Fate in Medea Essay example

Many people today may say that all events happen for a reason and it is out of our control, but is it really our individual choices that we make determine our future. The same thing happened in the play Antigone. In the play one message is that characters blame fate for the downfall of their life when it is their own doing.

At the very end of play, Medea emerges from the house in a dragon-pulled chariot, carrying the corpses of her children. Taking the bodies of the children with her as she flees Corinth is the final blow towards Jason. He can no longer have any form of closure and he cannot give them a burial so he is stuck with a torn, grieving heart. Meanwhile, Medea can take the bodies and give them a proper burial. She will make it so that their bodies are safe and protected.

We must not forget that in King Oedipus Sophocles deals with the struggle that mankind has with fate. ‘Fate’ would imply that events are predetermined and beyond the control of human beings. Sophocles cleverly showcased determinism in a form of a prophecy; the example from the play, “That he should die by the hands of his own child, His child and mine.” (Sophocles, trans. 1947, line 713-714), suggest that the prophecy is unconditional and will be fulfilled no matter what actions are taken, in other words, predetermined. The prophecy itself is the cause of it coming true. One would think that Laius’ and Jocasta’s decision in sending the baby away or King Oedipus’ decision in leaving Corinth is a display of human agency. But it appears not to be so as their decisions are caused by the knowledge of the

In Medea, a play by Euripides, Jason possesses many traits that lead to his downfall. After Medea assists Jason in his quest to get the Golden Fleece, killing her brother and disgracing her father and her native land in the process, Jason finds a new bride despite swearing an oath of fidelity to Medea. Medea is devastated when she finds out that Jason left her for another woman after two children and now wants to banish her. Medea plots revenge on Jason after he gives her one day to leave. Medea later acts peculiarly as a subservient woman to Jason who is oblivious to the evil that will be unleashed and lets the children remain in Corinth. The children later deliver a poisoned gown to Jason’s new bride that also kills the King of Corinth.

The controversy of whether the doctrine of determinism or free will guides us throughout our life is constantly debated. Is there a superior being that determines everything that occurs, or are humans free to do whatever they choose? In stories, the collaboration of fate and free will propels the actions of characters throughout the plot. In J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, there is a certain fate ordained, but there is free will that brings the characters to their fates. On the contrary, the chorus of Euripides’ Medea states “the gods find a way, against all expectation, to do what they want...And that is exactly how this case turned out” (Euripides 1467-1469), suggesting that whatever Medea does is constrained the the fate determined by the gods. That she enacts the judgement of the gods is what she considers the bindings of fate, but under the lens of Harry Potter, Rowling would treat this as free will that endows fate.

The involvement of the gods in the Argonautica shows us how the free will that was once Medea’s is stolen by gods in order to shape the fates of characters. When “Hera presently broke the silence with the following scheme… in the hope that he can be persuaded to

From birth, Oedipus, the Tragic Hero of Sophocles’ play Oedipus Rex has been destined to kill his father and marry his mother. Although by the opening act of the play, Oedipus has already earned the throne of Thebes for solving the riddle of the sphinx, the greek hero is unaware that he has already fulfilled the prophy. Meanwhile, the people of Thebes are dying of a plague that will only end when the murderer of Laius, the previous Theban King, is punished. Through retrospection, Oedipus believes that he might be responsible for Laius death and is told that the King and Queen of Corinth who raised him were not his biological parents. In this passage, Jocasta, having already discovered the truth that she is both Oedipus’ mother and wife, warns Oedipus to go no further in his path for self knowledge. But Oedipus ignores her warning and calls for the Shepherd, to learn more about his mysterious lineage. This passage suggests that Oedipus’ downfall is not the product of fate but of his own free will. Sophocles employs characterization, word choice, and irony to reveal how free will has led to tragedy.

Antigone, a tragic play by Sophocles, demonstrates that characters dictate free choices which derive from the fate of devestating events from the past or the future. Despite the countless attempts to avoid the fate, determined by an Delphic oracle, of killing his father and marrying his mother, Oedipus’ outcome was exactly as foretold. Before the death of Oedipus, he foretells that his two sons, Polynices and Eteocles, will kill each other in the coming battle (Sophocles, 1984, p.365). Antigone's decision to defy Creon’s edict was one of free will, “Ismene: I scorn them not, but to defy the state or break her ordinance I have no skill... Antigone: A specious pretext. I will go alone to lap my dearest brother in the grave...” (Soph. Ant. 82-83; Sophocles, 1984). This clearly depicts the contrast between Antigone and her sister Ismene, as Antigone is empowered to influence her own fortune, while Ismene does not. It is the Antigone’s exercise of free will, then, that ironically binds her even more surely to the thread of destiny. Creon, although he remains stubborn, is warned by the Prophet Tiresias of that his bad decisions he has made from his free will, will greatly influence his fate (Soph. Ant. 1099 - 1100; Sophocles, 1984). Sophocles indicates that characters are unable to be entirely responsible for their actions by elevating the

However, no one in the play except the Nurse thinks for a second that Medea could bring herself to murder her children. Medea even has an internal debate over whether she could bring herself to commit such a crime, showing once again that she is not completely in control of her emotions. In the end, she decides to go through with it rather than leave them “to the mockery of my enemies” (78). In the end, Medea appears in the sky in “a chariot drawn by dragons” (84). She has already killed the boys and she attributes their death to Jason’s “weakness” (86) and his “lustful heart and new marriage” (86). The play ends with Medea disappearing from view with the children.

