Category: Oedipus the King

Abstract

The present paper deals with the inexorability of fate in Sophocles Oedipus the King. This author conveys the message that people cannot influence their future because everything is predetermined by Gods will. The sequence of particular events and actions from Oedipus life is depicted in the piece of literature to prove this idea. Thus, Sophocles states that those attempts that people make to avoid some events from happening in the future only advance them and result in severer consequences. Furthermore, the given research tries to explain why people in ancient times believed in rough fate and their inability to influence it. Then, the questions of what aspects of human life and to what extent they depended on the supreme powers will be answered. By focusing on Oedipus the King and its details, the paper demonstrates beliefs and ideas that both were popular in Ancient Greece and find their manifestation in the modern world.

Introduction

The question of whether people can influence their lives has always been challenging. Many prominent thinkers tried to present and prove their points of view concerning the given issue. Some of them stated that people could shape their lives with their decisions and actions, while others mentioned that the supreme forces predetermined the future of every person. Among all these philosophers, Sophocles deserves specific attention since this Ancient Greece tragedian created a significant piece of literature on the given topic. His Oedipus the King depicts the inexorability of fate and its relationship to knowledge, political power, and civic life through a sequence of interconnected events. In the tragedy, Oedipus kills his father, has children with his mother, and deprives himself of vision, which demonstrates that people cannot escape what is predetermined for them.

Essay Body

Oedipus is King of Thebes, and he wants to discover why his kingdom suffers from the plague. He sends Creon, his brother-in-law, to the oracle to ask for advice. Creon brings unpleasant news stating that the nation will suffer from this curse until they find a murderer of Laius, their former ruler. Oedipus wants to discover who the murderer is, but Tiresias, a blind prophet, soon makes an unexpected announcement, stating that Oedipus is the foul pollutant in this land (Sophocles 27). Oedipus does not have trust in the prophets words, and he is supported by Jocasta, his current wife. While she was Laius wife, she mentions that some of such prophecies have not come true and provides a specific example. A few years ago, Laius was told that he would be killed by a son who would be given birth by him and Jocasta (Sophocles 42). Thus, they decided to have the child killed, and the prophecy was canceled.

Even though that information should have been pleasant for Oedipus, he does not like it. It is so because when he was a child, an older man told him that Oedipus was adopted and that he would kill his biological father and sleep with his biological mother. The situation becomes even more tragic when Oedipus recalls that he murdered a stranger, which is similar to the description of Laius death. In spite of Jocastas objections, Oedipus decides to reveal the secrets of the past. In a while, Jocasta finds out that Oedipus, with whom she has children, is her son. This discovery is horrifying for her, and the woman kills herself. Soon, Oedipus also understands that the prophecy has come true and that he is the source of the curse for the kingdom. This terrible information makes him put out his own eyes. Furthermore, blind Oedipus is exiled from Thebes to free the nation from the plague.

The information above demonstrates that people take responsibility for their actions and decisions. Once Oedipus discovers his identity and what he has made to his parents, he decides to blind himself as a kind of punishment. The notion of responsibility is essential for the theme under consideration because it shows that people suffer from adverse consequences when they try to escape their fate. In addition to that, the given topic indicates that peoples attempts to change their future can have a negative meaning for others because the citizens of the kingdom experience the plague epidemic. It means that Oedipus blinds himself to assume responsibility and free the population from it.

Even though Oedipus the King is considered by many to be a story about unethical decisions and actions, it presents the theme of fate and humans inability to change their lives. Sophocles was an evident fatalist, and it influenced the tragedy under consideration significantly. This piece of literature demonstrates that people cannot change their future irrespective of how hard they try. It is supported by the fact that Laius wanted to kill his son to prevent him from committing the murder and that Oedipus tried to escape having children with his mother. The two men did their best to avoid their destiny, but they failed, which is an example of a fatalistic worldview.

The author has included two significant phenomena in his tragedy, and they are worth mentioning. Firstly, Sophocles stipulates that individuals cannot choose their identities. They are predetermined by the supreme forces, while people can only choose either to define them or not. As for Oedipus the King, Danze mentions that pity motivates the main character to identify his self-recognition (565). Even though Oedipus understands that his revealed identity of a murderer and foundling results in particular social stigma, he tries to neutralize his negative image by punishing himself (Dugdale 421). However, this harsh action fails to influence Oedipus fate, and he has to suffer from the adverse consequences of his fortune. It shows that once a person commits an action, he or she will inevitably face some results. Thus, Sophocles conveys a message that individuals cannot hide from the outcomes of their actions and decisions. However, these consequences cannot make satisfaction for the previous sins.

