Why have some modern critics considered Euripides’ deus ex machina endings artificial?

Modern critics often characterize the deus ex machina endings in the plays of Euripides as artificial or clumsy because they rely on the sudden, unexpected intervention of a god to resolve a plot crisis that otherwise appears insoluble.12

While this device was a recognized convention in 5th-century BCE Greek drama—named for the mēchanē (crane) used to lower a deity onto the stage—modern authorities view the technique as a contrived narrative solution. For Euripides, however, the appearance of a god often served a practical, structural purpose: it provided the audience with essential information that could not be revealed through the natural progression of the dramatic action.132

Unlike his predecessors, Euripides frequently depicted these gods as irrational or indifferent to human justice, further distancing his work from the traditional moral frameworks of Aeschylus and Sophocles. Consequently, while the epilogue of a god was likely more acceptable to ancient audiences, contemporary critics often find the abrupt shift in tone and the reliance on divine intervention to be a structural weakness in his otherwise psychologically realistic dramas.24