Category: Literary Criticism

Social Hierarchy has existed for decades. The societal construct based hierarchy places people into categories defined by their financial standing across a scale, ranging from upper class down to the poverty level. The upper and lower class are often segregated, living in different parts of town and having different experiences due to the opposite lifestyles that they live. In Nicholas Sparks’s novel, The Best of Me, Dawson Cole, a boy from an unprosperous, criminal family meets Amanda Collier, a wealthy, robust girl from Pamlico County, in Oriental. Their relationship is prosperous, but due to their different aspirations the relationship takes a misfortunate turn. Later in life the two individuals are reunited, and both learn how the stereotypes of their social class can impact them negatively. Major roadblocks that they must overcome begin with objection from Amanda’s parents. The Colliers disapprove because Dawson is of a lower social class than Amanda, hence he is unworthy of her. Secondly, the dilemma that Dawson is faced with when their conflicting plans for their future clash. In Kasie West’s novel The Distance Between Us an oppositional view is portrayed. The lower class family does not like the wealthy because they judge them as obnoxious and selfish (254). The novel tells the story Caymen, a teenage girl helping her mom run a failing porcelain doll shop that is drowning in debt and Xander, the son of a successful hotel franchise owner. In their journey of a relationship they face dire struggles. They must overcome they opposing opinion that Caymen’s mother forces and the internal battle that Caymen struggles with as she feels like she is going against her morals and values by dating Xander. Both relationships must endure a lot of obstruction including rebellion, objection and identity crisis. Though, all relationships face conflict, being of opposite social standing makes it nearly impossible to maintain a healthy relationship.

In The Best of Me Dawson and Amanda meet in high school, when they get paired up for a chemistry assignment. They went to school together for years, but never exchanged much of a conversation until Junior year (Sparks 16). Amanda Collier was popular and came from a prestigious family. They are the opposite of Dawson’s family who reside in a trailer park. His mother left when he was young, leaving Dawson with his abusive father and cousins. His family is known for many treacherous acts (10). Dawson decides to run away and hide in his Neighbor Tuck’s garage where he works fixing cars. Tuck is a very significant person in Dawson’s life. He states “Tuck had become the most important person in his life, and Dawson couldn’t imagine anything that would change that. Until the day Amanda Collier entered his world.” (16). This shows how very important Amanda is to Dawson. He values her among anyone else in his life and their social standing did not influence how they viewed each other at all in the beginning of their relationship. The only thing that affected the relationship was the fact that Amanda was off to University and Dawson did not want to hold her back from reaching her full potential.

As for its counterpart, The Distance Between Us. Caymen meets Xander while working in the family doll store trying to sell him a doll for his grandmother. When he walks in, she immediately makes a judgements about him. She thinks to herself, “The untrained eye might not pick up on the richness oozing off this guy, but I know rich and he reeks of it” (West 2). She also assumes that he has had “a lifetime of privilege”(3). Caymen has never met this boy prior and knows nothing about him, in fact she refers to him as “ Mr. Rich” (2). Overtime, Xander continuously returns to the doll store bringing treats like hot chocolate and walks her to school in the mornings to get to know her. Throughout the process of Xander trying to get to know her, Caymen pushes him away because she wants nothing to do with a rich guy. She makes snarky remarks to him trying to drive him away. While she is hanging out with her best friend she starts to make fun of him when he comes in for a visit “Another day where mingling with commoners helps you appreciate your life more?”He is offended, but again returns another day to try to win her over.

The relationship between Dawson and Amanda is something that both of them want, and are willing to fight for. Dawson really exaggerates the saying “If you love somebody, set them free” by Richard Bach. Their relationship ends only because Dawson loves her enough to let her go to live her life. Caymen does not want to be with Xander because she is afraid of many problems that will arise if she is with him. She fears that he is judging her and she does not want to go against her mom’s wishes. She even tries to force herself to be in a relationship with a boy named Mason. He is in an uncouth garageband and falls in the lower class. This in turn portrays him as a more compatible bachelor for Caymen. This is not practical, because she loves Xander. Caymen’s mother dislikes all people of the upper class because her wealthy, ex abandoned them and moved to New York City. Caymen’s mother has left her with this ideology that all rich people are bad and are only looking out for themselves, when in reality Xander really cares about Caymen. The problem is not that she hates Xander. She is afraid of the life that he leads. In a conversation between the two about their fears, Xander asks, “ Is there anything you’re afraid of?” which she in turn thinks, “You”(West 117). Caymen is fearful of what Xander stands for; the money, the power, all of it is a foreign concept to Caymen.

One of the biggest obstacles standing in Amanda and Dawson’s way is their parents. Amanda’s parents, the Colliers are wealthy and know very well who the Cole family is, as does everyone else in the small town of Pamlico. They are the kind of people that you avoid, so of course when they discover that Amanda is fraternizing with Dawson Cole they are concerned. Their concerns do not consider Amanda’s feelings because Dawson and Amanda are happy together. Amanda’s mother begged her to break up with Dawson and her father stopped talking to her (Sparks 19). Dawson believed that “everything and everyone seemed stacked against them”(19). Truly the odds of the relationship working at the time are not the best. The constant fight in the Collier family home regarding the relationship began to drive Amanda closer to Dawson and It caused her heartbreak. While Dawson loves her a lot he hates to see her go through this. Due to the fact that Amanda’s parents are so concerned about their relationship “he gently suggested that it might be better for her if they stopped seeing each other.” (19) Dawson does not want their relationship to end, but he can see that Amanda’s parents are not going to back off. Dawson is aware that her parents dislike him. Most people in Pamlico county do, but the Colliers have a specific dislike to him because he is lower class. Mr Collier even calls Dawson “a worthless piece of white trash” (18). The Colliers look down on him because if people were to see a Collier dating a Cole, it could ruin their reputation, which is something especially important to people in the upper class. After continuing the relationship a bit longer, Amanda’s parents put their foot down and tell her that if she is going to continue her relationship with Dawson they are going to kick her out of the house and they will not pay for University. She considers this and decides to stay with him, but Dawson is not as naive as Amanda. They begin discussing how it would work out for them to move in together and Dawson realizes that he needs to breakup with her or she will not go to school and everything between Amanda and her parents will be ruined. If Amanda’s parents were okay with the relationship, they would have stayed together. Even though Amanda is soon off to university. They planned to call and visit every so often, but with the burden of Amanda’s parents their relationship is nearly unattainable to maintain.

