According to this (https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Medea+complex) website, the Medea Complex is: Murderous hatred by a mother for her child(ren), driven by the desire for revenge on her husband; it is a reference to Medea of Greek mythology, who kills her children.
Does that give anyone else the creeps? Because it kind of just hit me that this condition is common enough that there’s a name for it. I think on some level, we excuse Medea for killing the kids because, yeah, kids and murder (two things that should never go together…) were viewed differently in Ancient Greek society. But what if we put it into modern context? Bringing it back to our debate (don’t worry, “Con” team…we’ll win the next one…) would we ever say that it’s necessary for a mom to kill her kids, when it’s clear that she’s doing it out of revenge? Sure, Medea spews some garbage about how she does it partly to protect the children, but can we all admit that that’s patently false? She definitely does it to get revenge on Jason, which she admits! It’s not about protecting the kids! If it was about protecting them, she would have just flown off on the golden dragon with them ALIVE. Besides, Medea was super innovative; she totally could have come up with some way to save the children. If you read on the news today that a mother killed her children after murdering her husband’s mistress, and then she admitted it was kind of to get back at her cheating husband, but then she also claimed that she did it partly to save her kids—what would you believe? Would you really believe the murderer? I mean, maybe Medea is just another Holden Caulfield in that she’s TOTALLY UNRELIABLE and MAYBE LYING TO US (the audience) JUST LIKE SHE LIES TO KREON AND JASON!
On a separate note, I’m kind of confused about how to view Medea. Do I view her in the context of her time, or do I view her with my modern perceptions and conceptions? How do I judge her? By what values do I appraise her? It’s all kind of complicated and confused by the fact that the Chorus, too, begged Medea not to murder her children. So I guess child-murdering wasn’t looked upon too kindly in those days, either!
So really, I don’t know what the “right” way to view Medea is. All I can really do is judge her based on what I think is right. Therefore, I regret to say that I do not like Medea at all as a person (although she’s quite interesting as a character). (Which is kind of sad because she’s the lead character in one of the very few ancient plays of Greece.) I think that Medea honestly knew that killing her children was wrong, and that she was motivated by completely self-centered reasons that were totally irrelevant to how she should treat her children. Just because she feels sad over MURDER doesn’t mean she’s a good person. Plus, she also only laments killing her brother once in the play, and never seems to regret killing Glauce at all. These reasons, and several others, lead me to believe that Medea was not a good person. Yes, she was hurt/in love with Jason/her pride was suffering, but are those really excuses for murder, even by ancient Greek standards? We know family ties were important, so betraying her country/father and killing her brother definitely weren’t okay. I kind of feel like people would have been against Medea murdering a princess and a king, too. But I don’t know, maybe they weren’t, depending on what kind of government their state had…
Also, interesting to think about how this portrays women and foreigners. Did tragedy just reinforce certain stereotypes, even as it also challenged them?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
So I know I was on the "pro" side of the debate, but...
Yeah, I agree with you.
Like you said, I think it's quite horrifying that enough mothers would slaughter their children for the purpose of enacting revenge upon their husbands. Quite honestly, I think that's not only petty but pretty much unforgivable. I also agree that Medea could have found a way to save her children—I don't think that they were doomed for murder, and frankly to say otherwise I think would be giving Medea too little credit. Not only is she the cleverest and most innovative character in the play, she's also a sorceress and the granddaughter of a god. Surely with all those factors combined, she could have found a path to success in an endeavor to save her children? I was also re-reading the passage where she's debating with herself about whether or not to spare the kids, and I think that one of the reasons she comes to the conclusion that she must kill them is that she doesn't want to be laughed at by her enemies.
I also think your comment about whether we should view Medea in the context of Ancient Greece or modern society is very much worth considering, and the conclusion I've come to is both. Sure, kids and killing weren't viewed in the same manner way back when as they are now, but the fact of the matter is that Medea purposefully murdered two innocents. Not only that, in my opinion she also broke a promise to them as a parent. This isn't to say that Jason was "better," than Medea, simply that she failed in her obligations as a mother and parent in general. Perhaps this promise to her children went unspoken, but I think it was there nonetheless. Since Medea herself seems almost obsessed with oaths, you'd think she would have considered this.
Post a Comment