المستخلص: |
Lumping together the sophists’ and the subalterns’ desire to challenge the traditional truth claims and to produce counter-discourses, this paper reads Medea as a subaltern woman who makes counter statements against the patriarchal and colonial representation of the female Other. While concentrating on Medea’s ability to interact, it first examines “the contrary arguments” in Medea and Jason’s agon and the way these two characters organize their arguments to discuss the same question: whether or not Jason is charged with betrayal. Second, it interprets Medea’s subjective interpretation of her filicidal act, which fits the sophistic doctrine of the human-measure doctrine, as an act that makes her straddle the boundary between the sage mother and the savage Other. Third, it investigates whether Euripides manages to promote her audibility.
|