Il mito di Medea è sempre stato uno dei miei preferiti fin da prima del liceo. Questa donna così forte, così ribelle, così anticonvenzionale suscita un innegabile fascino su un'adolescente. Quindi non ho potuto resistere a leggermi la riscrittura del mito da un punto di vista femminile, dal punto di vista di una cultura matriarcale, come quella da dove Medea proveniva - la Colchide.

E allora vediamo subito, con l'autrice, che in una cultura matriarcale era impossibile che Medea avesse ucciso prima il fratello e poi i figli. Quindi ci viene proposta un'interpretazione di Medea depositaria di un sapere antico e femminile in contrapposizione con la cultura patriarcale di Corinto. Medea è una donna, una straniera, una miscredente, una ribelle. Medea non rispetta le consuetudini delle donne di Corinto, Medea non si assoggetta agli uomini. E per questo diventerà il capro espiatorio perfetto per debellare la peste che inizierà ad ammorbare la città.

Suo marito, Giasone, non farà nulla per impedirlo. Le cose vanno così, devono andare così. Tutto quello che è accaduto è colpa di Medea, di Medea che non ha voluto adattarsi. Di Medea che non ha potuto chiudere gli occhi di fronte all'atroce delitto sul quale si fonda la società di Corinto.

Ma Medea non è Glauce, la secondogenite di Creonte, re di Corinto, che ha visto, che sa, ma preferisce nascondersi dietro il suo "male" pur di non affrontare la verità. E così la sua femminilità sarà annichilita e svilita dagli uomini.

E' un romanzo estremamente femminile, dove si mostra il male che può derivare da una cultura patriarcale. E dove si mostra che nemmeno una cultura matriarcale è esente da orrori. La soluzione sta nell'equilibrio che nessuno ha ancora trovato.

Christa Wolf: "E' sempre più evidente che solo l'interazione degli sguardi - femminile e maschile - può mediare un'immagine corretta del mondo. Un mondo che dev'essere plasmato da uomini e donne in modo paritario, a seconda del loro specifico punto di vista. Questo condurrebbe a priorità ben diverse da quelle che attualmente ci condizionano. Ad altre gerarchie di valori. Ma da tutto questo siamo ancora distanti anni luce". ( )

’I am Medea, the sorceress, if you all will have it so. The wild woman, the foreigner. You shall not belittle me.’’

I’ve always declared-to the dismay of many- that if I ever had a daughter, I would name her Medea. My fascination with this larger-than-life woman has been undiminished ever since I started learning about the ancient, endless, eternal myths of my country from a relatively young age. Call me ‘’weird’’ but dark, controversial figures have accompanied me for the most part of my reading life. It also helped that my mother had the knowledge and the patience to explain to me how myths were made in a society of men, by men and for men. World Culture is loaded with mythical women who have been vilified as an excuse for the stupidity, disloyalty and absolute lack of courage on men’s part. Eve, Medea, Helen of Troy, Pandora, Circe, Phaedra, Jocasta...The list goes on and on….A woman can either be a whore or a saint. Too bad for the ‘’willing’’ ones because the first team makes for the best of stories. In this extraordinary moment in European Literature, Christa Wolf reimagines Medea’s story, focusing on her last days in Corinth and culminating with the death of her sons. The result is a haunting, raw elegy of broken promises and thwarted dreams….

’They’ve made what they need out of each of us. Out of you, the Hero, and out of me, the Wicked Witch. They’ve driven us apart like that.’’

People create myths to explain passions, hopes, wishes and inclinations. They need the heroes, the ones who battle against gods and men, as they need the scapegoats responsible when the hero goes astray. What happens when the Hero succeeds only after the Scapegoat has provided the necessary help? Well, noone cares about this tiny detail, all that matters is that the job is done. However, when everything crumbles because of disloyalty and ambition, it’s time for the Scapegoat to be driven out. Medea is either a healer or a bringer of curse. This is what the mob, the ever-changing, witless crowd believes. She is the Other, the Foreigner, the one who threatens the established order with her powers and invocations. Jason is blaming his obsession and lust to Medea, always unwilling to admit what a phony ‘’hero’’ he is. He doesn’t care anymore, the glory is his and it’s time to find a younger, docile wife who would worship him without questions and thoughts of her own…

‘’Is it a comfort to think that people everywhere fall short of the agreements they have made?’’

I feel that this quote expresses the essence of our times extremely accurately. In the outstanding introduction, Margaret Atwood refers to the political and social background and the status quo that shaped Wolf’s work. Coming from the troubled land of former East Germany, it is clear that her political and social views influenced her writing. How could it have been otherwise? Medea was written in 1996, six years after the reunification of Germany, and while reading, one can feel a deep sense of bitterness and intense distrust towards the institution of the state and the authorities. Knowing the political context, Medea becomes much more than a retelling of an ancient legend.

