient Greek drama, and the result is at least interesting. I wasn’t wholly enthusiastic about the play itself, but the ending was extremely thought provoking given the various retellings of the myth that are available.
August 26, 2017
Συγκλονιστικός.
Η ψυχολογία και ο χαρακτήρας της Μήδειας εξωτερικεύονται και αποτυπώνονται στο χαρτί με εκπληκτικό τρόπο.
Η ψυχολογία και ο χαρακτήρας της Μήδειας εξωτερικεύονται και αποτυπώνονται στο χαρτί με εκπληκτικό τρόπο.
July 26, 2022
هرچقدر از خوبی این اثر بگم، کم گفتم. بی نظیر.
October 31, 2022
С точки зрения современности, крайне сложно понять и оправдать убийство Медеей своих ни в чем не повинных детей, чтобы отомстить Ясону, ее неверному и расчетливому супругу. Также непонятны ее мотивы, что чтобы задержать преследовавшего ее отца, она убила брата, разрезав его тело на мелкие кусочки. На эту жертву она пошла ради Ясона. Их любовный союз был односторонним, она страстно его любила, и мы видим, на какие непостижимые жертвы она пошла. Он же женился на ней в обмен на ее помощь, и надо особо отметить, что никто бы не смог ему помочь, кроме нее, и его подвиги на колхидской земле только благодаря ей. Она � та, кто может многое, у нее есть власть и способность совершать большие дела. То есть им руководил трезвый расчет и ничего более. Бросает он Медею тоже по расчету, женившись на дочери Креонта, правителя Коринфа ради перспектив, даруемых этим браком. В этом его полнейшее ничтожество. Я ни в коем случае не оправдываю Медею, но ее гнев мне понятен. Страшное решение пришло к ней не сразу, гений Еврипида в том, что он показывает страдания мятущейся и мечущейся души. Нужно отметить, что Медея не только оскорблена такой дешевой изменой, но и в своих национальных чувствах. Ей, колхидянке, предпочли эллинку. Медея � безусловно, сильная личность, хоть и преступная в своем дето- и братоубийстве и умерщвлении соперницы и ее отца. Всегда удивительно, почему такие яркие личности выбирают ничтожнейших мужчин, ищущих лишь собственную материальную, имущественную выгоду. Образ Медеи � не вымысел Еврипида, а собирательный, обобщенный образ из народного творчества, мифов Древней Греции.
August 5, 2023
I know infanticide is wrong but I’m still kinda with Medea on this one?? at least Jason is literally the most gaslighting bloke ever like ever line he spoke made me feel progressively more murderous
here’s to the most emotionally complex woman in the classical canon
here’s to the most emotionally complex woman in the classical canon
March 22, 2017
“Gods often contradict
our fondest expectations.
What we anticipate
does not come to pass.
What we don't expect
some god finds a way to make it happen.
So with this story�
our fondest expectations.
What we anticipate
does not come to pass.
What we don't expect
some god finds a way to make it happen.
So with this story�
March 4, 2024
«زن در بسیاری از جاها آفریدها� ترسوست، که دل و ستیزه ندارد و چشمش بر رویینه خیره میماند� اما اگر در عشق بر او ستم کنند، دلی مرگ آور تر از دل او نیست�.»
وای خدای من عجب چیز تکاندهند� و جونداری بود.کاش مردهای امروز ۱٪ اوریپید زنهار� میشناختن و میفهمیدن:)😂نمیتونم نظر بدم، نمیتونم حسمو بگم. خیلی دوستش داشتم انگار از یه طرف پلید بودنش و از یه طرف قدرتی که تو عمل مده� بود...فقط باید بخونیدش. این اثر نیازی به "ریویو" نداره�. مثل تئاتری که بعد از تماشاش فقط ترجیح میدی سکوت کنی و به جای تحلیل کردنش هی به دوستات بگی عجب چیزی دیدیم.
اون پی گفتارِ آخرش(نشر بیدگل) هرچیزی که لازم بود درمورد این اثر گقته بشه رو گفت�. از ریشهها� اسطوره شناسیش تا برداشتِ مردمِ مدرن امروز و نگاه فمنیستی.�..
«جهان به هم ریخته است�. زیرا مردان آوازهایی میخوانن�.آنه� داستانها� مغرضانها� میگوین� مبنی بر اینکه نمیتوا� به زنان اعتماد کرد، اما در واقع این مردانان� که به عهدشان وفا نمیکنن�.»