Secondly, it is necessary to comment on hamartia and its role in the tragedy. Thus, the phenomenon refers to an error made due to inadequate knowledge, and this error results in negative consequences (Glassberg 201). In this case, both Oedipus and Jocasta have false information regarding their identities, which leads to unethical situations. This information indicates that people cannot make the right decisions when they do not know everything about an issue. While it is often impossible to know everything, people are subject to making mistakes. In other words, people make decisions, these decisions can have an impact, but the incomplete nature of human understanding makes the effects of actions unpredictable.

It should be mentioned that incomplete knowledge makes it impossible for people to change their future. Even though their actions seemingly alter their destiny, the final outcomes demonstrate the opposite. On the one hand, the central conflict of the tragedy emerged because Laius found out unpleasant information about his son. That news forced him to make some decisions to avoid tragic events in the future. All the following situations, including Laius death and the fact that Oedipus marries Jocasta, prove that knowledge can be detrimental under certain conditions. Thus, the author emphasizes the prophecy and its consequences to show how the present information can influence people and their lives.

At the same time, Sophocles conveys a distinction between the information from the prophecy and that from personal experience. The difference refers to the fact that personal experience can present a part of the information that would show the possibility of changing the future, while the prophecy describes those events that will finally happen. Furthermore, Laius demonstrates a firm belief in the unlimited power of knowledge. Once he is told the prophecy, he does not question its truthfulness and credibility. It means that his character is used to depict that the issue of destiny was of crucial significance for many people in Ancient Greece.

On the other hand, Oedipus represents a different approach to knowledge. Once he is told the same prophecy, he does not believe that it is true. Consequently, he does his best to deny the unpleasant prediction. In this case, Oedipus becomes a seeker of truth without drawing attention to the fact that it can have negative consequences for him. In pursuit of knowledge, the ruler makes horrifying discoveries that are detrimental to him. It is possible to state that experience means symbolic death for Oedipus since when he finds out the truth, it becomes difficult for him to keep living with his mother. Thus, Sophocles describes these events to indicate that it is not safe to look for the answers when people are not ready to accept them. Therefore, the truth shocks Oedipus, but he finds the power to bear the responsibility.

Even though the two characters above have different attitudes toward the prophecy initially, it comes true for each of them, and they fail to escape their shared fate. The description of events from the lives of Oedipus and Laius supports Sophocles idea that individuals can try to change their destiny, but it will not influence the final outcomes. People can handle knowledge differently, but it does not mean that information always results in some benefits.

Similar to knowledge, the issue of political power and its relationship to fate influence characters differently in Oedipus the King. Thus, Laius seems to be an arrogant and despotic ruler who is ready to kill his own son to preserve his power. One can say that these selfish interests made him try to prevent the prophecy from happening rather than other benevolent intentions. As has been stated previously, Laius attempts did not allow him to preserve power, save his life, and preclude the adverse events described in the prophecy. Finally, Oedipus kills Laius and deprives him and accepts his power as a ruler.

By contrast, Oedipus is born in a royal family, and he should become the subsequent ruler of the kingdom. However, Laius tries to prevent it, and the boy grows up far from the throne, and he seems to have no chances to become the king. An occurrence plays its role, and Oedipus kills his biological father and starts living with his mother, who is currently his wife. He thinks that these events are accidental, but it has been proved there were results of the destiny. That is why Oedipus becomes the king, even despite the fact that he did not look for political power. Thus, the events concerning political power prove that fate is also unavoidable when it comes to political power. Even when people do not want something to become true, they cannot do anything to influence the given state of affairs. It suggests that the Greeks believed that the gods chose their rulers. In other words, if it was a persons destiny to become a ruler, he or she would gain political power irrespective of external conditions.

Finally, Jocastas civic life has been significantly influenced. She had a husband, Laius, but their shared desire to cancel the prophecy has led to his death and severe problems for her. As soon as Jocasta finds out that Oedipus is her supposed-to-be-dead son, she cannot bear this tragedy, and she commits suicide. These events indicate that people are powerless to influence anything in their fate. Furthermore, a civic sphere stands for the most crucial aspect of human life since problems in the given area make people kill themselves. It is an interesting example in a way that Jocasta commits suicide in a private sphere. It indicates that she tries to hide from the public to avoid blames. In other words, the Greeks paid specific attention to their civic image, and Sophocles demonstrated that this image was shaped by the supreme forces rather than the people themselves.

The tragedy demonstrates that the Greeks believed in the supreme forces and their immeasurable impact on human life. That is why Sophocles describes prophecies, oracles, and other spiritual elements of that historical epoch. Furthermore, the tragedy indicates that people are minor elements in the whole world and that they can only witness what they are supposed to experience in their lives. In other words, people cannot fundamentally alter their destiny because of the fact described above. Last but not least, the events from Oedipus life show that people should not behave like gods and should not try to shape their future. All such attempts can have the opposite meaning resulting in adverse consequences, and the fates of Oedipus, Laius, and Jocasta prove this thought. It refers to the fact that the civic life of the characters suffered a lot because of their attempts to change their destiny.

