The myth of Medea is one of the most well-known. In fact, before I read the play, I always knew Medea as the psycho-spurned lover who kills her sons (most know her for this). If you believe that morality is fixed and unchangeable, chances are you will always think of Medea as an immoral mad-woman. If on the other hand, you believe that morality is relative, after reading Medea for yourself, you may (as I did), change your mind about her character.
Medea fell in love with a man named Jason. He was on a quest to retrieve the Golden Fleece so that he might be granted his stolen birthright as king. Medea did everything in her power to help Jason. She even forsake her family ties so that Jason would become king. But Jason betrayed her. After Medea, had given him everything (including two sons), Jason decided to leave her for a young Princess. Jason chose fame and nobility over what Medea believed was true love. Medea, in a desperate attempt to strike at Jason's heart, the way he had at hers, killed first Jason's new bride and then their two sons. While this course of action is extreme, consider her position: she was exiled from not only Corinth (the place where Jason was to rule) but also from her own homeland. Furthermore, she knew her sons would never be accepted by Jason and his bride, the Princess of Corinth. Her sons, like her would be outcasts anywhere they went.
Keeping all this in mind, you can understand Medea's plight. She really had only two choices: being submissive (inaction) or preserving her honor. None of us, will find ourselves in a similar situation (probably). Furthermore, none of us will ever love to the extent that Medea loved Jason (hopefully). Therefore, it is nearly impossible to condemn Medea's actions. This is precisely the perspective of moral relativism. Problems can not be looked at in terms of black and white, especially when matters concern the heart.
No comments:
Post a Comment