Not only are the odds against the relationship, but Dawson has his own set of dilemmas. He is unable to go off to University even though he is very smart. His father used to beat him for having good grades because it made him look like he thought he was better than the Coles. His father seems to be insecure with himself because of how he lashes out every time he sees him being successful. Mr. Cole wants to belittle Dawson down to make himself look stronger. Dawson can see past this and knows his father is weak, but that does not help the fact that he is very low on money and if he left, his father and cousins would probably come after him. There is no way Dawson is leaving Pamlico County and he thinks that there is more out in the world for her. Dawson is living in Tuck’s garage and fixing cars for money, buying only the necessities until his father and cousins, Ted and Abee, show up at the garage demanding money from him. This is a battle that Dawson loses. His father returns weekly for the money and Dawson feels like he is conformed to a life of being a poor failure who does not deserve Amanda. Between his neglectful father, and Amanda’s parents disapproving of him, he is beginning to believe that he is “a worthless piece of white trash” (18) like Amanda’s father called him. Dawson is well aware of the fact that society dislikes him because of his family which just makes him loathe them more.

In The distance between us, Caymen’s mother has a vendetta against the upper class because her ex husband was rich and she is stereotypical to people of the upper class to arrogant and self-centered. Because Caymen is well aware of her mother’s hate towards rich people, she is afraid to even tell her mother about her relationship. This puts a strain on her relationship with her mother as well because they are close and tell eachother everything. When Caymen finally tells her mother about the relationship, her mom does not react well. Her mother, Susan is trying to protect her from the pain that she suffered when her rich, husband left because she still feels hurt and used. She means well but when Caymen tells her that she is in a relationship with Xander, she reacts by saying “That’s all you are to him though. Fun. Can’t you see that? You are just a little bit of excitement for him, Caymen, something different, until he’s ready to settle down for real… if you trust my judgement or care about my opinion at all, you won’t”(254). Caymen’s mom is passionate about her not being with Xander anymore and is nearly shaming her for dating him. This conversation escalated to Susan yelling “Your father never wanted to see you! That’s my point Caymen. Don’t you get that? He left us”(254). The fact that Sausan brings up Caymen’s father Proves how She is relating Caymen’s relationship with Xander to her old relationship. Caymen and her mother are angry and avoiding each other for a while which pushes her closer to Xander. further damaging her relationship with her mother. It is not healthy for Caymen to rely on Xander only because she is angry with her mother and is unsure of who else to turn to. This is a burden in Caymen and Xander’s way because she can not balance her relationship, when she is having family conflicts. Caymen really cares about her mother’s opinion, but she does not want to stop seeing him. Caymen’s mother shaming her for dating a rich guy really takes a toll on Caymen’s confidence in the relationship, leaving her with conflicts throughout.

While Caymen struggles with the conflicts with her mom. She also struggles with society judging her for being poor. It leads to her making a ton of false assumptions and judgments about other people. It starts with Xander taking Caymen out for dinner with his friends. They enter the restaurant and are greeted by his friends. One of them says “You taking in strays now Xander?”(125). Caymen is very angered by this statement and goes home. This eventually leads to Caymen being angry with Xander for a while and they stops talking for a bit. She makes false assumptions such as that Xander is just using her to feel better about himself, like some kind of charity case. She goes through an internal conflict where she feels like she has to date Mason instead of Xander because he is in the same social class as her. She does not like Mason that much, he is not a gentleman and most importantly he is not Xander. She feels as if she can not date Xander because he is rich. Caymen believes that she is not good enough to date Xander to the point where it makes her insecure, while Caymen’s mom believes they are too good for rich people, like they are superior when really she is just full of envy because of how she was treated in the past ,even though it may be different for her daughter.

In comparison The best of me and The Distance between us have a common theme of parents rejecting their children’s significant other, but for opposite reasons. Dawson is not good enough for the Colliers because he is poor, while the Caymen’s mom dislikes Xander because he is rich. She just makes assumptions about him and his intentions such as “in a few weeks Xander will be done seeing how the other half lives” even though he really intends to be in a real relationship with her, so it is a bit obnoxious and judgmental of her to think that of him. Both of the poorer characters also suffer from their parents inadequate attitudes. For Dawson, he is suffering his father’s drunken, abusive tendencies while Caymen suffers from her mother’s judgmental attitude and her mother keeping secrets from her in the time when their business is going bankrupt. They both struggle with the internal battle of not knowing if they should continue with the relationship because of the hurdles in their way. Both of them has the odds stacked against them and while Dawson and Amanda are always willing to work through their problems, whereas with Caymen and Xander if a rough patch hits she leaves and stays mad at him for a week while she deals with her conflicts alone, until eventually they get together again. From the beginning the odds were not in either relationships favors, but the struggles that the impecunious characters face make the relationship much more difficult to maintain.

After the time spent at Tuck’s cottage with Amanda, Dawson feels like everything is going perfect, it is just like the old times when they were teenagers, in love. They both sat there thinking “There was a moment, just a moment, when she was able to imagine a different life that might have been hers, the kind of life she knew the she’d always really wanted.” (140). They both realize how good they go together, but just when everything is going perfect, his past begins to sneak up on him. Dawson has successfully avoided his father and cousins for the past 20 years, but when he returned, he was found by Ted and Abee. They recognize him and still have it out to get it. Dawson walks into a restaurant and sees that chaos has broken loose, he is trying to help someone get out but as he is leaving he is shot by his cousin Ted. Amanda and Dawson are star crossed lovers. They are destined to not work and once again the odds are stacked against them.

Caymen faces the struggle of the doll store that is run by her and her mom in a large sum of financial trouble and her mom leaves her in the dark about their financial situation and family situations. In the end Caymen finds out that her mother’s parents, Caymen’s grandparents are the richest people in California. Her mother hides the rich life from her, and any information about her father hidden from her. This leads to despair and frustration because Caymen did not think that her mother would lie to her, especially about such big things, but it makes her lose trust in her mother and causes her to be distraught. Even though her mother was only trying to protect her from the stress that it would have put on her if she had know all of those things. Caymen is also frustrated with how much responsibility she has at the doll store. She even says “for just one second I think of a life without the doll store. For that one second I feel free.”(43). The doll store is suppose to be passed on to her even though Caymen does not really want to run the doll store forever. With all of the combined stresses it makes it difficult for her to handle her relationship with Xander, as that is just another thing to worry about. Xander is also seen to have a problem similar to Caymans. His father expects him to run the family Hotel chain, but Xander has no desire to fulfil his father’s wishes. This makes Caymen annoyed because he thinks they are the same when she thinks that she has went through more than he has because of her social status. “I want to tell him that if he thinks he has found some sort of connection with me through our similar situations he should think again.” She thinks to herself. Caymen does not see his issue to be similar to hers. She sees nearly all of his issues to be invalid because he is very rich. It is an unfair assumption for her to make as having a lot of money can often lead to problems on its own.

