Medea is, even though a mythological woman from ancient Greece, very popular today and her story feels modern, which many recent adaptations clearly prove. How can this ancient material be so applicable and thought-provoking to discuss today? This study shows how different translators and authors have interpreted and re-imagined Medea to make her feel relevant to their contemporary societies. Focus is put on Medea’s roles as a woman and a foreigner, because these aspects are especially relevant today. The following research compares three Swedish translations of Euripides Medea from 1860, 1931 and 2012 with each other and analyses three modern adaptations (a movie by Lars von Trier, a novel by Christa Wolf and a play by Viktor Tjerneld) to reveal similarities and differences in the reception of the ancient material. This is achieved by a close reading and analysis of the source material with a theoretical approach that focusses on classical reception and drama theory. The results show that the different translations only differ in nuanced details because all of them try to stay as true as possible to the ancient Greek original. Only the prefaces and character lists written by the translators reveal significant differences in the values that they express and that are signs of their contemporary societies. The modern adaptations offer more possibilities for changing the original depending on which aspects are important during the time of publication. The results show that Medea’s role as an independent woman is important today, but also that her role as a foreigner becomes even more significant as the debates about refugees are getting more evident in our society.

Euripides’ Alcestis and Medea are plays about a woman of exemplary virtue and a woman of horrible vice, respectively. This thesis examines how both heroines have a subjectivity that is destructive because they are female, and which is expressed by making deals with men. Women’s deal-making is dangerous because it conflicts with a system of exchange exclusive to men, in which women function as objects of exchange which solidify men’s homosocial bonds. Alcestis’ and Medea’s deals with men disrupt these bonds. Alcestis’ dangerous subjectivity is contained when she is made the passive object of exchange between men, while in Medea’s case, the absence of deals between men allows the uncontained effect of her deal-making to destroy her family and community. Comparison of the plays shows that the suppression of women’s deal-making, and not the benign or malicious intent of the deal-maker, is crucial to the happy resolution of the play.

