Feminist Criticism Of Euripides

The third and most contemporary of the great three tragic dramatists of Greece, Euripides often expressed controversial ideas in his work. Unlike the other two members making up the triumvirate, Aeschylus and Sophocles, Euripides’ work questioned traditional and widely held social values, and thus, his work was seen as less appealing and less popular to the masses . For example, his first known tragedy, Medea, “attacks contemporary injustices not only to women but also to foreigners” (Hadas, 92). Thus, though widely held as a misogynist, Euripides could better be classified to have held feminist ideals, and sought to tentatively shine a light on the plight of women.

Medea, Euripides’ most prominent work, weaves the story of Medea, the demigod

Aristotle said “Sophocles drew men as they ought to be; Euripides, as they were.” Rather than heightening man to an ideal, Euripides was in the habit of portraying men including all their flaws. He was able to understand and accurately portray the psychology behind obsession, of the minds of the fairer sex, and of “ different kinds of weakness that are not wickedness” (Ferguson 239). In fact. it could be argued that his plays are driven by purely human passions ( Flaceliere 211). This is precisely the case with Medea, as she succumbs to her passions and obsession over Jason’s betrayal of both her and her children. Rather than diminishing Medea, originally a sympathetic character and causing her to become two dimensional, Euripides adds further depth by having Medea kill her children. It also applies conversely with Jason, as his actions and speeches characterize him despicable and contradictory, saying that “the children (he) has are enough” before stating in the same speech that he wanted “to produce brothers for (her) children.” By adding dimension into Medea’s character by having her kill her children, and because of the despicable, yet familiar nature of Jason, Euripides humanizes the characters and causes them to invoke a humane familiarity that allows the audience to sympathize with the characters and immerse themselves into the

Women were generally, uneducated, confined to their homes, and seen as “objects,” To Euripides, the subjugation of woman was an injustice. However, Medea was written as part as a competition, and the audience would only be made up of men. Thus, the language and expressions used would have to be crafted to hide the true meaning of the play. For example, in a misogynistic interpretation, Medea’s infanticide would be a man’s worst dream: “they ultimately affirm male anxiety about women by launching a violent and excessive attack on the male and his male children” (Folley). Then, it follows as such that Medea could be seen as a heartless and illogical women, willing even to sacrifice her children for her husband’s misery. Her actions inspire fear from the male audience, reaffirming the idea that independent women were dangerous. However, due to this reason, it becomes infinitely more difficult to decipher Euripides’ true intentions. Thus, Euripides is often characterized as a misogynist, though “ many of his portraits of girls and women show them in a wholly admirable light” (Flaceliere 217). Medea is a loving mother and wife, who had sacrificed nearly everything for her husband. She disobeys her father, forsakes her homeland, and kills her brother in order to be with Jason. Thus, her passionate rage at her sudden betrayal is also just as deep, and much