Mavarine Du-Marie
Personal ID: M2515473
The Open University
Question
In an essay of not more than 1500 words, compare and contrast the treatment of femininity
in two of the following works:
MEDEA, a play by Euripides
PYGMALION, a play by Bernard Shaw
Historically the Medea and Pygmalion plays are written at different times, Medea in
431 BC and Pygmalion in 1916, but both are romantic plays written by males, who
perceive the treatment of Medea’s and Eliza’s femininity as a crucial in the
relationship they have with the male characters in the plays; tragic in the case of
Medea and in the case of Eliza quite a comical scenario.
However, the authors re-enforce this confidence in the treatment of femininity by
contrasting and comparing them constantly to other women in the dramas. Both
Medea and Eliza in the plays weren’t striving for inner perfection as women, for that
they’re in possession of already, for both take themselves seriously, and know of
themselves, that is, Eliza seeing herself as ‘I’m a good girl, I am’1 and Medea says
of herself ‘because I am clever’2, these words are uttered by both women as a
statement of their own traits.
By comparison the males view their female counter-parts differently too; young bride
and Clara, by writing about them but not giving them any feminine qualities; the
young bride is described in behaviour as ‘her sulkiness, her girlish temper’3 and Clara
is described as ‘a ridiculous person’4, for they aren’t seen as women in the full sense
of the word by the male authors nor by the male characters in the plays, though
socially class ‘perfect’ scant attention is paid to them throughout the plays. In
contrast, this can also be seen in how the two authors of the plays treated Medea and
Page 1 of 6
Mavarine Du-Marie
Personal ID: M2515473
The Open University
Eliza with admiration due to their strength of character, even when they cried their
woes, as well as their imperfect appearance, in their description of Medea and Eliza,
whilst Jason and Henry mocked, taunt and tease at Medea’s and Eliza’s outward
womanly mannerism.
In my own definition femininity is that ‘female maturity in the inner quality of
character which expresses being a woman outwardly’. The male authors in their
definition of femininity describes it as ‘instinct’5 possessed by a woman in
Pygmalion, this is the inner quality of femininity written by Shaw, and in the play
Medea, femininity is described as ‘vindicating the cause of passion’6 which is the
outer quality that Euripides wrote in regards to what he saw in behaviour. But there
are similarities and differences between the treatment of Medea and Eliza and their
femininity.
In comparing the similarities in their treatment of femininity both Medea and Eliza
have the same value in regards to their reputations, which they learnt not from their
mothers, but their father’s presence in their lives. Therefore the women are viewed in
terms as being animalistic predators, Medea in gaining ‘oaths’ and Eliza in gaining
‘lessons’ from the principle male characters; Jason describes Medea as a ‘tiger’ and
Henry describes Eliza as an ‘insect’, but the two women still exhibit feminine aspects
which makes them appealing and interesting to the men in their lives; Jason says of
Medea “it was not, as you resentfully assume, that I / Found your attractions
wearisome…”7 and Henry says of Eliza “you’re not bad looking: it’s quite a
pleasure to look at you sometimes…”8 However, the male authors do
question whether their principle female characters are aware of their femininity and
Page 2 of 6
Mavarine Du-Marie
Personal ID: M2515473
The Open University
the strong feelings they bring out of others due to their traits; as the Chorus says of
Medea “this passion of hers is an irresistible flood”9 and in Pygmalion, Mrs
Higgins says of Eliza “The girl is naturally rather affectionate, I think.”10 So
there does seem to be a consensus in regards to how the Medea and Eliza’s
comparative feminine traits have similarities.
Each woman, Medea and Eliza, has by contrast a different situation to face at
differing stages of their relationship, Medea being more experienced made use of
it only “to gain my purpose, carry out my schemes”11 knows feminine worth, whilst
Eliza only realized after considerable effort “Aha! Now I know how to deal with you.
What a fool I was not to think of it before!...”12 her lack of awareness until that
moment of her femininity is most evident by her excited exclamations as she
discovers its value to her. Both women may have differed in arguments, but they
didn’t aim for a finale with the men either, as all enjoyed the intense camaraderie
they had in their relations, and Medea and Eliza both handled it by making use of
their femininity, however both differently.
However, there is also a contrast in how both women view the manifestation of being
feminine, Medea saw it in her physical sexuality as a woman, for when Jason no
longer slept with her, she says “and is that injury / A slight one, do you imagine, to a
woman?...”13 but Eliza saw her femininity as “Every girl has a right to be loved”14
being intellectual desirable to Henry. However there’s also a difference in language;
of Eliza honest wants in securing a future15 and Medea’s needs in her right of
marriage,16 but Medea is the one who’s more explicit with regards to being a female
as she says “we were born women — useless for honest purposes, / But in all kinds
of evil skilled practitioners…”17 were as Eliza thinks nothing of this but “I
Page 3 of 6
Mavarine Du-Marie
Personal ID: M2515473
The Open University
could have been a bad girl if I’d liked, I’ve seen more of some things than you, for all
your learning”18 but alas is still chaste in experience and femininity.