Conclusion

Oedipus the King by Sophocles is a significant Greek tragedy since it covers an essential topic. It refers to fate and its unavoidable nature for individuals. The author uses emphasis to present the sequence of a few details that are detrimental to the future of his characters. It is exciting that a single prophecy influences three lives and break them once these characters decide to change their fates. Sophocles indicates that the inexorability of fortune is an unchanged phenomenon, and when people try to influence it, they approach them and create even more problems. People can influence their destiny, but they cannot significantly change it, which means that their political knowledge, civic life, and what they know is predetermined. As a result, the Greek philosopher uses his piece of writing to show that people only witness those events in their lives that they are supposed to experience. Any attempts to alter upcoming events will result in severer consequences for people and their lives. Thus, Sophocles Oedipus the King conveys the message that the supreme forces predetermine peoples future and that individuals cannot influence their destiny.

Works Cited

Danze, Teresa M. The Tragedy of Pity in Sophocles Oedipus Tyrannus. American Journal of Philology, vol. 137, no. 5, 2016, pp. 565-599.

Dugdale, Eric. Who Named Me?: Identity and Status in Sophocles Oedipus Tyrannus. American Journal of Philology, vol. 136, no. 3, 2015, pp. 421-445.

Glassberg, Roy. Uses of Hamartia, Flaw, and Irony in Oedipus Tyrannus and King Lear. Philosophy and Literature, vol. 41, no. 1, 2017, pp. 201-206.

Sophocles. Oedipus the King and Other Tragedies: Oedipus the King, Aias, Philoctetes, Oedipus at Colonus. Translated by Oliver Taplin, OUP Oxford, 2015.

Throughout the centuries, literature has always tried to analyze the conflict between fate and free will. These notions always contradict each other and seem almost incompatible. To be more exact, we should say that the very ability of human beings to cope with overwhelming forces has always been a subject of philosophical and literary debate.

The main task of our essay is to compare two entirely different plays, which represent entirely different epochs. The aim to be achieved is to analyze the ways in which two protagonists try to cope with some higher forces. It is also of the utmost importance to discuss the attitude of two authors towards the very notion of the overwhelming force.

The first play that we are going to discuss is Oedipus the King, which is considered to be one of the brightest examples of ancient Greek dramaturgy. The plot of this play written by Sophocles is based on the myth of Oedipus. The main character unwillingly and unknowingly kills his father and consequently marries his mother. It is worth mentioning that the oracle foretells that such tragedy will befall Oedipus, he tries to avert this disaster, but in spite of all his attempts, the prophecy comes true. This is a rough representation of the plot.

Oedipus is very often perceived as a puppet in the hands of a puppeteer, or it would be better to say some greater force. The main character seems to be unable to change the course of their actions. At first glance, such a point of view may seem quite rational especially judging from the plot development. However, if we look at this problem from a different angle, we can say that the oracle just predicts the events but not forces them to happen (Meyer, 123). There is a curious paradox: if the main characters had not tried to change the course of action, none of these events would have happened. Moreover, some choices are made only by Oedipus, and we cannot say that he is the victim of circumstances. For instance, it is he who chooses to take Jocasta as his wife; besides, nobody makes Oedipus kill his father.

As far as the play Proof by David Auburn is concerned, we can say that the main character Catherine also struggles against an overwhelming force. Nevertheless, her case is a very special one. She is a daughter of a famous mathematician who has recently deceased. The trouble is that the mental disorders Robert, Catherines father, had been transferred to his daughter. However, not only this, but Catherine also inherits her fathers incredible talent. The main character is constantly struggling with mathematical genius and mental illness. She is trying to make people believe that she is the author of the proof which she found among Roberts papers. However, people who surround her have serious doubts as to her sanity. This pushes Catherine into a state of apathy. Catherines family background makes her the victim of stereotyping and incredulity.

Thus, it is quite possible for us to arrive at the conclusion that the problem of fate or rather conquering some insuperable force has always attracted many writers. In these two plays, the authors try to show how a human being struggles against something which he cannot change.

Bibliography

Michael Meyer. The Bedford Introduction to Literature. Palgrave, 2005.

Oedipus life was a series of tragedies from birth to the point of blindness. This tragedies can be assumed to stem out of the fact that Oedipus  was an individual with a strong character which made him want to know the truth and as a result the tragedies befall him out of free will.

However, Oedipus was already doomed to succumb to the fate which was foretold long before his birth via the oracle which was at Delphi. From the time the oracle predicts this to Oedipus parents Jocasta and Laios, they immediately take action to ensure that the oracle is not fulfilled. Little do they know that the fate of Oedipus will come to occur in their lives which would be a series of tragedies that blindly lead them to believe that the oracle would not be fulfilled.