Με μια αρχική επεξεργασία του θέματος της παρούσας εργασίας έγινε φανερό πως χωρίζεται σε δύο χρονικές περιόδους. Η πρώτη περίοδος εκτείνεται από τα μέσα του 19ου αιώνα ως το τέλους του ίδιου αιώνα(εδώ εντοπίστηκαν τρία έργα) και η δεύτερη περίοδος από τα μέσα του 20ου αιώνα περίπου(1959) ως τις αρχές του 21ου αιώνα(2007) (εδώ εντοπίστηκαν δώδεκα έργα) καταγράφεται αποδεδειγμένα ως η πιο δημιουργική περίοδος, ακόμη και αν θέσουμε ως κριτήριο το πλήθος των έργων. Η πρόσληψη δομών και σημαινόντων της ευριπίδειας δραματικής ποίησης θα αναζητηθεί με βάση όσους από τους τύπους διακειμενικότητας του Gerard Genette μπορούν να ανιχνευτούν στα εξής νεοελληνικά δραματικά κείμενα: Μήδεια του Ιωάννη Ζαμπέλιου(1860)-M1, To Ψέμα του Ιάσονα του Δημήτρη Χριστοδούλου(1959)-M2, Μήδεια (η οφιοπλόκαμη ερινύα των πόθων) της Μαρίας Κέκκου (1990)-M4, Μήδεια του Μποστ (Χρύσανθος Βοσταντζόγλου ή Μποσταντζόγλου) (1993)-M6, Μήδεια του Βασίλη Γκουρογιάννη (1995)-M7, Μήδεια, του Βασίλη Ζιώγα(1995)-Μ8, Στον αστερισμό της Εκάτης-(Θεατρικά έργα και μονόπρακτα) του Κωνσταντίνου Μπούρα(1997) α. Η Μήδεια στην Αθήνα του Κωνσταντίνου Μπούρα (Μονόπρακτο) (1997)-Μ9 και β. Το τέλος της Μήδειας(Τραγωδία) του Κωνσταντίνου Μπούρα (1997)-Μ10, Μήδεια αυτοπυρπολούμενη του Ντίνου Ταξιάρχη(2006)-M11, Backstage (Παρασκήνιο) της Άννας Μαρίας Μαργαρίτη(2007)-M12, Η άλλη ΜΗΔΕΙΑ του Βασίλη Μπουντούρη (1990)-M5, Ποιος σκότωσε τα παιδιά της Μήδειας του Χάρη Λαμπίδη(1984)-M3. Αν ξεκινήσουμε από τον κανόνα της Kristeva πως κάθε κείμενο με βάση το φαινόμενο της διακειμενικότητας «είναι ένα μωσαϊκό από αναφορές σε άλλα κείμενα, μια απορρόφηση ενός άλλου κειμένου», κατόπιν μπορούμε να επεκταθούμε και στην κατά Riffaterre θέση, η οποία υπογραμμίζει την ανάγκη αναζήτησης ενός διακειμένου ώστε να ολοκληρωθεί η οποιαδήποτε λογοτεχνική προσέγγιση κάθε κειμένου. Τα επίπεδα πρόσληψης θα αναζητηθούν μέσα από τα στοιχεία(δομικές, νοηματικές και δραματικές μονάδες) που διοχετεύονται από τη Μήδεια του Ευριπίδη (Μ) στα διακείμενα (Μ1 έως Μ12) νεότερες Μήδειες ή και όχι υποχρεωτικά Μήδειες ως προς τον τίτλο. Κατόπιν θα εξεταστεί η αυτούσια (λογοκλοπή-plagiarism) μετάγγιση στα νέα έργα στοιχείων του (ΜΕ) ή η μεταλλαγμένη παρουσία τους καθώς και σε πιο βαθμό διατηρούνται ή αλλάζουν τα μυθολογικά μοτίβα, θέματα, πρόσωπα και ο δραματικός χώρος των δραματικών κειμένων με καταγωγή από την πλατφόρμα πάνω στην οποία κυριαρχικά τοποθετείται η Μήδεια του Ευριπίδη. / Initially as a treatment of the subject of the present work it became obvious that it is separated in two time periods. The first period is extended by the means of the 19th century until the end of same century (where located three plays) and the second period from the means of the 20th century roughly (1959) until the beginning of the 21st century (2007) (where twelve plays). Where located evidentig the most creative period, even if we place as criterion the number of plays. The engagement of structure and meaning of the Eurepides’ dramatic poetry it will be sought with based those on types of Gerard Genette’s intertextuality can be detected in the following Modern Greek dramatic texts: Medea by Ioannis Zambelios(1860)-M1, The Jason’s lie by Dimitris Christodoulou(1959)-M2, Medea (the shake of desnes) by Maria Kekkou (1990)-M4, Medea by Bost (Chrissanthos Vostantzoglou or Bostantzoglou)(1993)-M6, Medea by Basilis Gourogiannis(1995)-M7, Medea by Basilis Ziogas (1995)-Μ8, In Ekates’ constellation-(Plays and one act plays) by Konstadinos Bouras (1997) α. Medea in Athens by Konstantinos Bouras(one act play) (1997)M9 and b. Medea’s end (Tragedy) by Konstantinos Bouras (1997)-Μ10, Medea self-burned up dy Dinos Taxiarchis(2006)-M11, Backstage by Anna Maria Margariti (2007)-M12, The other Medea by Basilis Boudouris(1990)-M5, Who killed Medea’s children by Harry Labidi (1984)-M3. If we start with the rule of Kristeva that each text based on the phenomenon of intertextuality «it is a mosaic of reports in other texts, a absorption of another text », then we can extend oneself also in the Riffaterres’ place, which underlines the need of search of intertext so that is being completed the any literary approach of each text. The levels of engagement will be sought through the elements (structural, meaning and dramatic units) that are channeled by the Medea of Eurepides’(ΜΕ) in intertexts (from Μ1 to Μ12) modern plays named Medea or even no necessarilly Medea as for the title. Then it will be examined self-same (plagiarism) transfusion in his new work of elements (ΜΕ) or their mutant presence as well as in what degree they maintain or change the mythological patterns, subjects, persons and the dramatic space of dramatic texts with originate from the platform above in that sovereign it is placed the Medea of Eurepides.