Throughout both novels it is a common occurance to see the lower class characters struggling emotionally throughout the relationship. Their main struggles were bittersweet, while Dawson finally finds the life that he has dreamed of for the past twenty years and is with Amanda, he is soon murdered, but his heart saves Amanda’s son who was in an accident. While Caymen discovers a ton of secrets that her mother had been hiding from her, but in the end her mother gives her permission to meet her father and she meets her grandparents. While this did cause them both confusion and pain it also gave them something that they had been desiring for so long.

In conclusion, The Best Of Me by Nicholas sparks and The Distance Between Us by Kasie West both offer different viewpoints on people of different social classes. Spark’s book shows how the rich family disapproves of the boy from the lower class, while West’s book shows the opposite perception of how the upper class boy is judged as obnoxious and rejected by the lower class. While both characters have something to overcome, It is clearly portrayed that the more indigent character in the two books has more to overcome with their internal struggles as well as either being oppressed and judged by other members of society.

Works Cited

1. “Richard Bach Quotes.” BrainyQuote, Xplore, www.brainyquote.com/quotes/richard_bach_136009.
2. Sparks, Nicholas. The Best of Me. Grand Central Publishing, 2012.
3. West, Kasie. The Distance between Us. Scholastic, 2014.

The novel, ‘Parable of Sower’ by Octavia E. Butler was ahead of its time when it was published in 1993. The book is set in a prospect the 2020s where the government has buckled and centers the Lauren Olamina, who can feel and perceive pain along with many additional sensations. These feelings, consequentially, are what keep Lauren on her own path to not acknowledge the belief system in place, the system of the elders. As a young adolescent living in the gated community in Los Angeles, she develops a benevolent religion and philosophical religion. Around the time Lauren is first introduced to us, there is increased resource scarcity and elevated levels of poverty, which has led the civil society to revert to relative anarchism. When the community’s security is threatened, Lauren’s home is broken when her family is murdered. From here on forth, Lauren starts to believe in “hyper empathy syndrome” which she’s convinced she got from her drug-addicted mother, who died whilst giving birth to her.

We can see that there is no such thing as freedom in Lauren’s life. When she goes out, she must be armed. After the first shock and devastation that came over Lauren, she decided to travel North together with other survivors to start a new community of her own and practice her own religion and/or faith: Earthseed. The times aren’t ideal as one can imagine. The novel describes class disparity as apparent and visibly failing. They are divided into three classes: poor, middle-class, and rich. The wealth disparity is tearing the country apart, especially with politicians giving empty promises with how the conditions will “change” and how they will improve all the distress and failing economies. It’s again; much to Butler’s credit, very ahead of its time and proof of the more things change the more they stay the same, fiction, or sadly, non-fiction as these are the problems we are facing. This difference is much more pronounced in Parable of the Sower; Lauren and her community are “fortunate” can have a house in a walled community but no money or resources to accommodate a relocation to a safer. The only people who are fortunate to move are the rich class, and they have the money to pay for their safety as well. People who are that rich live in estates as Lauren calls them: “one big house and lots of shacky little dependencies were the servant’s life.” The poor, on the other hand, are not as fortunate. The poor live outside the walls and tend to die young and very painfully like Lauren’s brother Curtis did shortly before her neighborhood burned down.

This disparity is drawn upon heavily in an article by Holly Otterbein titled ‘Sanders casts an eye toward ‘Trump Country.’” Otterbein cynically insinuated an instigation that most democratic voters can foresee if Bernie Sanders is the Democratic nominee. “Trump told working people that he was going to be on their side. He is not on their side Sanders said. “By the end of this campaign, I suspect that a number of people who voted for Donald Trump will understand that he is not their friend and that the agenda that we have, which is prepared to take on the billionaire class, is the agenda they will support.” To a Trump supporter, these accusations towards his administration are not going to stick, which there lies the problem. How people can be so blinded to follow a leader that they cannot see is against their best interest. As a liberal voter, Trump has made no attempt to help the poor, and his self-proclaimed accomplishments are trickle-down economics from the Obama administration. Yes, while he did foster more job growth by making companies come back to America, I am often left wonder what the corporate agenda behind this was. That tax breaks are the wealthy receiving to induce such a move. Are the tax breaks they receiving equaling out to the number of new jobs created? One has left to wonder. Let us not forget the bank bailout that was meant to stimulate the economy. Time has proven that the upper class and associated politicians only look out for their own self-interest.

A civilization is basically the stage of human social and cultural development and organization that is considered most advanced. Civilization has been around for almost forever. Civilization can be represented in many ways; from having a first agreement to having a government, laws, and leaders. A good civilization should have, first off, a good leader, someone which people respect and listen to. Secondly, it should have rules to follow and lastly, it should be filled with people who work together, united as one, working toward achieving their goals. In William Golding’s Lord of the Flies, these three elements of a successful society were present at first and then vanished over time, causing the group of boys to become completely savage.

Leadership is an authority of power, it is having one strong man or woman lead the people into making smart decisions together. Having a leader is critical in a good civilization because it guides the people through difficult times and helps them surmount challenging obstacles. When you have a leader, it means you listen to only one person, making it much easier and straightforward than having to make your own decisions or listening to a bunch of different points of view and not knowing what to decide for yourself. Having a leader means you have someone to look up to, someone to count on, and someone to trust. In Lord of the Flies, Ralph was declared as a leader, first off because he was the biggest and strongest of all the boys. Secondly, because unlike Jack who does what he wants, Ralph takes everyone’s opinions into consideration when making a decision. “All this I meant to say. Now I’ve said it. You voted me for chief. Now you do what I say.” (Golding, 62). Having a leader means that you have to respect and accept the decisions that were made. In the quote above, Ralph is saying that since he was declared leader, the boys have to listen to him, because that is how a democracy works.