From an initial reading, most readers assume that the tragedies that befall Oedipus and his family are mere actions of free will by both Oedipus, his parents and the shepherd but it is actually the fate that was already predicted by the oracle which leads to all the tragedies that Oedipus goes through in the entire play. The essay thus intends to show that it was due to fate that the tragedies befell Oedipus rather than free will as it appears.

Oedipus parents try to avoid the fate that the oracle predicts concerning Oedipus. They send the shepherd to get rid of the child by leaving the child in the jungle so that he might die due to exposure but instead the shepherd does not leave Oedipus to die, rather, he takes him to his home country and Oedipus is left under the care of the queen and king of Corinth.

Come, then, say, on. Rememberest thou a boy Thou gav`st me once, that I might rear him up As mine own child? (Sophocles 1168)This causes Oedipus to believe that the queen and king of Corinth are his real parents which causes him to flee from them to escape the fulfillment of the oracle but finally this belief acts a catalyst for the fulfillment of the oracle and Oedipus and his parents (Jocatsa) are forced to come to the realization that they could not control fate.

Fate also plays a tricky game on Oedipus when in his attempts to discover the person responsible for the death of Laios; he comes to know that it was actually him who killed his own father.

Oedipus met with his father and killed him believing that it was a group of bandits while in actual senses it was his father. His quest to discover what happened to the king Laios leads him to his predetermined fate, Tis enough.

Oedipus replies, I cannot yield my right to know the truth Oedipus finds it difficult to restrain himself from looking for the truth even though he has already been warned that the truth might lead to disaster on his part. Whom did he speak of? Care not thou for it, But wish his words may be but idle tales. (Sophocles 1176).

Jocasta tries to steer away Oedipus from venturing into asking more questions because she had already deciphered the end of the story. Had he listened to what he was told instead of being stubborn then maybe the fate would not have been completely fulfilled.

It so happens that the priest who is currently in Apollo is blind and Oedipus mocks him by telling him that he can never be blind but fate has it that he would be the one responsible for gouging out his eyes leading to blindness. Woe! woe! woe! woe! all cometh clear at last.

O light, may I ne`er look on thee again, Who now am seen owing my birth to those To whom I ought not, and with whom I ought not In wedlock living, whom I ought not slaying. (Sophocles 1200).

At this point Oedipus prefers that he would rather be blind so that he would no longer look upon the evils of the world and those that he had already done. Fate had it therefore that he should become blind despite the fact that he had been mocking the priest

In Oedipus the king, Sophocles raises various questions about fate, should individuals be concerned in knowing their fate instead of living their lives freely or after knowing ones fate, which action is best to take. To ignore fate and live life, or to try as much as possible to control and evade fate.

Oedipus and his parents know their fate and try as much as possible to control this fate but all their actions lead them to the fulfillment of the oracle. Thus, it can be concluded that had Jocasta and Liaos lived their lives without seeking to know their fate then they would have lived happily and the same applies to Oedipus.

Work Cited

Sophocles. Oedipus the King. E.d Cavender, Kenneth. San Francisco: Chandler Pub. Co, 1961.

Introduction

Oedipus Tyrannus is one of Sophocles masterpieces. This play brings into action different historical issues that are pertinent in contemporary world. Written between 428 and 425 B.C, Oedipus Tyrannus remains all time favorite play. Sophocles explores how it is to be a human and live in a world that does not bend itself to support humanity (Meineck & Woodruff 10). Sophocles addresses historical issues like oracles and divination and Greek religion among others.

These plays were part of Greek religion; actually, it was a form of worship where they worshiped, Dionysus, a seditious revelry god who lived in the wilderness. According to Meineck and Woodruff, amongst Greek people, divination and oracles served as the only form of revelation, no priesthood, sacred books, theology, or founders, only seers and oracles (13).

Delphi; being the most sanctimonious place in Greece, gave the final word on every matter and all people had to respect its oracle. Oedipus Tyrannus expounds on these works in a colorful event dealing with society issues like murder, rape, marriage, family, leadership, and divinity among others.

Importance of the Story

Though written many years ago, Oedipus Tyrannus addresses important issues that affected people during those times. Interestingly, the same issues appear to be affecting people in the contemporary world. This fact solidifies the common adage that, the more things change, the more they remain the same.

It is amazing that the issues that rocked the newly civilized society are still pertinent in a fast moving world where civilization has hit climax. The main character here, Oedipus, is acting like most of our leaders in modern times, confident, heroic, saying one thing and doing the other coupled with deliberate denial of the truth even when all evidence is available. This play is important because it handles issues that are happening in our society today.

Oedipus appears as a hero especially at the beginning of the play where he solves the Sphinxs enigma. It takes a lot of confidence to engage in a dangerous activity that Oedipus engages in.