«مده� میگوی� که زنان در نبرد ارسو هستند اما در امور مربوط به همخوابگی بی رحماند�
«جنگیدن در سه میدان از زادن یک فرزند خوشایندتر است�.»
وای خدای من عجب چیز تکاندهند� و جونداری بود.کاش مردهای امروز ۱٪ اوریپید زنهار� میشناختن و میفهمیدن:)😂نمیتونم نظر بدم، نمیتونم حسمو بگم. خیلی دوستش داشتم انگار از یه طرف پلید بودنش و از یه طرف قدرتی که تو عمل مده� بود...فقط باید بخونیدش. این اثر نیازی به "ریویو" نداره�. مثل تئاتری که بعد از تماشاش فقط ترجیح میدی سکوت کنی و به جای تحلیل کردنش هی به دوستات بگی عجب چیزی دیدیم.
اون پی گفتارِ آخرش(نشر بیدگل) هرچیزی که لازم بود درمورد این اثر گقته بشه رو گفت�. از ریشهها� اسطوره شناسیش تا برداشتِ مردمِ مدرن امروز و نگاه فمنیستی.�..
«جهان به هم ریخته است�. زیرا مردان آوازهایی میخوانن�.آنه� داستانها� مغرضانها� میگوین� مبنی بر اینکه نمیتوا� به زنان اعتماد کرد، اما در واقع این مردانان� که به عهدشان وفا نمیکنن�.»
«مده� میگوی� که زنان در نبرد ارسو هستند اما در امور مربوط به همخوابگی بی رحماند�
«جنگیدن در سه میدان از زادن یک فرزند خوشایندتر است�.»
August 12, 2021
طفلی مده آ! از غصه و خشم کارش به جنون کشید...چرا چرا چرا مده آ آدم بده قصه ست؟ چرا هیشکی جیسون رو مقصر نمیدونه؟ جیسون ناسپاس ِ خیانتکارِ عهد شکن...میدونی کلا همه افسانه های یونان اینطوری ان: قهرمان ها میتونن هرکاری _بخونین هر غلطی_ که بخوان انجام بدن، چون قهرمانن...مثل همین جیسون...مثل هرکول...مثل ادیسه...بدون سرزنش...بدون تاوان...
یونانی ها هم مثل همه جای دنیا، نسبت به زنها بی انصاف بودن...
همچنان دلم برای مده آ میسوزه...
مین.
یونانی ها هم مثل همه جای دنیا، نسبت به زنها بی انصاف بودن...
همچنان دلم برای مده آ میسوزه...
مین.
October 20, 2019
Sunt surprins că mi-a plăcut și se citește destul de repede!
"Dreptatea n-o găsești
în ochii muritorilor, pentru că ei
chiar înainte să-ți cunoască sufletul
deplin, dintr-o privire te socot vrăjmaș,
deși nu le-ai greșit."
"Dreptatea n-o găsești
în ochii muritorilor, pentru că ei
chiar înainte să-ți cunoască sufletul
deplin, dintr-o privire te socot vrăjmaș,
deși nu le-ai greșit."
February 4, 2025
واقعا چطور ممکنه یه همچین اثری ۲۴۰۰ سال پیش نوشته شده باشه ؟!
چیزایی آدم میبینه ها
چیزایی آدم میبینه ها
December 10, 2024
مده� عاشقتری� بود...اما این به ضررش تموم شد. درد خیانت و درد وجدان، این دردهایی که قابل درمان نبودند و مده� رو دچار عذاب و جنون وحشتناکی کردند، جنونی که باعث شد تا دست به چنین گناه بزرگی بزند.
(خودم میدون� خیلی بد نوشتم.)
(خودم میدون� خیلی بد نوشتم.)
December 21, 2023
Jason was a dolt. This basic bro believed his own hype and knew nothing, absolutely nothing, about women. He conveniently forgot that his whole reputation was owed to Medea’s sorcery, wisdom, and savagery. And he stupidly supplanted her in his bed for the King of Corinth’s daughter and the prestige that alliance brought him. His hubris would cost him dearly.
When Medea attempted to refresh Jason’s faulty memory, to remind him who had created his legend �
”I saved your life, and every Greek
knows I saved it,
Who was a shipmate of yours
aboard the Argo,
When you were sent to control the
bulls that breathed fire
And yoke them, and when you
would sow that deadly field.
Also the snake, who encircled
with his many folds
The Golden Fleece and guarded it
and never slept,
I killed, and so gave you the safety
of the light.