Rules are certain orders or directions made by the superior, that have to be followed, or else rule-breakers will be punished. Today, in our society or civilization, rules are the law and punishment is jail time, fines, or even death sentences. In Lord of the Flies, there aren’t necessarily any punishments to be made. The boys just wanted to make and follow rules to stay on track, to keep everything in order/control, and to stay civilized English boys. Without rules, people would turn savage, just like in Lord of the Flies. “ We’ve got to have rules and obey them. After all, we are not savages” (Golding, 33).

Teamwork is being united as one, working together toward achieving goals.

When working with others to achieve things, we must have goals with which we all want and agree. In Lord of the Flies, one of their goals was keeping the fire going and being rescued by a passing ship. “The fire is the most important thing. Without the fire we can’t be rescued” (Golding, 110). Whenever someone does not commit to the team, it then creates problems, just like in Lord of the Flies when Jack tried to overpower Ralph by taking his position as a leader and failed. Jack then left the tribe and created his own group. “I’m not going to play any longer. Not with you” (Golding, 98). The separation of Jack from the tribe, caused every boy other than Ralph, Piggy, and Samneric to join Jack’s tribe. This leads to Jack’s tribe trying to kill Ralph by lighting the island on fire and sharpening a stick at both ends.

In conclusion, to have a good, functioning civilization, the civilization must include a strong leader who considers others, otherwise, decisions won’t be made. The civilization must include rules in which everybody obeys and respects, and lastly, a good civilization must consist of a group of people who work hard together, that achieve their goals, and that stick together through thick and thin. Without these three elements, everything would just collapse and nothing would get done. This is proven in Lord of the Flies; at the beginning, everything was in order, but once these elements vanished the boys became out of control and savage and killed two of their own. Although Golding’s Lord of the Flies is just a fictional story, in our reality, it is clear that with the absence of these elements we would not have a fully functioning society.

The Lord of the Flies, written by author William Golding, is a novel that describes a group of schoolboys who try to survive on an uninhabited island after their plane crashes there. Golding asks readers to consider how the children’s civilization and savageness represent modern culture. Civilization represents order and leadership while savagery represents the desire of wealth and power. Golding uses the groups of different schoolboys to reflect humans’ natural instinct of savagery and loss of civilization. Ralph, the protagonist of the novel, who wants to run the island as properly and modernly as he can, represents the civilization part of society. On the contrary, Jack, the antagonist, wants to use power to hunt and command the others, represents savagery and greed. This creates a conflict between these two characters due to their different mindset and values. William shows that when civilization disappears, savagery will soon take over. Ralph tries to resurrect the structure of society like the one in England while using the conch as a representative of civilization. Jack separates from Ralph’s group bringing many children with him and declares them as the hunters. Even though they have different moral beliefs they both know the children need a leader, “There aren’t any grown-ups. We shall have a look after ourselves.” (Golding, 43)

Ralph makes it his number one rule to keep the signal fire lighted. The fire is a symbol of hope and the only way for the boys to connect with civilization. The conflict between Ralph and Jack, civilization and savagery, grew greatly when Jack and his tribe did not carry out their duty by keeping the signal fire going, because of their want to hunt. Ralph shows his anger towards Jack and screams at him, “I was talking about smoke! Don’t you want to be rescued? All you can talk about is pig, pig, pig!” (68) Another major disagreement is about the “beastie” a kid saw in the forest. Ralph believes there is no beast and it is just the kid’s active imagination, while Jack not only believes in the beast but actually starts to worship it. Trying to be a good leader, Ralph knows he needs to act rationally so he states that, “There isn’t a beast in the forest. How could there be? What would a beast eat?” (104) Civilization exists to suppress the beast and savagery arises when civilization stops suppressing the beast.

Jack prefers hunting rather than building huts, looking after the signal fire, or cooperating with others needs, due to his natural instinct which is savage, cruel, and barbaric. He uses the excuse to the group that, “we want meat!” (68) to cover his savagery. Jack’s initial desire is to kill pigs to demonstrate his bravery. He and his tribe delve into a frenzy dance and sing, “Kill the pig! Cut his throat! Kill the pig! Bash him in!” (142) He commands those little boys to handle and live with their fears. “Fear can’t hurt you any more than a dream. Serves you right if something did get you, you useless lot of cry-babies!” (103) Jack also claims that Ralph is a coward and not suitable to be chief during a meeting with all of the boys. He emphasizes that if there is a beast, he and his followers will hunt it, as a way to convince the young kids that he has all of the power.

Golding expresses that government can’t control ones action and thinking because there always will be a driving force inside human psyche which turns them back top the primal state, also known as savagery. This is reflected by the boys’ new look, “…hair much too long, tangled here and there, knotted round a dead leaf or twig; clothes, worn away, stiff like his own with sweat, put on, not for decorum or comfort but out of custom; the skin of the body scurfy with brine.” (136) One day when Piggy, Ralph, and what is left of his tribe are going to Jack’s tribe to retrieve Piggy’s glasses. A member of Jack’s group drops a boulder onto Piggy who happens to be carrying the conch. “The rock struck Piggy a glancing blow from chin to knee; the conch exploded into a thousand white fragments and ceased to exist.” (222) This represents the marking point of the final decent into savagery. The reason Golding chooses a group of young boys to represent the battle between civilization and savagery is because their minds haven’t fully developed, so they are a basic human model. Hence a system is put in place to lead humans to do the moral and civilized thing, but at the same time can’t fully control them due to their primal psyche.

Often times we overthink and criticize ourselves when it comes to making a decision to the point of having regret and sorrow. When we are up against a fork in the road distress kicks in, creating a heavyweight and burden that brings doubt and concerns if we made the right decision. What if the decision we regret is actually the best one for us? The poem, “The Road Not Taken” by Robert Frost unfolds a mystery of a traveler who is challenged to pick the next road to take and if it is the “right one.” The theme of the poem analyzes the free will of a choice being made, the decision of why the road is chosen, and what the effects are. This essay will discuss the imagery contained in the poem to convey its meaning, the use of symbolism that ties into the structure based on making life decisions, as well as clarifying the tone in context. Robert Frost sheds light throughout the poem creating a dynamic way of presenting two roads that ultimately symbolize the essence of being the same and equal to one another, and representing whichever road we take will benefit us either way.