He offers to give Sphinx an answer although he knows a wrong answer would lead to death. After this incidence of freeing people from the wrath of Sphinx, Oedipus becomes popular and garners massive following due to his intelligence and bravery. This phenomenon is common in modern world where a single act of boldness and bravery will lift someone to stardom.

The first person to hail Oedipus is a temple priest who says, You freed us from the Sphinx, you came to Thebes and cut us loose from the bloody tribute we had paid that harsh, brutal singer. We taught you nothing, no skill, no extra knowledge, still you triumphed (Sophocles 44-47). According to the people of this city, nothing short of gods gift would deliver them from the hands of Sphinx. This blessing came through Oedipus.

Unfortunately, once the Thebans start to idolize Oedipus, he assumes powers that are not his. It is interesting how people are hungry for power and recognition, and the things they will do once they gain all that they have been wanting all along. Oedipus assumes powers of gods.

Instead of people praying to their gods, he offers to answer their prayers. He says, You pray to the gods? Let me grant your prayers (Sophocles 245). This is ridiculous. Maybe out of gullibility and hypnotization, people start offering their prayers to Oedipus. This is because their gods does not seem to answer their prayers anymore.

It is easy for people to be lured away from what they believe and what they have cherished for long. As aforementioned, though written in many years ago, this play is of great significance in the contemporary world. Day after the other, people are becoming followers of new sects that they do not really understand. Not because they did not have beliefs and religions hitherto, they are simply hypnotized.

Nevertheless, Oedipus popularity begins to take a nosedive as the reality of Laius death starts to set in. At this point, the vehement denial of truth sets in. leadership without honesty cannot stand. Oedipus becomes a tyrant for he cannot swallow the truth that he killed Laius.

As Locasta recounts the events that preceded her husbands murder, it becomes clear to Oedipus that he is the subject in this case. Suspicion plunges him and absentmindedly says, Strange, hearing you just now . my mind wandered, my thoughts racing back and forth (Sophocles 800-02). People cannot just accept the truth; however, they will always look for scapegoats and point fingers to others. What happened to owning up mistakes and taking responsibility?

Oedipus is not different, despite the mounting pressure he continues to carry out investigations to what he already know. In a typical way of people in modern world, Oedipus goes on to question the credibility of the Oracle. Just like people nowadays, they want to challenge every ruling to satiate their selfish ambitions.

After Tiresias implicates Oedipus in the murder of Laius, Oedipus becomes offensive and he actually infers that Tiresias is the murderer. He says, You helped hatch the plot; you did the work, yes, short of killing him with your own hands . (Sophocles 394-96). Dying of suppressed guilt, he extends the blame to Creon and accuses him of treason and conspiracy.

He says, I see it all, the marauding thief himself scheming to steal my crown and power! (Sophocles 597-98). Talk of assassinating the messenger with a complete disregard of the message. Man is known to deny the facts. This paper aforementioned that, interestingly, the things that were pertinent in society many years ago, they remain the same even to date.

Citizens and leaders alike do not want to come out and accept the truth. Selfish ambitions are the rule of the day and no one is ready to take responsibility of his or her actions. It appears that Oedipus set the pace, and we have followed his footsteps so faithfully.

At this point Oedipus cannot be contained. He acts with complete disregard of divinity, by spiting a prophet and even igniting the ire of gods. This wrath is inevitable as we find out in the chorus that, But if any man comes striding, high and mighty, in all he says and does, no fear of justice, no reverence for the temples of the gods-let a rough doom tear him down, repay his pride, breakneck, ruinous pride! (Sophocles 972-77).

This tyrant behavior is typical in modern society. People choose leaders to be a blessing to them only to be a curse. Our leaders go to the people, beg for votes, and get that highest seat in the land, and turn out to be tyrants once seated in the throne of powers.

Think of Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe. The only thing the people of Thebes could show after Oedipus reign is wrath from their gods. Similarly, the only thing the people of Zimbabwe can show after many years of poor governance by one of their elected leaders is a wretched economy.

Lastly comes the payday. Oedipus has to pay for all his sins and face humiliation in front of the very people he ignored with contempt. He admits his mistakes by saying, I stand revealed at last-cursed in my birth, cursed in marriage, cursed in the lives I cut down with these hands! (Sophocles 1309-11).

On top of this, he gouges out his eyes but moves quickly to justify his actions, What good were eyes to me? Nothing I could see could bring me joy (Sophocles 1473-74). Truth has a way of finding her way home. No matter how hard we try to cover the truth, nature has a way of bringing our deeds to light. This is a fact that Oedipus came to learn, unfortunately, it was a belated bitter lesson.

When people reach this point of life where they realize everything is vanity, they become remorseful. Oedipus did not miss in this common arena and he concludes by saying, Oh no, what can I say to him? How can I ever hope to win his trust? I wronged him so, just now, in every way.

