Medea vs Medea: Adapting the Ancient Myth
Antonia Tsamouris*
Medea. Directed by Simon Stone. Dramaturgy by Peter Van Kraaij. Translation into Dutch by Peter Van Kraaij and Vera Hoogstad. Set design by Bob Cousins. Lighting design by Bernie van Velzen. Costumes by An D’Huys. Cast: Marieke Heebink, Alexander Elmecky, Bart Slegers, Eva Heijnen, Evgenia Brendes, Leon Voorberg, Mente Wijsman, Fedy Bakker. Staged at Pallas Theatre, Athens, Greece, 9–11 July 2024.
Simon Stone, the Australian enfant terrible of modern European theatre, has adapted Euripides’ myth of Medea into a contemporary play. Inspired by a family tragedy that took place in the United States in 1996, where a mother killed her two children and then set fire to them and herself, he highlighted problematic relationships, especially marital ones, and their disastrous consequences that could lead to horrific actions, such as killing one’s own children. That way, Stone wanted to discuss the survival of ancient myths through the ages. Although he tried to deliver a modern insight into Euripides’ tragedy, he did not manage to impart a modern essence to Medea.

Medea was a barbarian, according to the ancient Greeks, who assumed anyone but Greeks to be barbarians, lacking their education and cultivation. Furthermore, Medea, coming from Colchis, near the Black Sea, was a descendant both of Circe, the witch who held Odysseus for a year with her magic and her allurement, and the Sun God (Helios).
Medea’s unsurpassable charms and courage were what gained Jason the Golden Fleece. Because of her love for Jason, she did not hesitate to go to extremes, killing her own brother and abandoning her homeland and family. She followed Jason to Greece, as a ksēnos (foreigner), where she had a new family with him. However, Medea met Jason’s ingratitude when he left her for a younger Greek princess, who could later make him King—only by marrying a Greek princess could Jason become King—something Medea could not offer to him, being non-Greek. Medea’s despair, as well as her anger against Jason’s cruelty, led her to the decision to kill both his bride-to-be and her father, as well as her own beloved sons. The Euripidean tragedy finishes with Medea’s abduction on her grandfather Helios’s chariot, unpunished by both divine and human law. That way, the ancient tragedian dared, within a male dominated society, to show Medea as a brave woman, in a performance exclusively by and for men. At the same time, Jason was presented as a feeble man, deserving neither the wife nor the family that he had.
Although Stone named his tragedy Medea, he named his leading couple Anna and Lucas, respectively. Changing their names and structurally stepping in the tragedy’s footsteps, nonetheless, did not modernize the play. Anna, who has been married for many years to Lucas, ends up in a mental hospital after having tried to poison him, having found out about his illicit relationship with a younger woman, Clara. The play starts on the day when Anna returns to their family house, only to discover that she has not only lost her husband to another woman but also the custody of her two sons, as well as her job, since she worked as a doctor at the research center that Clara’s father led.

Struggling to maintain whatever she can of her previous life, she is driven to insanity once more and ends up killing Clara and her father, as well as her sons. In a change from Euripides’ tragedy, Stone’s heroine commits suicide, showing her weakness in a society which obviously favours men like Lucas.

Lucas, on the other hand, is depicted as a naughty adolescent having no responsibilities whatsoever, always carried away by other people’s desires: he goes to bed with Anna because she seduces him, and he impregnates Clara because her father tells him to. Stone opted for a theatre play based on social clichés, assuming that men are, for some inexplicable reason, inevitably driven by their instincts to fall for young women, thus abandoning their wives to depression and insanity. These ideas would much better belong to the well-made plays of the previous century.
Stone’s mise-en-scène, however, was much more interesting and artistically stimulating than his text. The performance followed, especially in the beginning, a twofold approach using both the stage action and a camera on a projection to show what was actually happening on stage. The stage action along with the video projection introduced the audience into a parallel sense of “reality,” where a documentation may be distanced from what is been documented.

Quite interesting also was the totally white stage design, resembling both the mental hospital from which Anna has returned and her lost purity and love for Lucas. Towards the end, black ashes begin to fall on stage, growing into a huge hill covering everything and everyone, except for Lucas, thus signifying the imminent death both of Clara and her father, as well as Anna’s two sons and herself. That way, those implicated in a wrong deed are presented as being equal in punishment: both Clara and her father, who encouraged the break-up of a marriage and the destruction of a family, and the couple’s two adolescent sons, whose effort to keep their family together led also to disastrous results. Stone’s ashes also signified the “dirt” that was brought into Anna’s life with Lucas’ extramarital relationship, as well as the fire, reminding the audience of the American family, the playwright’s original inspiration. Either way, it was a very innovative and intriguing scenic and directorial effect, with its reference to the Euripidean Medea’s uplifting by King Helios, whose light and warmth is able to burn anything and anyone nearing him.

Marieke Heebink was fascinating as Anna, trying to highlight the dead-end that can confront modern women. Heebink depicted Anna’s despair at losing the life she had, just because she is growing old. Leon Voorberg’s Lucas was gripping as an attention-seeker, bringing tragedy to everyone’s life, including his own. Torn between the life he had and a new one, Voorberg highlighted the hesitancy of modern post-middle age men. Eva Heijnen’s Clara was also interesting, since her character is not seen in the ancient tragedy but was put on stage by Stone. Heijnen realistically depicted a modern, young, spoiled woman who steals somebody else’s man without hesitation, indifferent to the consequences in other people’s lives. Bart Slegers as Clara’s Father, as well as Anna’s and Lucas’ boss, managed to depict the authoritarian capitalist who intervenes in everyone’s life, dictating to them what to do. Accustomed to taking whatever he wants, he assumes that people are like enterprises. Last, the psychiatrist (Evgenia Brendes) and the librarian (Alexander Elmecky), in whose bookstore Anna later seeks for a job, eloquently replace the ancient Chorus, taking the part of the ancient dīmos (people).

Overall, Simon Stone’s adaptation of Medea proved problematic. Stone tried to follow in the footsteps of the ancient tragedy, failing, though, to maintain Euripides’ essence and finally delivering a play with a much less feminist approach than the original tragedy. His stimulating mise-en-scène, however, shows that his scenic talent is certainly better than his writing one.

*Antonia Tsamouris holds a BA in Theatre Studies (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki) and an MA in Drama and Theatre Studies (Royal Holloway University of London). She holds a PhD and a Post-doctoral thesis from the School of English (Aristotle University). Member of the Greek section of IATC and of the Board of the Hellenic Association of Theatre and Performing Arts Critics (Secretary), as well as of the Board of Directors’ at the Edward Albee Society. She has contributed with articles and reviews in many magazines and books, both in Greece and abroad.
Copyright © 2024 Antonia Tsamouris
Critical Stages/Scènes critiques, #30, Dec. 2024
e-ISSN: 2409-7411
This work is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution International License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.