Medea considers the greater good to be fairness and equality: “throat for throat, evil for evil, vengeance for vengeance” (80). She believes she is obligated to steal from Jason what he stole from her: happiness. By the end of the play, Medea fulfills her aspiration of vengeance as she murders those whom Jason holds dear: his new wife, the king, and the children he and Medea conceived together. Throughout Medea, Medea faces a grave predicament regarding “(her) eaglets, (her) golden ones” (73). She begins to realize that “as long as they live (she) shall be mixed with (Jason)” (74). Because of this, Medea claims that her children will be going to “a darker city, where no games are played, no music is heard” (58). The murder of her own children stands as arguably the most shocking and evil action Medea makes throughout the

Medea’s conflict with Jason proves to be the main conflict in the play, which really sheds light into the fact that Euripides created this play to challenge the notion of feminism. After Jason’s betrayal, Medea decides to take control. It is evident in the way she manipulates other characters within the play, and how she handles situations she is in, that she is quite intelligent. Her motivation and will to accomplish her own goals, portrays Medea as the complete opposite of a typical patriarchal woman who embodies the norms of patriarchy in Greek society. In the play, Jason says, “I married you, chose hatred and murder for my wife – no woman, but a tiger…” (1. 1343-44) This quote shows the misogyny with Jason, because he is saying that him and the society have made Medea this way. But maybe Medea started acting

A laughter sounded behind her. So low that she took it for a fancy. But when someone giggled by her feet Medea opened her eyes and stared down. A flower had bloomed on the mound, the one she had never seen before, with a long green stem and silver petals. And in the heart of the bloom a tiny creature lay, its eyes as big as human teardrops, its body fragile and golden, its wings clear like ice.

For thousands of years, philosophers questioned the very structures our society was founded on, ripping apart the meaning of society, religion, and politics, to create unanimity in the world. One of the biggest questions is the existence of free will. Philosophers have tried to tackle the concept of free will through a plethora of ideas and theories. They continue to ponder if free will is concrete and real, or if it is a figment of the imagination; still, there are several different viewpoints and approaches. Free will is the right to be able to make your own choices without anything else determining it. One of the most famous philosophers, Aristotle, had a very strong opinion on what constitutes a free action and even has a few theories to use in determining if an action is free or not. Additionally, Spinoza, a hard determinist, had an interesting but contradictory view on free will. Both viewpoints can be applied to many situations, such as the actions of Medea. In the play Medea, Medea is a woman who makes some questionable choices to get revenge on her husband because he is leaving her. One of the most controversial actions was Medea’s choice to kill both of her sons. She was driven by emotion, raging because of the ultimate betrayal her husband was committing by leaving her for another woman and then leaving her to be exiled. However, it is challenging to say if she is responsible for the action of murdering her children. According to Aristotle, Medea acted voluntarily

Euripides’ Medea is a Greek that revolves around Medea and her struggle she has with her husband Jason. P.E Easterling writes an article discussing the huge emphasis on the children in the story and how it impacts the story. Within this article P.E Easterling discusses how Euripides gives a thorough background to make you take Medea seriously, he discusses how she comes to her conclusion to murder her children, and he discusses all the reasons why she would murder her children. All of this is used to establish Medea as a tragic hero. After reading Euripides’ ‘Medea’ and P.E Easterling’s article I have come to agree with the idea that Medea is a tragic hero that leads to her own destruction as well the destruction of her enemies.

Each of the heroines in the three plays have some sort of a reason for what they do, which is why I am able to elaborate on how they were in the right. Before doing so, background information will help you understand the “crimes” to the Greek culture that were committed. The three heroines being discussed are Medea, Antigone, and Lysistrata. Medea executed her children, Antigone buried her brother, and Lysistrata condemned men from having sex with their wives until the war ends. Medea is the wife of Jason, whom she supported all throughout her life. That is until Jason planned a marriage with the daughter of Creon (Glauce), while leaving Medea and their children on her own. Medea is infuriated by Jason’s decision to “better the family” by marrying into royalty because, she had always been there for Jason, from giving him children, to betraying her own people to help him. Although Jason tries to rationalize with Medea about what she threatens to do (kill their children). He follows through with the re-marriage which pushes her over the edge. Euripides makes it very clear that Medea suffers, which is ultimately why she ends up killing their children. She does this because Jason made her suffer so badly, to the point where she needed to get back at him in a way that would genuinely hurt him. I don’t believe that this is okay, but she was in the right because Jason single-handedly destroyed her will to live and left her feeling useless in the world.