Alcestis (play) - Criticism

Criticism

Critics have debated how to categorise the play's genre. It employs both tragic and comic elements and was performed in the usual place reserved for satyr plays when it was first produced. Conacher explores how Euripides expanded the myth of Admetus and Alcestis and added comic and folk tale elements. Beye also discusses legendary and fairy tale aspects of the play.

Alcestis is also a popular text for women's studies. Critics have indicated that the play's central focus is Admetus rather than Alcestis. Segal, for example, has written of the play's patriarchal aspects. The nature of sacrifice, especially in ancient times, has been variously analysed by Rabinowitz, Vellacott, and Burnett, who explain that ancient Greek morality differed considerably from that of the present day. Modern interpretations of the play have been extremely varied, so much so that critics (such as Michelini and Gounaridou) have noted their failure to agree on much of anything. Gounaridou argues that Euripides meant for the play to be understood in many different ways. The psychologies and motivations of Admetus and Alcestis are especially disputed, with the question of Admetus's selfishness strongly contested.