La vision de la Grèce antique de Pasolini est une vision barbare parce que le cinéasterefuse toute idéalisation néoclassique. Une telle vision de l’antiquité était déjà répondue dans laculture européenne à travers les textes de Nietzsche. Pasolini est inspiré particulièrement pardeux disciplines auxquelles il se réfère souvent : l’anthropologie et la psychanalyse.A une thématique barbare correspond aussi, chez le cinéaste italien, un environnementbarbare, avec l’accord entre la forme de l’expression et la forme du contenu. Pasolini rejette lareconstitution archéologique : à la luminosité aveuglante du Maroc (où est tournée la partiemythique d’OEdipe roi), à l’architecture archaïque de pierre de la Cappadoce (la Colchide deMédée), aux remparts d’une ville syrienne d’Alep (Corinthe dans Médée), le cinéaste associe descostumes dans lesquels s’inscrivent de différentes cultures archaïques, et des musiquesprovenant pour la plupart des pays non-occidentaux (africaines, tibétaines, japonaises,roumaines).Avec la pratique de la contamination et du pastiche, Pasolini souhaite recréer le langageintemporel du mythe, le langage primaire dans lequel s’inscrit la civilisation paysanne. Cetterelation entre le mythe grec et le monde rural s’articule principalement autour de la notion decyclicité. / Pasolini’s vision of ancient Greece is barbaric because the filmmaker refuses any neoclassicalidealization. This vision of antiquity was already famous in European culture through the textsof Nietzsche. Pasolini is particularly inspired by two disciplines he often refers to : anthropologyand psychoanalysis.The barbarian theme is also linked to a barbaric environment, with agreement between the formof expression and form of content. Pasolini rejects archaeological reconstruction. He combinesblinding brightness of Morocco (were the mythical part of the Oedipus Rex is turned), archaicarchitecture in stone of Cappadocia (Colchis in Medea), and the ramparts of a Syrian city Aleppo(Corinth in Medea) with costumes from different archaic cultures and music mostly from non-Western countries (African, Tibetan, Japanese, Romanian).With the practice of contamination and pastiche, Pasolini wants to recreate the timelesslanguage of myth, the primary language of the peasant civilization. The relationship between theGreek myth and the rural world revolves mainly around the notion of cyclicity.

Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades / Informe de Seminario de grado para optar al grado de Licenciada en Lengua y Literatura Hispánica / En el siguiente informe se analizarán comparativamente dos obras, siendo una reescritura de la otra. Me refiero a Medea escrita por Eurípides y estrenada en el 431 a.C., y Medea Mapuche, pieza dramática del chileno Juan Radrigán, representada en el año 2000 y publicada por primera vez en el año 2004, dentro del compilado Crónicas del Amor Furioso realizado por la editorial Frontera Sur. Estas obras fueron escritas en contextos de producción distintos, pues corresponden a momentos históricos diferentes, uno, situado en la Antigua Grecia y, el otro, en el Chile de finales del siglo XX. Eurípides escribe durante el siglo V a.C. en Grecia, cuando Atenas era gobernada por Pericles y los mismos atenienses se autodenominaban como la Hélade de la Hélade1, imponiéndose frente a los otros pueblos griegos con su poderío marítimo y altísimos impuestos. En ese entonces, la tragedia ya se había instalado como género literario, siendo la crisis de valores sociales de la época uno de los grandes temas trabajados por los trágicos. Eurípides se convertirá en uno de los autores más críticos y rebeldes, como lo señala Gilbert Murray en Eurípides y su tiempo.

