Greek drama (Tragedy) -- History and criticism; Mythology, Greek, in literature
borders of Corinth. She departs through the air, leaving Jason utterly
broken.
The literary history of this play is extremely interesting, though
obscure. First, is it later, or earlier, than the _Trachiniæ_? One
general idea is common to the two tragedies; but the treatment is utterly
dissimilar, and one may not unreasonably believe that Sophocles has
sought to reprove Euripides, to paint his own conception of a noble
wronged wife, and to show how a woman so placed should demean herself.
Secondly, there is some reason[424] to believe that two editions of
the _Medea_ where for a time in existence. Euripides almost certainly
himself remodelled the work, presumably for a second “production,” but
to what extent it is hard to say. Thirdly, and above all, there is the
question of his originality. The longer Greek “argument” asserts that he
appears to have borrowed the drama from Neophron and to have introduced
alterations. This interesting problem has been discussed elsewhere.[425]
Neophron’s play, if one is to judge by the style and versification of his
brief fragments, should be regarded as written early in the second half
of the fifth century.
The dramatic structure of the _Medea_ calls for the closest attention.
In Sophocles we have observed how that collision of wills and emotions,
which is always the soul of drama, arises from the confrontation of two
persons. In the present drama that collision takes place in the bosom of
a single person. Sophocles would probably have given us a Jason whose
claim upon our sympathy was hardly less than that of Medea. Complication,
with him, is to be found in his plots, not in his characters. But here
we have a subject which has since proved so rich a mine of tragic and
romantic interest—the study of a soul divided against itself. Medea’s
wrongs, her passionate resentment, and her plans of revenge do not merely
dominate the play, they _are_ the play from the first line to the close.
Certain real or alleged structural defects should be noted. First, we
observe the incredible part taken by the chorus; they raise not a finger
to stay the designs of Medea upon the king and his daughter; and we are
given no reason to suppose that they are unfriendly to the royal house.
The episode of Ægeus, moreover, is puzzling. Though quite necessary in
view of Medea’s helpless condition and prepared for by her remarks as to
a “tower of refuge,”[426] it is quite unneeded by one who can command
a magic flying chariot. Moreover, this chariot itself has been often
censured, notably by Aristotle,[427] who regards it as to all intents and
purposes a _deus ex machina_, and on this ground very properly objects to
it.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account