The first display of imagery occurs in line 1 when the speaker mentions “yellow wood” which in terms means the start of a new day(Frost 856). In comparison, line 11 states “and both that morning equally lay” giving confirmation by the examples of imagery mentioning the word “morning” which brings reassurance for a new beginning or new start(Frost 857). In line 6 “then took the other, as just as fair, and having perhaps the better claim, because it was grassy and wanted wear” shows imagery of the road that was taken by it’s description and the road calling for exploration(Frost 856).

The symbol of taking the road that hasn’t been traveled on suggests that the speaker is ready to have a new start and is convinced to travel the road by it’s inviting natural elements that still remains unknown. In the first stanza it says ‘Two roads diverged’ perhaps represent the strongest use for symbolism. This declares a fork in the road by the speaker having to choose between the two roads, which demonstrates a difficult decision ahead. Frost uses symbolism throughout this poem that suggests there is more meaning to both roads that meets the eye. For example, lines 9 through 11 states “Though as for that the passing there had worn them really about the same and both that morning equally lay in leaves no step had trodden black” indicates that the speaker notices later that the two roads are really the same and are equal(Frost 857). To justify this further, poetry Columnist David Orr put it this way in his interview with Pbs, “it does not matter which road you take. The two roads are the same and are interchangeable”.

The beginning tone of the poem starts with the speaker justifying reasons why to go down the road in sight. The appearances stand out most to the speaker which draws the conclusion as to which road to take. Towards the middle of the poem the speaker notices that both of the roads are the same(857). The tone changes drastically at the end when the speaker states “I shall be telling this with a sigh somewhere ages and ages hence: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I— I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference”(Frost 857). We can sense first off that the speaker regrets or is unsure about the decision of the road he took by revealing the word “sigh.” The speaker is actually using the word “sigh” to demonstrate that he wishes he could travel both roads instead of just one. Later we see the road that is taken after all has made all the difference, emphasizing that the speaker is reassured in the results and outcome of their actions.

As you can see the title “The Road Not Taken” says it all by unveiling the road less traveled was chosen but also informs us the regret for the road of lost possibilities. The moral of the story is to not freight over what could have been and focus on one road at a time.

In “Tim O’Brien’s”, “The Things They Carried” shows how he talks about several soldiers, how each one loss of innocence and effects. The purpose of this story is to create a personal look at the soldiers. O’Brien talks about certain soldiers and when he does, he gives personal information about what these soldiers find important.

O’Brien says a lot of the soldiers because they sacrificed their life how they were capable of doing any for their country. Most important he lists the things that each person carries such as what the mentally they carry and how the war is heavy for them. Which this relates to the theme as well because it shows physical and emotional that what the whole story is about. The theme of this story is also relatable to the symbol because there’s love, friendship, hopes, a bunch of emotions going on, dreams and how they carry things.

For example, the young Vietnamese soldier shows O’Brien’s “guilt at the lives taken by war. He refuses to speak to Kiowa showing that he died in some temple when the young Vietnamese man died. O’Brien also gives the young man past and future by giving the young man a story. The young man is a symbol of the innocence taken from all the young men forced into the war.” This shows how someone innocent life went away in just a second.

Another example is that there’s romance too after Lavender’s death. Lieutenant burns Martha’s letter, Martha is a poet and dreamer. Which is made Lieutenant realize that he loves and hates Martha he loves her because of her affection but also hates her cause he knows that his obsession but Martha doesn’t love him back. Martha represents Lieutenant’s hopes and dreams she gives him a sense of escape. Which this shows an apart of the people what was important to them and how much it meant to them.

In conclusion, O’Brien wanted to information such as how the soldiers were being hurt physically and mentally. How each person was, wanted and believe they are a huge person that is no longer here such as how people come, and others go. They make memories and replace thoughts as well. He did it to tell people such as stories do continue forever but people dont continue forever( people don’t leave for the rest of their lives).

Othello is considered one of the most tremendous tragedies out of Shakespeare’s excellent, well-known work. Shakespeare’s playwright was initially believed to have performed around 1604 for the relatively the first time. It is a story based on Othello, an African general within the Vietnam army, who is tricked by an envious and spiteful man into suspecting that his wife had committed adultery with his soldier. A few common known themes of this play includes prejudice against races, manipulation, and a great deal of covetousness. Particularly, the prejudicial race factor was directed towards Othello. Being regarded as a beast and Moor, it’s a clear sign that Othello is African American. However, the character, Micheal Cassio, played a huge role in the development of the outstanding playwright and was also known as the trustworthy soldier of Othello’s and one of the main targets of the antagonist. In Shakespeare’s Othello, Cassio’s naiveté and the point that he lacks the experience that other military personnel would have created the circumstances in which Iago could fall through with his ghastly plan.

Therefore, Cassio’s objective in the playwright is solely to move the plot further along by being used as one of Iago’s many pawns.Cassio occurs as a susceptible victim in which Iago used to his leisure to convince Othello of the adultery that Desdemona has falsely been accused of. Hind Abdullah Alkoli and Shi Ji claim in ”An Analysis of Power Desire of Iago in Shakespeare’s Othello From Psychological Perspectives” that “Cassio is the man who got a position that Iago wanted for himself and Othello is the man who put him there” (420). Iago is envious of Cassio, an extensively less experienced officer with a good impression on Othello, and finds his promotion an “insult given that Cassio has so little experience” (Alkoli 419; Ji 419). This influenced Iago’s decision to ruin Cassio and he started putting actions behind his plan. The night that Cassio and Iago both were waiting for guard duty for the celebration of Othello’s and Desdemona’s wedding along, Iago planned to make Cassio disregard his resolution considering it would be an easy task because of Cassio’s lack of experience.

As stated by Ram Prasad Rai in ”Jealousy and Destruction in William Shakespeare’s Othello”, ”Cassio refuses to drink” but nevertheless, eventually ends up drinking along with the others that night and gets into a drunken mood and brawl (Rai 55). The next day, to Iago’s pleasure, Othello demoted Cassio from his lieutenant’s position. Iago pretends to be worried about the unfortunate situation that Cassio found himself in and uses this to scheme another false situation in order for him to harm ”a master who kept him down, and by envy for a man he despises who promoted over him.” (Alkoli 419, Ji 419). With Cassio being upset and vulnerable, Iago preys on him upset and advises him to seek advice from Desdemona. Therefore, creating a path for Iago to communicate false statements to Othello about them both.However, without Cassio, Iago’s plan wouldn’t have prevailed as easily and would have been additionally difficult to effectively complete. The author indicates that Cassio is ”good looking” which identifies that he would be a wonderful lover for Desdemona (Alkoli 418, Ji 418). Iago also states that Cassio was ”hath a person and a smooth dispose / To be suspected, framed to make women false” (Shakespeare 1.3).