And I myself betrayed my father
and my home�
This is how I behaved to you, you
wretched man,
And you forsook me, took another
bride to bed…�
instead of taking heed, Jason damns her with slight praise, then claims that it is she who owes him:
”You are clever enough � but really I
need not enter
Into the story of how it was love’s
inescapable
Power that compelled you to keep
my person safe.
On this I will not go into too much
detail.
In so far as you helped me, you did
well enough.
But on this question of saving me, I
can prove
You have certainly got more from me
more than you gave.�
Not having dug his grave deep enough, he tells her that he’s doing all this for her benefit:
”Next for your attack on my
wedding with the princess:
Here I will prove that, first, it was a
clever move,
Secondly, a wise one, and, finally,
that I made it in your best interest and the
’s.
Please keep calm.�
Oh no he didn’t!! He went there! He told a woman to calm down � and not just any woman, but a sorceress, a servant of the dark goddess Hecate, who savagely betrayed her own father and murdered her brother for love of him, a woman he had just heartlessly betrayed. He certainly wasn’t considered a hero because of his brains!
Medea, for her part, regrets that the gods don’t assist young women from choosing badly in love:
”Why is there no mark engraved
upon men’s bodies
By which we could know the true
ones from the false ones?�
And she swears her vengeance:
”It shall not be � I swear it by her,
my mistress,
Whom most I honor and have
chosen as partner,
Hecate, who dwells in the
recesses of my hearth �
That any man shall be glad to have
injured me.
Bitter I will make their marriage
for them and mournful…�
This is an ancient tale, so no worries about spoilers. Medea goes on to use her guile to poison the princess her rival, who dies horribly along with her father the king, then steels her heart against pity, and kills her own children, Jason’s sons, depriving him of all, even their little corpses. She then proceeds to make the most amazing boss exit ever, in a chariot pulled by dragons, while Jason helplessly watches on, still railing against her. To which she replies,
”Hate me, but I tire of your barking
bitterness.
Medea was a bad ass. Jason was a punk too stupid to see what he was messing with. Too bad about the kids, but Jason got what he deserved.
When Medea attempted to refresh Jason’s faulty memory, to remind him who had created his legend �
”I saved your life, and every Greek
knows I saved it,
Who was a shipmate of yours
aboard the Argo,
When you were sent to control the
bulls that breathed fire
And yoke them, and when you
would sow that deadly field.
Also the snake, who encircled
with his many folds
The Golden Fleece and guarded it
and never slept,
I killed, and so gave you the safety
of the light.
And I myself betrayed my father
and my home�
This is how I behaved to you, you
wretched man,
And you forsook me, took another
bride to bed…�
instead of taking heed, Jason damns her with slight praise, then claims that it is she who owes him:
”You are clever enough � but really I
need not enter
Into the story of how it was love’s
inescapable
Power that compelled you to keep
my person safe.
On this I will not go into too much
detail.
In so far as you helped me, you did
well enough.
But on this question of saving me, I
can prove
You have certainly got more from me
more than you gave.�
Not having dug his grave deep enough, he tells her that he’s doing all this for her benefit:
”Next for your attack on my
wedding with the princess:
Here I will prove that, first, it was a
clever move,
Secondly, a wise one, and, finally,
that I made it in your best interest and the
’s.
Please keep calm.�
Oh no he didn’t!! He went there! He told a woman to calm down � and not just any woman, but a sorceress, a servant of the dark goddess Hecate, who savagely betrayed her own father and murdered her brother for love of him, a woman he had just heartlessly betrayed. He certainly wasn’t considered a hero because of his brains!
Medea, for her part, regrets that the gods don’t assist young women from choosing badly in love:
”Why is there no mark engraved
upon men’s bodies
By which we could know the true
ones from the false ones?�
And she swears her vengeance:
”It shall not be � I swear it by her,
my mistress,
Whom most I honor and have
chosen as partner,
Hecate, who dwells in the
recesses of my hearth �
That any man shall be glad to have
injured me.
Bitter I will make their marriage
for them and mournful…�
This is an ancient tale, so no worries about spoilers. Medea goes on to use her guile to poison the princess her rival, who dies horribly along with her father the king, then steels her heart against pity, and kills her own children, Jason’s sons, depriving him of all, even their little corpses. She then proceeds to make the most amazing boss exit ever, in a chariot pulled by dragons, while Jason helplessly watches on, still railing against her. To which she replies,
”Hate me, but I tire of your barking
bitterness.
Medea was a bad ass. Jason was a punk too stupid to see what he was messing with. Too bad about the kids, but Jason got what he deserved.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 4,159 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.