CoordenaÃÃo de AperfeiÃoamento de Pessoal de NÃvel Superior / A presente dissertaÃÃo analisa o texto de Clara de GÃes, Medea en Promenade (2012), a partir da tragÃdia homÃnima de EurÃpedes, Medeia, (431 a.C.). O texto de chegada narra o encontro de Glauce, (Jovem), Medeia (Mulher) e a ama de Medeia (Velha), trÃs mulheres âem uma espÃcie de deserto fora do tempo e do espaÃoâ, nas palavras da autora. Pontuando a fala dessas mulheres, ouvimos a voz do Corifeu, quase sempre à penumbra. Propomos, assim, uma reflexÃo crÃtica, voltando nosso olhar para as protagonistas dessas poÃticas, cujas falas sÃo marcadas por questionamentos: âQual meu lugar no exÃlio? Seria o exÃlio meu lugar?â Tais perguntas reforÃam uma antiga reivindicaÃÃo das mulheres, nÃo sà de Atenas, mas de muitos outros lugares, especialmente as estrangeiras. Foi buscando entender essas margens e o porquà de tantas travessias, muitas delas forÃadas, que elegemos o tema do exÃlio, haja vista constituir objeto de interesse nÃo sà dos Estudos ClÃssicos, mas tambÃm dos Estudos Culturais, por exemplo. Nosso intuito à mostrar como ocorre o que ora chamamos âdiÃlogoâ entre EurÃpides e Clara de GÃes, numa perspectiva comparada, buscando imprimir outra leitura para o mito de Medeia, paralela ou alÃm da metÃfora, especialmente voltada para os constantes deslocamentos da heroÃna. Como salienta Jan Felix Gaertner, um dos autores que fundamentam nossa pesquisa, o exÃlio âtem sido um dos temas literÃrios mais produtivos em literatura do sÃculo XXâ (2007, p. 1) e tornou-se um tema central na literatura pÃs-colonial em associaÃÃo a temas relacionados a distÃncia, separaÃÃo, deslocamento, desprendimento e diÃspora. Nossa hipÃtese à reconhecer ou ler o exÃlio como dispositivo, conforme Agamben (2009) â termo tÃcnico decisivo na estratÃgia do pensamento de Foucault, do qual foi tomado de âemprÃstimoâ â nÃo sà polÃtico, mas tambÃm existencial, a partir da Medeia, de EurÃpides, que a imortalizou como infanticida, nÃo sem antes problematizar seu status de mulher estrangeira. A respeito dessa condiÃÃo, apoiamo-nos, especialmente, em Pierre Vidal-Naquet (1999) e Vernant (2009), Queiroz (1998) e Jasinski (2012). A fim de confirmar, em parte, nossa hipÃtese, dado o hibridismo da anÃlise, apoiamo-nos em Sara Forsdyke (2005) e Gayatri C. Spivak (2014). Como aporte teÃrico do teatro â da tragÃdia grega à cena contemporÃnea â, Albin Lesky (2010), Jacqueline de Romilly (2013), Marie-Claude Hubert (2013) e Patrice Pavis (2011).

Greek tragedy portrayed the husband and wife relationship as fraught with hos¬tilities and ambivalences. The purpose of this mini-dissertation is to examine these dysfunctions, and to explain them. I have approached the problem from several important angles. I have begun with selected aspects of Athenian Mythol¬ogy and the foundation myths of Athenian culture to see whether there are recur¬rent themes that attest to inherent ambivalences and hostilities towards women within the mythological heritage of Athens. This approach is based on two as¬sumptions: first, that the dynamics of interpersonal relationships portrayed in mythology and literature tend to mirror the modal patterns of cultures and sec¬ond, the experiences of these modal patterns are the inspiration from which a culture draws its mythmaking. I then examine the context of the production of tragedy within the religious framework of the festival of the Greater Dionysia so as to establish a theory of the nature and function of Greek tragedy. The purpose of the second focus is to see whether there are connections between the workings of Greek tragedy and the thematic material it portrays. I have chosen four Greek tragedies within which to explore marital dysfunctions: Aeschylus’ Agamemnon, Sophocles’ Ajax and The Women of Trachis, and Euripides’ Medea. I have un¬der¬taken a close reading of the original texts and commentaries as well as a close reading of comparative translations of the texts for the purpose of this study. My explorations reveal that Athenian society was aware of the risks of the dire imbalance prevailing within their social order, which was created by such a fero¬cious suppression and derogation of half their members. In addition this imbal¬ance was redressed on a continual basis by the production of and through com¬munal participation in tragedy in its function as a ritualistic mechanism for ca¬thartic relief. Thus I conclude that the production of tragedy served to reaffirm the status quo. Tragedy provided a process for the de-structuring of familial and social order first and then sought and promoted a process of psychological restructuring and re-integration. This occurred through the empathetic workings of Catharsis or pur¬gation of negative emotions or feelings of guilt. The cathartic effects of tragedy were designed for men. As a collective therapeutic action it confirmed the male dominated order of society and reaffirmed the Athenian perception of a dualistic reality in the form of irreconcilable opposites: theatre versus life and female ver¬sus male. Tragedies were written by men and performed by men and thus we can expect all symptoms, signs and symbols of male and female conflict to be the products of the masculine psyche. / Prof. J.L.P. Wolmarans