Cassio’s behavior consists of gallantry and courtesy which could be easily misinterpreted as flirtation towards women. This made it simple for Iago to portray Cassio as “free and open nature,” and as Desdemona’s paramour (Shakespeare 1.3). This was not a good thing for Desdemona and Cassio because even though Othello is a tremendous leader, the combination of stress and the much tension upon his shoulders, the boiling covetousness that he has to face, and the loss of honor from upon him was basically a trigger which made Othello mad and violent. Therefore, he does not hesitate to murder his wife. Dr. Himadri Sekhar Roy and Md. Ziaul Haque stated in ”The Mad Othello: A Psychological Perspective” that ”Othello is not jealous by nature” (26). Being a senior general in the army and a highly regarded Moor, Othello is not known for being easily desirous. For example, it is shown that Iago can’t even help but honor Othello because he ”Is of a constant, loving, noble nature” (Shakespeare 3.3) If it wasn’t for the opportunity that Cassio unknowingly helped Iago create, it would’ve been extra difficult to turn Othello into an envious and violent man who would have the courage to suffocate his honest wife and seize his own life along with it.

Above all, making Cassio the perfect addition to Iago’s master scheme to ruin Othello.Aside from other characters in the playwright, Cassio ultimately learns and develops as a character. Alkoli and Sho Ji mention that Iago manages to trap people into a web of lies and manipulation by ”getting close to all personalities and playing on weaknesses while they refer to him as honest Iago” (420). Iago is simply known as ”-cynical and self seeking” and cleverly uses every little chance he can possibly get to his benefit. (Roy et al.). Rightfully so, it can be stated that the path of deception and manipulation that Iago leads people onto is quite cunning and strong that as a result, Othello suffocates his wife to her death and also kills himself eventually too. He never lets Othello think logically on his lonesome. As a result, not only does Othello reach devastation from the poisoning effects of jealousy as planned but by the end of the playwright, Cassio manages to get the rightful position that he deserves to have after the hardships that he had to face throughout Iago’s schemes. As it is believed by Iago that he was more inclined to get the Lieutenant position that previously belonged to Cassio, it shows not one indication throughout the playwright that Iago was superior.

Not only did Cassio prove that he’s further skilled than Iago once, but it was additionally substantiated when Cassio replaced Othello as the Governor of Cyprus. Cassio discovering the truth about Iago’s betrayal among many other characters was increasingly important for him. This ended the blind trust he retained for people and the innocence that he withheld. For the most part, it made him increasingly responsible and cautiously apparent towards others.To conclude, Cassio is an important character within Shakespeare’s Othello thanks to Iago using him as one of his main pawns throughout the well-known playwright. Cassio occurs as a susceptible victim in which Iago used to his leisure to convince Othello of the adultery that Desdemona has falsely been accused of. Because of the fact that Cassio had been given the position that Iago wanted, he planned to make Cassio disregard his resolution by getting him to drink among the others and become a part of a brawl. With Cassio being upset and vulnerable after getting his newly earned title stripped away, Iago preys on him and advises him to seek advice from Desdemona which created a path for Iago to communicate false statements to Othello about them both.

Alkoli indicated that Cassio is ”good looking” which identifies that he would be a marvelous lover for Desdemona (418). Iago also states that Cassio was ”hath a person and a smooth dispose / To be suspected, framed to make women false” (Shakespeare 1.3). Furthermore, thanks to Cassio’s behavior that consisted of gallantry and courtesy which could be easily misinterpreted as flirtation towards women, Iago’s plan wouldn’t have prevailed as easily and would’ve been additionally difficult to effectively complete. It also made thig simpler for Iago to portray Cassio as Desdemona’s paramour which was not a good thing for Desdemona and Cassio because it made things easier for Iago to continue his dangerous plan which would result in a not so favorable outcome for the two innocent bystanders. If it wasn’t for the opportunity that Cassio unknowingly helped Iago create, it would’ve been increasingly difficult to turn Othello into an envious and violent man who would have the courage to suffocate his honest wife and seize his own life along with it. Even though Othello is a tremendous leader, the combination of stress and the much tension upon his shoulders, the boiling covetousness that he has to face, and the loss of honor from upon him was basically a trigger that made Othello mad and violent. Dr. Himadri Sekhar Roy and Md. Ziaul Haque stated in ”The Mad Othello: A Psychological Perspective” that ”Othello is not jealous by nature” (26).

Being a senior general in the army and a highly regarded Moor, Othello is not known for being easily desirous. Rightfully so, it can be stated that the path of deception and manipulation that Iago leads people onto is quite cunning and strong that as a result, not only affected Othello to the point of him reaching devastation from the poisoning effects of jealousy as planned but by also helped Cassio get the rightful position that he deserves to have after the hardships that he had to face throughout Iago’s schemes and even develops him into a responsible and increasingly cautious person towards others. Therefore, Cassio’s objective in the playwright is solely to move the plot further along, helping the idea of Othello being considered as one of the most tremendous tragedies out of Shakespeare’s well-known work.

According to Aristotle, “ a tragedy should arouse in the spectators the feeling piety and fear – ‘pity’ mainly for the hero’s tragic fate and ‘fear’ at the sight of the dreadful suffering that occurs the characters, particularly the hero. By arousing these feelings of pity and fear, a tragedy aims at the catharsis or purgation of these and similar other emotions.”

By Aristotle’s definition “ ‘ hamartia’ or ‘tragic flaw’ is an error of judgment that was made by a character in a theatrical tragedy.” The story of King Oedipus reveals the qualities and faults of his character, in the light of which we have to consider Oedipus’s stature as an Aristotlean tragic hero whose sufferings are due to a ‘ hamartia’ or ‘ tragic flaw’. In the story, we see that Oedipus is the king of Thebes, and husband of Jocasta, queen of Thebes. He knows from the Delphi oracle which has fallen on the city of Thebes due to the presence of the murderer of the late king Laius. After hearing that Oedipus calls upon all those who have any knowledge about the matter to come forward and disclose it. Tiresias, the blind prophet knows the truth but he didn’t want to say that to Oedipus that’s why he refuses to disclose it. But Oedipus wanted to know the truth as he was a good king and also he want to solve the suffering of the people of Thebes.