The writing and the characterization are unique. The portrait of Medea is moving, sad, haunting...There are quite a few exceptional descriptions of the city of Corinth and the nightly scenes are eerie, foreboding. Don’t expect any infanticides, gore, violence or sex and the end will surprise you. I will not compare Wolf’s work to Euripides or Seneca. Each one is a different beast, all masterpieces in their own right. However, I know which one I prefer. Wolf’s esoteric, haunting, solemn cry for the truth and for a world that turned out quite different than promised. For the innocent victims of the frustrations of the mighty, the demonization of the weakest links.

‘’Up there in the dark, night-blue sky, like a slightly tilted silver of peel, the crescent moon was still swimming, though on the wane, reminding me of my waning years, my Colchian moon, endowed with the power to pull the sun up over the edge of the earth every morning.’’ ( )

Excellent take on the Medea myth/legend. The people were all believable and there was plenty to think about for modern times as well. My biggest complaint was that Medea (and the rest of the Colchean people?) was described as being black ("dark brown skin", "crinkly" curly hair) which strikes me as odd since she came from what is now part of northern Turkey. ( )

Ein fragwürdiger Versuch, Medea zu rehabilitieren. Wolfs Medea ist keine Mörderin, sondern eine mißverstandene unschuldige Ausländerin, die Opfer politischer Intriguen wird. Die Geschichte wird – im Vergleich zu Wolfs früheren Kassandra Projekt – aus der Perspektive mehrere Agierenden im Geschehen (Jason, Kreon, Glauke) erzählt. Leider, so mein Eindruck, entsteht dadurch keine Stimmenvielfalt, weil alle Erzähler ihre – Medeas – Darstellung der Ereignisse bestätigen. Medea wird als Sündenbock gebraucht.

Diese Deutung der Geschichte stört aus mehrere Gründen. Erstens weil Wolf teilweise den Anspruch zu erheben scheint, dass ihre Version die ‚wahre‘ ursprüngliche Geschichte ist und dass Schriftsteller einer patriarchalischen Gesellschaft Medea bloß zu Mörderin gemacht haben. Weit interessanter hätte ich eine Erzählung gefunden, die die ideologischen Hintergründe der Geschichte kritisiert oder in Frage stellt, ohne die Tatsachen der Geschichte selbst verändern zu müssen. Dadurch wäre auch ein Dialog mit der Quellen entstanden, die hier nicht möglich ist, weil Wolf ihre Gültigkeit nicht anerkennt.

Wolf verkennt die Faszination dieser Figur, indem sie Medea freisprechen will. Medea fasziniert, weil sie eine komplexe Figur ist, die dazu fähig ist, eine grausame Rache durchzuführen, ohne dass sie dabei ihre Menschlichkeit und Anspruch auf unser Mitleid verliert. Wir müssen Medeas Handlungen nicht gutheissen, um die Zwickmühle zu verstehen, in der sie steckt. Wolfs Erzählung verdrängt diese Komplexität, den Zwiespalt unserer Gefühle. Auch deswegen überzeugt sie nicht.

Letztens stört auch der Verdacht, das Wolf durch diesen mythischen Stoff eigentlich die neuere Vergangenheit abarbeitet. Man kann (und es wird auch häufig getan) im Roman Analogien zur ehemaligen DDR und der Bundesrepublik sehen. Angesichts der Stasi-Vergangenheit erscheint es problematisch, dass es Wolf offensichtlich so viel an die Rechtfertigung ihrer Protagonistin liegt. Nein, ihre Medea hat nichts getan. Nicht in Kolchis, nicht in Korinth. Die Fremde aus dem Osten wird von Anderen verleumdet, die ihre eigene Schuld verheimlichen wollen. Auch in dieser Hinsicht wäre eine differenziertere Untersuchung der Schuldfrage wünschenswert: kein unschuldiges Opfer, sondern eine Frau, die ihre Fehler – und ja, auch ihre Verbrechen – zugibt und Rechenschaft ablegt.

Ein Kritiker hat von den „verpassten Chancen“ des Romans gesprochen. Diesem Urteil kann ich nur zustimmen. Der Roman hätte eine interessante und vielseitige kritische Interpretation eines alten Stoffes sein können, hat aber meines Erachtens den Ziel verfehlt, weil Wolf zu viel in ihrem ideologischen Programm verhaftet bleibt.

Het verhaal van Medea, verteld door haarzelf en de mensen om haar heen. Dit boek zet Medea neer als een zelfbewuste vrouw die in het vreemde Korinthe waar men niet gewend is aan zulke vrouwen, uiteindelijk de zondebok wordt. Over haar gaan praatjes de ronde doen, op basis waarvan de Medea die we kennen uit de Griekse drama's wordt geformeerd. Intriges en manipulaties zijn van alle tijden (het boek is geschreven vlak na de Wende).