You must see that-I was so wrong, so wrong (Sophocles 1554-57). He regrets how contemptuous he acted towards Creon. This is a typical ending of many people in our times. People have risen to stardom only to come down crumpling as we watch.

Apart from the significance of this play in contemporary world, it plays a crucial role in Greeces history. This play reflects greatly the character of Athenians rulers; who were diligent, brave, and daring on one side, while arrogant and contemptuous on the other side (Silverman para. 6).

These leaders defended their territories but they could not defend themselves as individuals, just like Oedipus. Moreover, Athenians struggled with religious issues and this play highlights all these. Lastly, this play expounds on human suffering that, sometimes people get what they deserve while at other times they endure the most of fate.

Conclusion

Sophocles knew exactly what he was writing when he compiled the play Oedipus Tyrannus. This play is a true reflection of what people go through. Oedipus is an epitome of modern day leaders who start their leadership reigns in style only to turn tyrannies and come to humbling ends.

The place of this play in todays society is important and it is amazing how humanity has not changed after many years of civilization. Issues to do with divinity were critical in Greece during the times of Oedipus and they still weigh heavily on society today.

There has been a deliberate shying away from and denial of the truth; a fact highlighted strongly in this play. People have continually neglected the truth, choosing to pursue what seems right in their own eyes regardless of criticism that may be surrounding them.

Finally, this play emphasizes on historical issues in Greeces history like nature of leaders, religion, and human suffering. Oedipus Tyrannus is an educative and entertaining masterpiece that cannot afford to take a backseat in todays literature.

Works Cited

Meineck, Peter, & Woodruff, Peter. Oedipus Tyrannus. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Company, Inc. 2000.

Silverman, David. Sophocles Oedipus Tyrannus. 1995. Web.

Sophocles. The Oedipus Tyrannus with English Notes. Crosby, Howard. Ed. New York: D. Appleton & Company. 1857

Introduction

There are several eternal questions, the answers to which have not been found yet. Every person has his/her own opinion on the point. One of such questions is the following: What rules our life: fate or our actions, which are inspired by the major traits of our characters? Though it is hard to answer this philosophic question, it is possible to prove a certain point of view, using some authoritative example. Such a highly authoritative source may be the play Oedipus the King by Sophocles, which has been considered one of the most well-known and respected dramatic masterpieces of imaginative literature for centuries. It is known that the plot of the drama is built around an awful tragedy in the life of the protagonist and his surrounding. The tragedy involves the two greatest sins and crimes: murder and incest. The finale of the play shows death and misfortune, which were caused by awful tricks of fate and concurrence of circumstances.

The role of prophets in the play

The great importance in the play, and the life of our forefathers, on the whole, was given to priests, who were recognized as mediators between common people and Gods, they were chosen people who could interpret the signs of fate, and they were greatly respected for that. In the play, the protagonist, Oedipus, frequently resorts to advice and instructions of prophets, oracles, and priests. They determine and rule the action of the characters. For instance, Tiresias, the blind prophet of Thebes, opens Oedipus the truth about the murderer of King Laius. Without this information, the action could have unfolded differently. Besides, it was a coincidence, that the prophet was blind, and Oedipus mentioned his blindness, provoking the prophets wrath: This crime was planned and carried out by you, All but the killing; and were you not blind Id say your hand alone had done the murder (Hall 60). Fate determined the final punishment of the king; he became as blind as the prophet had been.

The concurrence of circumstances in Oedipuss life

The action of the play omits the first part of the myth about king Oedipus, but later Jokasta tells the story to Oedipus, her husband, and son. It becomes evident, that his life was ruled by fate from the very beginning. It was his father, Laius, who obeyed the prophecy of the oracle and decided to kill his son, in order not to be killed by him. However, Laius failed in deceiving destiny, thus, proving, that no matter what you decide to do, the final result will be determined by destiny. Laius made a desperate step, deciding to kill his offspring. Still, the chain of coincidences led to his death: Jokasta proved to be too weak to kill her son, the servant was too kind as well, the shepherd found new parents for the boy. Besides, again it happens because of the terrible prophecy, that Oedipus abandons his step-parents, fearing to bring harm to them. Instead, he makes the prophecy come true, he kills his real father, Laius. Their encounter at a crossroads is also an accidental circumstance, causing the terrible murder.

Oedipuss character

At the same time, it must be mentioned, that Oedipuss character also contributed to the development of action. His resoluteness has constantly made him act; for instance, when he decided to abandon his parents, Polybus and Merope. His desire to be honest, fair, and avenging eventually led to the revelation of his crime against his real father. Sophocles wanted to show that even strong people could not deceive fate.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it may be stated, that Oedipus the King is a marvelous example proving the ancient Greek idea that life is ruled by fate alone. According to Sophocles view, a person should humbly obey destiny, as he is a mere puppet in the hands of fate, and all attempts to disobey it are sure to be doomed to failure.