When Tiresias refuses to disclose the truth Oedipus commands Tiresias to conspiracy to depose him. Oedipus started insulting the blind prophet for his blindness and also said that he do not know anything. Tiresias then cannot control his angriness and tell all the truth about the origin of Oedipus that he is the son of king Laius and queen Jocasta. Oedipus himself killed his biological father king Laius and marry his mother Jocasta. At a young age, he killed king Laius and all his men by getting into an argument but at that time Oedipus didn’t know that king Laius was his biological father. After knowing all that queen Jocasta committed suicide. Then Oedipus understood that he make great sins. He cannot tolerate what he did, then he blinds himself to the golden broaches of his mothers who was also his wife.

From the story of the tragedy, we come to know about both the qualities and faults of Oedipus. Oedipus solved the Sphinx and saved Thebes from great suffering. As a king, he is a well-wisher of his people and an efficient ruler. In the end, he blinds himself because he understands he did wrong to his father and mother which express that he hates impurity.

But has his fault as well. He is short–tempered, quick in his judgment, and he feels very proud of his power and intellect and arbitrary decisions. He insulted Tiresias when he refuses to tell the truth. All these of his faults are owning to his feelings of pride or ‘hubris’.

Finally, I can say without any doubt that, the gods do not lead Oedipus to his downfall. His own error of judgment cause his suffering. His downfall is due to hubris.

The Greek philosopher, Aristotle, defines a tragic hero as a character having valiant traits that earn the audience’s sympathy but also have human flaws that ultimately lead to their own downfall. Aristotle states a tragic hero’s fortune should be not from bad to good but from good to bad caused by their own doing. A tragic hero’s misfortune is seen ‘not through vice or depravity but by some error of judgment.’ This hamartia refers to a flaw in the hero’s nature, such as excessive arrogance, or, hubris. An example of Aristotle’s definition can be seen in the Greek play, Oedipus Rex, where Sophocles narrates a tragic story of the downfall of Oedipus and his rule. The city-state Thebes is under great distress from a plague; looking for an answer they turn to Oedipus, a king who saved them from the tyranny of the Sphinx. The oracle claims for the plague to be lifted, the murderer of the previous king, Laius, must be found and punished. The blind prophet, Tiresias, claims Oedipus is the cause of the plague and the murderer of Laius. Realizing Oedipus fulfilled Athello’s prophecy of killing his father and marrying his mother, Queen Jocasta killed herself, and Oedipus gouged his own eyes out in grief and is banished from Thebes. Oedipus fulfilling his fate of killing his father and seizing the throne of Thebes, leaving the question of whether he’s considered a tyrannous, absolute ruler who has seized power and not inherited it. As with any tyrannical rule, Oedipus was endowed with absolute power, but with power came his unruly hubris. In the play, Oedipus the King, scripted by Sophocles, Oedipus’ hubris as a tyrant leads him to learn his inevitable fate as a king, reflecting on the title of “tyranny.”

Since Oedipus didn’t gain his place on the throne through birthright, he is considered a tyrannical ruler which leads to his excessive hubris like ruling causing his own downfall. This can be seen through Tiresias’s claim, ‘How terrible– to see the truth when the truth is only pain to him who sees!’ (Lines 359-260) Oedipus’ position as a tyrant came with the burden of uncovering his true fate caused by his unwillingness to stray from the unknown. Fate, being predetermined, leaves the known ideal that no matter how you try to avoid it, your future is predetermined by a higher power. Oedipus tries to challenge this doctrine and outrun his fate by fleeing his state and parents, Polybus and Merope. Oedipus’ thinking there’s inevitability in this prophecy, led him closer to his truth without cognition. Apollo warned Oedipus through the oracle, informing him that he would kill his father and have children with his mother. However, he chose to defy the gods, unaware that this tragic flaw encouraged his further actions. Ironically, Oedipus draws himself to his downfall, causing the death of Jocasta and Laius and the decline of Thebes. Oedipus doubted his fate and the powers of the gods. Oedipus then reaches his anagnorisis, where it becomes clear that he was ‘born to suffer, born to misery and grief.’ No longer conceding his fate, Oedipus lives the very moments he vowed he would never face. Oedipus’s hubris ideas caused him to be unable to see the truth of who he was; Oedipus’ rejecting the laws that the gods had set for him, ultimately prevented him from becoming the proper king he would have earned. His ultimate fate retained his words conveying his known enormous pride and impulsive nature, which caused him to push the decisions that set into action the events that not only guided him to his own ruin but ironically the fate he tries so desperately to avoid.

The title “tyrannos” although does fit Oedipus’s character well ironically can not be declared true because technically he does have the birthright to the throne. While those of Thebes seek answers to the plague in their state Oedipus declares, “Here I am myself— you all know me, the world knows my fame: I am Oedipus.”, (Page 159 Lines 7-8). Oedipus’claim of superiority strengthens his hubris, pushing him to his fate. With this notion of superiority, he believed taking on the task of the unresolved murder of Laius would be easy to seek out. With a great desire to seek out who is causing havoc in his state, he publicly declares “Now my curse on the murderer. Whoever he is, a lone man unknown in his crime or one among many, let that man drag out his life in agony, step by painful step—I curse myself as well…if by any chance he proves to be an intimate of our house, here at my hearth, with my full knowledge, may the curse I just called down on him strike me!” (Page 172) The irony in this speech is that Oedipus unknowingly condemns himself by demanding the truth about the murder while the person he seeks and slanders is himself.

Thank you, Your Honor. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, thank you for your time as all the evidence was carefully presented. So, all the facts and evidence have been presented to you today and with that, I’d like to say the fate of Oedipus’ life now is within your hands. Oedipus has been convicted of committing an inhumane crime and letting his anger get the best of him, resulting in grave damage therefore we request that you determine a punishment that seems just for taking the lives of several humans. It is our humble request to view all the evidence in its entirety and make an unbiased decision. The decision made today will affect multiple lives as well as bring closure to some. We believe that Oedipus’ punishment should be that he receives 15 years in prison on the basis of committing the inhuman crime of murder which resulted in the death of several Thebes citizens, his father, King Laius, and the subsequence suicide of his mother. Some may argue that it was his fight against fate however we believe that Oedipus did intentionally kill his father and several other men even if it was in the act of self-defense. This punishment is just because Oedipus did not display any self-control upon the confrontation with the group of men traveling with his father. Oedipus’ uncontrolled anger took the lives of many innocent men and it is not justifiable to simply take one’s life over a disagreement or argument.

