Ramani 1
Haren Ramani
Professor Jennifer McBryan
CAL 105-K
23 September 2016
Protagonist’s Ability to Solve Problems
When faced with conflict, people are subject to taking action in an attempt to overcome
the obstacles for the betterment of themselves or society. However, in deciding how to go about
solving the problem, the effectiveness, the consequences, and the social acceptability of the
action each actively contribute in a person’s judgement when making a decision. Moreover, in
Euripedes’ Medea and William Shakespeare’s The Tempest, the protagonists of the play, Medea
and Prospero, both encounter numerous conflicts in the duration of the play which test each
other’s morality, ethics, and overall skill in being able to solve problems. Medea faces being
cheated on by her husband and being exiled while Prospero has been exiled and wishes to return
back to his country to be the rightful Duke of Milan. Conversely, Prospero’s approach to solving
conflicts is more effective and acceptable than that of Medea’s. Prospero makes more pragmatic
resolutions to the problems that he faces compared to Medea who makes radical decisions that
are not entirely practical or socially acceptable.
Initially, both protagonists are confronted by dealing with betrayal and deception in
which Medea responds with murder while Prospero is able to come to a realization about his
methods to fixing the situation. In Medea, as a response to Jason’s disloyalty, Medea plots for
revenge hoping that the, “ornaments that she [Glauce, daughter of Creon] take and put them on,
miserably shall she die, and likewise everyone who touches her,” (Euripides 31). Medea’s means
of solving her problem is that she is inclined to murder Glauce, the individual who has no direct
contribution to the overall problem, rather than killing Jason, who is the primary cause for the
Ramani 2
actual problem itself. Her solution to solving the problem is only indirectly effective since Jason
is still alive and unaffected after the time of murder. Medea’s solution also entitles to kill
“everyone who touches” Glauce as well, but she does not consider the lives of innocent people
that she will be killing, and her action is therefore an unacceptable approach to solving the
problem. Likewise, Prospero from The Tempest, plots for revenge and is able to realize that,
“Though with their [Antonio and Alonso] high wrongs I am struck to the quick,/ Yet with my
nobler reason against my fury/ Do I take part: the rarer action is/ In virtue than in vengeance”
(Shakespeare 134-135) rather than killing “everyone” as Medea approaches. In this situation,
Prospero realizes that the “nobler” thing to do is to reason with Antonio and Alonso rather than
to make them suffer from his revenge for their betrayal. When comparing the two methods for
solving problems, Prospero’s method is more effective and practical because he is able to reason