Works Cited

Hall, Edith, ed. Antigone; Oedipus the King; Electra. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.

Peoples destiny is predetermined by the actions

People have always been interested in their destinies, and this interest was supported either by fear or by relief. Peoples actions are the main signs of what people will get in the future, what they deserve. Providing some actions people do not always think about the consequences, but it usually appears so that they get what they deserve and the play of the ancient Greek author Sophocles Oedipus the King is one of the literary examples that peoples destiny is usually predetermined by the actions, which person provides through his/her life.

Oedipus as a victim and person who deserves punishment

Reading the play it seems that Oedipus is the victim, whose life was not so exciting, but analyzing it the conclusion comes out that people overvalue him. Being a king, powerful and rich, does not always mean being a happy person. Without knowing a father and mother, being without parental love may make the reader feel sorry for Oedipus. His hubris character, inability to see the real estate of things may make people think about his hard childhood and way to power. The closer consideration of Oedipuss life makes people understand that he is not such a victim, how wants to appear to others. Being blind not physically but mentally, Oedipus created his fate as it was. Being wiser a little, he could change his life and avoid that punishment which he deserved for his actions.

Oedipus knew his fate

So, what is the reason for punishing a person who had just entrusted himself to fate? The question contains the answer. Oedipus knew his fate, he knew that would have killed his father and get married to his mother, but such knowledge did not make him think before killing Laius and getting married to Jocasta. The blindness to trust is the main reason why Oedipus was punished as the reaction to the oracles words could have changed the life and the destiny of Oedipus.

People always get what they deserve

People always get what they deserve, and this hundred years of experience is always supported by millions of examples. Oedipus is not the exception, being blind in his heart, he was punished by real physical blindness. Understandings of his actions lead him to the understanding that he had to be punished. The awareness of his actions (the murder of his father and marriage to his mother) made him feel sorry for his action and had nothing to do but punish himself. The disability to see was a real punishment, not physical pain. Oedipus received his punishment for his actions and this punishment is argumentative. The realization of it is the main relief for him as we all are mortal and the question of the further condition is not solved.

So, peoples actions now predetermine the punishment or gift in the future. Disability for Oedipus to consider his actions, to analyze them reduced him to blindness. Providing some actions people should always think about consequences and make them think twice before providing this or that action. Oedipus had the chance to avoid his punishment, but he did not want to, he just was brought under the consequences and had to pay for that. The murder of the person is the main sin, and the cost for the murder is very high. The double pain is that he had killed his father that is the punishment in itself.

Works Cited

Sophocles. Oedipus the King. Minneapolis: Filiquarian Publishing, LLC., 2006.

Introduction

Over the years, there has been a raging debate on who really caused the downfall and subsequent destruction of King Oedipus. Some scholars believe that Oedipus pride and arrogance brought his destruction while on the other hand others claim that Jocasta was responsible for destroying everyone and everything.

Despite the different approaches taken by scholars on the matter, one thing that emerges clearly throughout the play is that Oedipus brought about his own downfall. His arrogance and high headedness clearly emerges as the genesis of all his woes. (Sophocles)

Right from the start, there is rumor that Polybus the Corinthian king is not Oedipus father. When this rumor gets to Oedipus, he confronts his parents who do not appropriately answer his question. Oedipus then decides to approach the Delphic Oracle to seek an answer to his question.

Even the Oracle does not answer Oedipus question but instead tells him that he will marry his own mother and cause the death of his father. Instead of heeding the oracle, Oedipus pride leads him to think that he can avert this tragic fate. While trying to flee from his destined fate, he ends up killing King Laius who is his own father.

His journey ends in the Thebes Kingdom where Oedipus eliminates the beastly Sphinx and consequently solves the complex riddle of a form that walks on all fours early in the day, on twos by midday and on threes by sunset.

In recognition of this achievement, the Thebans appoint him to take over the vacant throne left behind by the demise of King Laius. By accepting this offer, Oedipus agrees to marry the widowed queen who in reality is her mother, Jocasta. It is clear that Jocasta does not play any role in any of these events but in reality, they are Oedipus own makings.

Soon after this, a plague rages throughout the Theban land leaving everyone in distress. This causes Oedipus to send his brother-in-law, Creon to seek why the city is experiencing the plague. The Oracle at Delphi reveals that the plague in the land is caused by the unavenged death of King Laius.

Against the peoples wishes to first consult prophet Tiresius, Oedipus goes ahead to pronounce a harsh punishment against the responsible person. Even after Tiresius is consulted, he advises that the matter should be left to rest. However, Oedipus keeps pressurizing him to a point where Tiresius gives an ominous prophecy for Oedipus.

