Class discussion: Medea vs. Jason

Following the class discussion we have had today in class, notably pertaining to the comparison between Jason and Medea, and which of the two characters deserved our sympathy (catharsis), I would like to further give prominence to the point I was attempting to make. First of all, it is primordial to draw attention to the fact that neither Medea, nor Jason have all the faculties needed, in order for us to be able to, without refutation of any sort, to characterize them as tragic heroes. Indeed, as was previously illustrated by fellow classmates on this wonderful blog, Aristotle defines the tragic hero as an individual who is: a character of noble stature and has greatness; pre-eminently great but he/she is not perfect; the hero's downfall is partially her/his own fault and the result of free choice; the hero's mis-fortunate is not wholly deserved, the punishment exceeding the crime; increase in awareness, some gain in self-knowledge. Though noble (considering temperament, and human nature) as well as moral aptitudes, can also be taken into consideration, they do not appear in Aristotle's definition, therefore this concept needs not to be applied to our two main characters, nonetheless it is essential to note that Medea, having brutality killed her brother, in order to save Jason, but also because the act would, in the future benefit her, cannot be considered as such. However the fundamental aspect of the clash between Medea and Jason, is, that within the context of the myth, Medea was not only influenced by Aphrodite to come to Jason's aid, but, as we can see throughout the play, a subject to her passions: "it was infatuation, sheer shooting passion, that drove you to save my life" - Jason responding to Medea, during their first confrontation. This theory, therefore in some sort, renders insignificant the acts Medea undertook for Jason. Nonetheless, though she sacrificed elements of her life in order to aid Jason, her naivety has lead her to believe that Jason's actions, respectable in their society, was a complete betrayal considering what she had done for him, without regarding the fact that she too was given fame, prosperity, and security, notably from her father's wrath, for ten years. Considering she is a corrupt and disastrous witch, it was said, today in class, that Jason should have known the lengths to which Medea would have taken her anger, indeed in that case, the Princess's death is inevitable, however, the killing of Jason's sons, are a simple affirmation of her pride not wanting to accept possible defeat, but also of her emotions, or rather sudden whims, integrally reprobating her consciousness, and sense of logic. On the other hand, this analysis goes both ways, Medea should have known that, Jason being a greedy and superficial individual, would always seek for more fame, through any means necessary. After all, women were not considered as citizens of society at that time, at least not lowly ranked woman within society, though this is not a concept I agree with, it seems only natural for Medea to serve and obey her husband and accept the decisions he makes for her. However this does not pardon Jason's depth-less acts, but he is forgiven because he simply acts according to his society, this poor man, who has lost everything is clearly not at fault. Indeed, adhering to a logical analysis of the literary context, one can affirm that Medea is simply making the same mistakes as she has done previously: entering a knew environment as a refugee, a foreigner, and mysterious individual, a clash between her and her host is inevitable. However, it seems as though Medea's abilities to manipulate individuals, as seen with Creon or the Chorus, has transfered itself with the audience. In conclusion Medea is a fool, and Jason is as well, that is the correlation that exists between these two characters, nonetheless Jason is a pardoned fool, only acting like he is intended to do. In order to fully understand my point of view, one must distance himself from our contemporary views of society, but also of ones bias interpretations of the play, indeed I have observed that most female individuals in our class have sided with Medea simply because she is a woman, without clearly analyzing the obvious facts. Finally, though Medea's actions seem respectable, they are only a perfect representation of the violent, brutal, barbarian, and somewhat primitive ideologies she is influenced by. Indeed, as she herself indicates, she is controlled by her emotions, however furthering her for her reason.