The Greek tragedies of Classical Athens frequently portray mothers in central roles, but despite this significance, the relationship between mother and child has long been overshadowed in secondary scholarship by the relationship between husband and wife. This study demonstrates the direct relationship between a female character's active possession of her children and her autonomy, or her ability to act in her own interests, in three plays of Euripides: Electra, Medea, and Ion. In general, women who internalize their ownership of their children, expressed on stage both in word and action, have greater influence over the men around them and the power to enact the revenge they desire. Once their ends have been achieved, however, these tragic mothers often devalue their relationship with their children, leading to a decrease in power that restores the supremacy of the patriarchal order. Within this broad framework, Euripides achieves different results by adjusting aspects of this cycle of maternal empowerment. The Electra follows this outline just as its predecessor the Oresteia does; however, Euripides invents a fictional child for Electra, extending the concept of maternal empowerment to Electra and defining Clytemnestra as both mother and grandmother. In Medea, Euripides demonstrates the significance of Medea's children to her power, and Medea does devalue her children enough to destroy them, the source of her influence, but she is not punished and cannot be reabsorbed into the patriarchal structure, which leaves an audience with a heightened sense of anxiety at the threat of maternal empowerment. Finally, the Ion initially demonstrates a cycle similar to Medea: empowered by her ownership of the child she believes she has lost, Creusa attempts revenge against the young man who threatens her but is in fact her lost son. In the end, however, Creusa uses her empowerment to achieve recognition between mother and son and voluntarily relinquishes her ownership, resulting in a peaceful reabsorption into patriarchal society and a happy ending. Despite the variations on this cycle presented by Euripides, one theme persists: motherhood was both empowering and threatening, and it required strict male control to avoid tragic results. Thus as scholars of tragedy, we cannot ignore the mother-child relationship, not only for its power to illuminate the feminine, but also for its capacity to reveal the vulnerabilities of the masculine.

No description available.

<p>This thesis offers a consideration of Ovid’s portrayal of Medea - in <em>Heroides</em> 6 and 12, <em>Metamorphoses</em> 7, and in <em>Tristia</em> 3.9. Although several scholars have examined the myth as Ovid presents it, no one has yet offered a literary appreciation of Ovid’s various accounts of the myth – one that examines his use of characterization, humour, audience response, and one that treats his Medea as a consistent, albeit complex, character.</p> <p>The first chapter focuses on the sources for Ovid’s Medea, the ways he makes changes and, as far as we can tell, innovations to his predecessors. The second begins with a general introduction to the <em>Heroides</em>, followed by a close reading of <em>Heroides</em> 6, showing how this letter is an oblique reference to Medea’s letter and myth, and I point out the links between the two poems, arguing that Hypsipyle’s letter must be read as a foreshadowing of Medea’s. The third chapter examines <em>Heroides </em>12 – Medea’s letter - where I concentrate on Ovid’s characterization of Medea and specifically look at elements of black humour and foreshadowing. The fourth – and longest – chapter deals with the Medea of the <em>Metamorphoses</em>, where I propose that the real metamorphosis of this story is Medea herself, who moves from the state of an innocent young girl to that of a witch, yet noting that all of the changes take place within a work that is marked by its sense of playfulness – its <em>perpetua festivitas</em> – and note Ovid’s use of wit and irony even as his characterization appears to grow dark. The fifth and final chapter deals with the Medea in Ovid’s <em>Tristia</em>, where I place the Medea of this work within the context of Ovid’s exile poetry, while showing that he is working with a complex character and is in no way contradicting himself.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)