2022 IB Diploma Extended Essays

6

this moment from the original play, as he also intended for Medea to be somewhat vindicated. Medea’s murder of her son in the modern adaptation is entirely without dialogue, and in the script, Bartlett gave the directions, “ She panics. Is nearly sick. ... Medea follows with the knife. ” (Act 5, Scene 1). This brief flash of Medea’s maternal nature emphasises a key aim of Euripides’ Medea : to propose the paradigm of role reversal. Cowardice was considered to be an intrinsically feminine emotion in Ancient Greece, and this is evidenced in many classic Greek plays. In his play Alcestis , Euripides had Admetus declare that cowardice is incompatible with the status of a socially respectable man (Euripides, 1884). Through Medea overcoming her cowardice by murdering her children, she contradicts the stereotypical gender roles of the time, and embodies emotions stereotypically masculine emotions. Euripides’ Medea monologizes and doubts her ability to murder her own children. Near the end of her monologue, she asks herself, “Did I actually let myself be influenced by such cowardly thoughts?” (lines 1052-3), further stressing the paradigm of gendered role reversal and evoking a sense of understanding of Medea’s actions in both plays. She is not some cold-hearted being incapable of feeling basic human emotions but is fundamentally human – regarding her emotions – and should be treated to the same judgement as any man. One difference between Euripides’ and Bartlett’s Medeas is their degree of separation from their societies. The original Medea expresses solidarity with the chorus members, whereas Bartlett’s Medea has a tense relationship with Sarah and Pam (her modern chorus). Bartlett’s Medea is fundamentally isolated, elucidating her character’s unpredictability. The audience does not feel the inevitability of events in the modern play, as Medea’s plans are unknown to all characters, including Medea, until the final scene. Additionally, due to her unpredictability, Medea is portrayed as more insane than rational in the modern adaptation. This is a productional aspect of both plays representing the importance of social status during