Reversal Of Revenge In Medea

939 Words4 Pages
Throughout the play we see a rising culmination of emotions of anger and hate to the point where there is an anticlimactic resolution when Medea gets revenge on Jason. If Aristotle were to comment on this so-called tragedy that Euripedes wrote, he would mention that this play does not contain the complexity and quality that a tragedy most definitely needs. According to Aristotle, the most important part of a tragedy is its plot or as Aristotle puts it, “the imitation of an action” or mimesis. Aristotle also states that in making a tragedy, three things must lead one after the other in a successive way; reversal of intention (peripetiea), recognition (anagnorisis) and the cleansing of pity and fear (catharsis). Euripedes fails to make Medea a tragedy as he does not include these main elements such as hermatia, peripeteia, anagnorisis and catharsis that Aristotle says make a tragedy successful. Euripedes ultimately fails to make a very complex play. The peripeteia or the reversal of intention, which according to Aristotle is the first element that should come in a tragedy, in Medea is absent or seldom occurs in the play as Medea is well determined in her motives from the very beginning to take revenge on Jason. From the very beginning of the play where Medea learns that her husband, Jason, has…show more content…
He literally writes that she is “realizing the wrong her husband does her.” Though there is no Peripeteia that precedes this anagnorisis which is usually the case in a tragedy, as Aristotle notes, it still is the turning point of the play and the time in which Medea becomes a dangerous and vile woman who will again get revenge because of her love and passion for Jason. But from this point on, Medea’s plan never changes. She never passes from ignorance to knowledge. As we see again in the conversation with Creon, she continues to carry out her revenge against Jason as she
Open Document