In conclusion, both Medea’s and Eliza’s particularly independent spiritedness meant
the authors defied convention in support of femininity in their treatment of strong
women and made use of this in the plays; in Medea the ending its conveyed as “…the
things we thought would happen do not happen. The unexpected God makes
possible…”19 by the Chorus, and in the play Pygmalion, Shaw wrote: [he roars with
laughter as the play ends]20, but who is the actual male that laughs, being as Shaw
wrote it as an ambiguously as Euripides openly states his male observer, in regards to
Eliza’s and Medea’s behaviour. The treatment of strong feminine characters in the
plays, was the preferable choice in the kind of a woman wanted by very masculine
males, as the feminine will enhance her qualities liken to that of a ‘feline’, as these
females weren’t fearful of exhibiting their femininity as being a woman, when in
private realm of the home nor in public society.
FOOTNOTES
1. Page xvi, Introduction, Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts, by Bernard Shaw, Published by
Penguin Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-141-43950-5, copyright 1913.
2. Page 26, [285-321], Medea and Other Plays by Euripides, translated by Philip Vellacott, Published
by Penguin Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-140-44129-8, copyright 1963.
3. Page 52, [1124-1155], Medea and Other Plays by Euripides, translated by Philip Vellacott, Published
by Penguin Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-140-44129-8, copyright 1963.
4. Page 114, Sequel, Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts, by Bernard Shaw, Published by Penguin
Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-141-43950-5, copyright 1913.
5. Page 107, Sequel, Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts, by Bernard Shaw, Published by Penguin
Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-141-43950-5, copyright 1913.
6. Page 9, Introduction, Medea and Other Plays by Euripides, translated by Philip Vellacott, Published
by Penguin Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-140-44129-8, copyright 1963.
Page 4 of 6
Mavarine Du-Marie
Personal ID: M2515473
The Open University
7. Page 33, [525-562], Medea and Other Plays by Euripides, translated by Philip Vellacott, Published
by Penguin Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-140-44129-8, copyright 1963.
8. Page 78, Act Four, Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts, by Bernard Shaw, Published by Penguin
Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-141-43950-5, copyright 1913.
9. Page 23, [180-213], Medea and Other Plays by Euripides, translated by Philip Vellacott, Published
by Penguin Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-140-44129-8, copyright 1963.
10. Page 91, Act Five, Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts, by Bernard Shaw, Published by Penguin
Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-141-43950-5, copyright 1913.
11. Page 28, [354-385], Medea and Other Plays by Euripides, translated by Philip Vellacott, Published
by Penguin Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-140-44129-8, copyright 1963.
12. Page 104, Act Five, Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts, by Bernard Shaw, Published by Penguin
Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-141-43950-5, copyright 1913.
13. Page 59, [1351-1375], Medea and Other Plays by Euripides, translated by Philip Vellacott,
Published by Penguin Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-140-44129-8, copyright 1963.
14. Page 102, Act Five, Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts, by Bernard Shaw, Published by Penguin
Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-141-43950-5, copyright 1913.
15. Page 102, Act Five, Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts, by Bernard Shaw, Published by Penguin
Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-141-43950-5, copyright 1913.
16. Page 25, [248-284], Medea and Other Plays by Euripides, translated by Philip Vellacott, Published
by Penguin Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-140-44129-8, copyright 1963.
17. Page 29, [386-423], Medea and Other Plays by Euripides, translated by Philip Vellacott, Published
by Penguin Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-140-44129-8, copyright 1963.
18. Page 102, Act Five, Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts, by Bernard Shaw, Published by Penguin
Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-141-43950-5, copyright 1913.
19. Page 61, [1406-1419], Medea and Other Plays by Euripides, translated by Philip Vellacott,
Published by Penguin Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-140-44129-8, copyright 1963.
20. Page 105, Act Five, Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts, by Bernard Shaw, Published by Penguin
Classics, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-141-43950-5, copyright 1913.
REFERENCES
Medea and Other Plays by Euripides, translated by Philip Vellacott, Published by Penguin Classics,
Penguin Books, ISBN 0-140-44129-8, copyright 1963.
Pygmalion: A Romance in Five Acts, by Bernard Shaw, Published by Penguin Classics, Penguin
Books, ISBN 0-141-43950-5, copyright 1913.
Unit 19, Pygmalion, Myths and Conventions, Block 5, A103 An Introduction to the Humanities, The
Open University, second edition, published in 1998.
Unit 20 and 21, Medea, Myths and Conventions, Block 5, A103 An Introduction to the Humanities,
The Open University, second edition, published in 1998.
Page 5 of 6
Mavarine Du-Marie
Personal ID: M2515473
The Open University
Pages 88-96, Section C: Studying Pygmalion, Resource Book 3, A103 An Introduction to the
Humanities, The Open University, second edition, published in 1998.
Pages 97-140, Section D, Medea, Resource Book 3, A103 An Introduction to the Humanities, The
Open University, second edition, published in 1998.
A103 – TV19 “Living Doll: A Background to Shaw’s Pygmalion”, Final Transcript, The Open
University Production Centre, Arts Faculty, Final Tape No. DOU8948, First Presentation 1998.
A103 – TV20 “Euripides’ Medea”, Final Transcript, The Open University Production Centre, Arts
Faculty, Final Tape No. DOU9360, First Presentation 1997.
A103 – TV21 “The Myth of Medea: Authenticity in Greek Drama”, Final Transcript, The Open
University Production Centre, Arts Faculty, Final Tape No. DOU9245, First Presentation 1998.
A103 – AC9 “Medea by Euripides”, Final Transcript, The Open University Production Centre, Arts
Faculty, Final Tape No. MKCM2339/2340, First Presentation 1998.
A103 – AC10 “Translating Greek Drama”, Final Transcript, The Open University Production Centre,
Arts Faculty, Final Tape No. MKCM2336, First Presentation 1998.
Page 6 of 6