not enough to compel Jason to keep his side of the bargain. She thus fails to express meaningful remorse for the actions in themselves. In Repentance, Punishment, and Mercy, Jeffrie Murphy explains that remorse is popularly understood to be evidence of good character: “[The] repentant person has better character than the unrepentant person … [and] simply deserves less punishment” (157). This is because people generally view remorse as “a measure of whether the defendant’s bad act is consistent with his character or a deviation from it.” A failure to show remorse, in other words, means that a person’s wrongful acts are taken as true expressions of their underlying character. In such an analysis, Medea is not sorry that she committed treason and murder because such actions are not at odds with her character. Rather, her regret is a result of Jason’s betrayal and the vulnerable position in which it leaves her. His taking of a new wife draws her past actions into question only insofar as they did not serve her interests in the long run. Audience members need not parse the language of Medea’s “remorse” to judge her character. Her reputation is established early on. In fact, it is important to note that Medea’s “bad character” is not without consequence for her within the world of the play, most notably before she kills her sons. Creon, the father of Glauke, Jason’s new wife, makes the decision to exile Medea from Corinth based on his negative view of her character. He tells her he wants her gone because, “I fear you’ll harm my daughter / Why? Because your nature, clever and vindictive, / thrives on evil and because you sting with loss” (lines 301-303). Creon chooses to exile Medea because he fears her character based on the actions of which she has proven herself capable. In a sense that will be elaborated soon, Creon’s exile of Medea amounts to a potentially devastating punishment – this is before she has wronged the Corinthian king or Jason. In effect, Medea is being punished for her bad character in the absence of a wrongdoing, or to preempt an undetermined future wrongdoing. To audiences, Creon’s decision would likely seem appropriate, especially when the little mercy he shows her – allowing her an extra day in Corinth – gets him and his daughter killed, and indirectly results in Medea’s murder of her sons. Arguably, the play vindicates Creon’s punishment and cautions against affording bad characters sympathy. However, it is also true that the play’s framing of Medea’s character in terms of her past actions limits the nature of the audience’s engagement with her. Consider, for example, how repeated recounting of her past actions make it a challenge for audiences to see her escape at the play’s conclusion as anything other than an injustice. Imagine that Medea had been perfectly blameless, or even virtuous, before Jason betrayed her. In such a light, her murder of her sons would have seemed profoundly out of character for her. It would be impossible to explain her actions in terms of her settled disposition, and the audience might feel challenged to consider her actions in a different light. 35
36 Publizr Home