This case is about Oedipus and how his actions lead to the death of several innocent people, including his birth mother, and father. Oedipus was a well-known and respected king of Thebes and was recognized for his hubris and ability to solve the riddle of the Sphinx and save his country (Rivas, 00:02:30-00:02:55). You all might be thinking how could such a well put together and honorable king be charged with murder? Well, it all started when the country of Thebes was in ruins because of a horrific plague that was killing hundreds of innocent citizens. This plague all started because of the murder of King Laius, former king of Thebes, who was not yet found, and until the killer was not found and exiled the country would remain in ruins. This tragedy needed to come to an end, so all the citizens of Thebes gathered outside Oedipus the king’s palace asking him to help their country and to bring light back into Thebes (Rivas, 00:01:00-00:02:23). Oedipus being an honorable king promised the citizens to bring an end to the plague upon the arrival of Creon, his brother-in-law, who would bring the news as to how to end this tragic plague. As Creon returned to the palace with a message from the Gods, he was informed that King Laius’ murderer was still not punished for his crime, and until he was not caught and banished the plague would continue. Oedipus unaware of who killed King Laius, promises’ the citizens that he will find the murderer and punish him for his actions and ensures them that the individual will be forever cursed.

In search of King Laius’ murderer, Oedipus sends for Tiresias, an old blind prophet, who would have the ability to find out the truth behind this injustice. Tiresias arrives at the palace and is fearful to tell Oedipus the truth behind the story. Following Oedipus’ insistence and determination to get the truth, Tiresias reveals that Oedipus himself is the killer. At first, Oedipus refuses to believe what Tiresias exposed but soon came to realize the truth. Tiresias reveals that Oedipus was adopted as a baby and his birth mother and father sent him off to a slave to be killed because of a prophecy. The prophecy was that Oedipus would one day be his father’s killer and would then marry his mother. His birth parents couldn’t bear to hear the news so decided to get rid of him. They were able to get rid of him for only a couple of years because fate brought both father and son together again one day. The story unfolds that later on in life Oedipus and King Laius both approach each other while traveling. Following some confrontation, Oedipus ends up killing all the men traveling with King Laius and the king himself in self-defense. Oedipus furious with Tiresias asks him to leave his palace. Jocasta, his wife, notices that her husband seems frustrated she asks what is wrong. He tells her what Tiresias just accused him of and instead of being shocked she learns that Tiresias’ accusations were correct. Jocasta realizes that Oedipus killed her husband, King Laius and that he is her son. She confronts Oedipus about the truth and runs to her room not knowing what to say to him. Oedipus then soon has recollections of the day of the confrontation and soon remembers everything. He realizes that he was the murderer of King Laius. Jocasta could not bear the thought that her own son killed his father and that her prophecy came true and felt that the best thing to do was to end her life.

So, with the full story being told I would like for you all the jury to take a minute and understand the evidence and see how Oedipus not only killed his father but also was the reason his mother died. Although some of you may say that he didn’t directly kill his mother, we have to remember that his actions lead to her suicide. Yes, some can argue that it was in his fate to kill his father and that it was not done intentionally and blame the prophecy but at the same time, Oedipus himself was the one to commit the crime. Even if it was written for him to kill his father and marry his mother, he was still the one to do it and he used his own two hands to kill his father. He was aware at the time of the confrontation that he was about to take the life of many individuals. Not only did he kill his father, King Laius, but he also killed the men that worked for his father and traveled with him. So, in all of this, he is the murderer of many individuals. As for his mother’s suicide, yes, we can’t directly say that he killed her, but his actions lead her to believe that suicide was the best option. This indirectly makes him the murderer of his mother. We have to remember that Oedipus himself states that “curse on the man who took the cruel bonds from off my legs, as I lay I the field. He stole me from death and saved me, no kindly service. Had I died then I would not be so burdensome to friends” (Sophocles, 1417-1424). He himself remembers the moment that his parents left him as a child. Could it be that this memory lead to uncontrollable anger and rage within him? Could this image of him being left alone while his parents leave him to be the cause of his wrongdoings? Maybe this act to kill shouldn’t be blamed on fate but should be blamed on built-up anger and rage. We can neither confirm nor deny that Oedipus knew that one of the men he confronted was his father, but he had built up anger and resentment internally that he committed such an unjust crime.

Although Oedipus was known as a tragic hero and honored king of Thebes, his actions of killing his father and causing his mother to commit suicide resulted in him being accused of committing voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. Oedipus didn’t have the intent to kill or pre-planned this action, but regardless of his fate he still made the decision to kill and he committed the crime with his own two hands. His statement regarding the act being made in self-defense doesn’t correlate with his story and we can’t believe that he committed this crime to protect himself. Oedipus had unresolved anger and rage which caused him to lose control and commit murder. He had his own free will to decide what actions to make. No one forced him to commit murder. This was all based on what Oedipus wanted. No one else is to blame for this horrific crime. Although he didn’t directly kill his mother, the act of killing his father caused his mother to commit suicide. He is to blame for the death of his mother. The gods and his preborn prophecy caused him to commit this injustice crime and be a victim of his fate. Just because he had no say in the killing of his father does not excuse him from his punishment. Our defendant himself admitted to the crime as he spoke to his daughters for the last time “Your father killed his father and sowed the seed where had spring himself and begot you out of the womb that held him (Sophocles, 1562-1564). Oedipus himself knows he’s guilty and should accept any cruel punishment received by him today. His actions not only lead to the death of many individuals, but he also ruined the life of his two daughters, Antigone and Ismene, they will forever be cursed and traumatized by their father’s actions.

Oedipus should not be given any sort of special treatment because he was king of Thebes nor should he be excused for the crime that he committed because it was in his fate to kill his father. The crime was still committed regardless of why it was committed and because of that the deserves to be punished. People of the jury, please without any hesitation express the way you feel Oedipus should be punished. We want to ensure that he receives just punishment for his actions. In the court, he is not known as the king of Thebes but as a normal human being that committed the crime of killing two individuals. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, with all of that being said I will ask you to decide the fate of Oedipus’ punishment and what you believe is a fair penalty for the crime he’s committed. The decision is in your hands.