The Sorrow Of Medea Analysis

In his article, The Sorrow of Medea, S.P. Mills parallels Medea’s act of filicide with that of two other Greek mythology characters, Ino and Procne. As revenge against Nephele, the first wife of her husband, King Athamas, Ino sends a false message that in order for a successful crop production that year, there must be a sacrifice. The message also stated that Phrixus, the son of Athamas by Nephele must be the sacrificial victim. This was Ino’s plot to get revenge against Nephele for talking about Athamas’s infidelity so that she could see one of her sons inherit the kingdom. However, the plan backfires and Ino ends up drowning herself in a lake in order to save herself from punishment from the Gods for her selfishness. Procne shares with Medea the deed for killing one of her own sons but

While most Greek tragedies would involve the victim directly murdering the violator, Ino, Procne, and Medea defy this convention and instead use their children as pawns for revenge. Instead of murdering the enemy in cold blood, the loss of one’s children incites enough rage, sadness, and defeat to destroy anyone. The next point that Mills addresses is the debate over whether Medea is a supernatural figure or a human being driven to extremes by passion. He reflects on the history of Medea’s character; how she was an outsider who came to Greece and became an outsider once again after she was exiled and her instances of procuring various spices and herbs to create concoctions of healing potions. But despite her mystical past, her powers do not have a history of being used viciously. Medea’s supernatural dimension is further articulated during her arrangement with Aegeus and, of course, her exit on the magic chariot of the Sun at the conclusion of the story. Mills then goes on to outline the Ino/Procne story pattern that Medea seems to