By this time, Oedipus has already declared that Creon is a traitor who has to die. Queen Jocasta intervenes to bring calm between her brother and husband. Upon learning of the feud between them, Jocasta assures Oedipus that he has nothing to worry about since her son was killed in infancy and there is no way he could have been the cause of the Kings death.

At this point, Oedipus learns that the king had indeed been killed at exactly the same spot where years earlier he had killed a man who had blocked his way. As the events unfold and Jocasta senses that Oedipus is indeed her son, she begs him to drop the matter but he decides to have none of this. This leads to the death of Jocasta and subsequent banishment of Oedipus from the kingdom.

Conclusion

From the account of events, it is clear that Oedipus woes began way before Jocasta came on the scene. Most of the things that Oedipus went through were actually caused by his pride and arrogance something that led him to disregard the oracles and the peoples advice. It is therefore only fair to conclude that Jocasta was nothing but a bystander who tried to control things from getting out of hand.

Works Cited

Sophocles. Oedipus the King: The Play in Focus, 2010. Web. <https://www.answers.com/search?q=oedipus-the-king-the-play-in-focus>

Introduction

Oedipus can be described as a Greek mythical personality in the Greek culture. He is described as a person who came to fulfill a certain prophecy. The prophecy itself involves this third king of Thebes killing his biological father. Later on, he unknowingly marries his biological mother.

All of this began with a prophesized oracle after the birth of Oedipus. Therefore, Laius orders his death to avert this prophesies. Unfortunately, while he was left out there in the wilderness to die, a shepherd picks him up and hands him over to a friend. Through the shepherds friend, he ends up in Corinth in the Kings house. The King and Queen take him as their own son. They see him as a blessing as they did not have a child.

Initially, Oedipus was not aware of the fact that the King and Queen were not his true parents. Therefore, when one day a drunk mentioned that he was adopted, it troubled him. He became even more troubled on visiting several oracles.

Even though the oracles told him the truth, it was more troubling because at that time, he could not make sense of it all. One day, while Oedipus was on his way, he had a dispute with the King of Thebes and unknown to him he killed him after having the argument. He did not even know that he was the king of Thebes when he was killing him.

Later on in the town of Thebes, his wits enabled him to answer a riddle and thus saved the people of Thebes. He thus went on to fulfill the prophecy by marrying King Laiuss widow. However, when mother and child came to learn later on their true relation to each other, the mother decided to commit suicide. Oedipus on the other hand decide to blind himself.

Strength of character by Oedipus

Oedipus has an outstanding central strength. This strength is his curiosity or in other words his truth seeking zeal. This strength can be termed as being part of him. This is first witnessed after he gets a tip of his true Identify. Since he wanted to really know the truth behind it all, he is seen visiting various oracles just to find out the truth.

Even though it took quite a while for him to know the truth about his parents, he finally did find out the truth, though a bit late. His truth seeking nature can also be thanked for enabling him to earn the throne of Thebes. This riddle of Sphinx enables him become a ruler and gets a ready wife.

The truth seeking nature of Oedipus can almost be described as being hard-coded in him. This is evident as he ignored all warnings to keep away from the truth. An example is a warning by the prophet who was blind, i.e. Tiresias. Terisias points out to him You dont want to know the truth It is in fact disappointing to him when he finally learns the truth. In fact it is the truth itself that brings Oedipus down and not even his defiance of the gods.

The desire to know the truth thus forms the strongest motivating factor in Oedipus. His period of reigning as king comes down to being characterized as a truth seeking mission. It is no wonder that despite the big title that he held, his life had many uncertainties that formed a riddle around him (Simon, 201).

It can be put down that in the whole play; the truth is vividly guarded from Oedipus. When it however finally dawns to him, the same truth shocks him. He however embraces this truth with open arms. Therefore one can say that his ability to move from being in pain and confused about the truth is a strength in character. It actually shows just how Oedipus has finally become wise.

Throughout the play of Sophocles, Oedipus seems extremely careless on his quest for the truth irrespective of the consequences that are ever so painful. Even though one can say that his quest for the truth was accompanied by lots of despair, this same quest is the one that is attributed towards having changed Oedipus.

Due to his many tribulations, Oedipus is forced to come to terms with new responsibilities. These were to affect not only his family and kingdom, but also himself. He is thus seen to have come out stronger. This strength of character also shows that he indeed has become mature.

Conclusion

Come to think of it, there was only one way through which Oedipus could have attained his strength of character. Therefore, Sophocles just puts out a simple fact through this strength of Oedipus. This simple fact is that every single person is always in a quest to find the truth about something. It is not a must for the quest to set you free. The fact however is that the journey on your quest will shape you

Works Cited

Simon, Peter. The Norton Anthology of World Literature. 1(2). USA: W. W. Norton & Company. 2009.

Family and tragedy are two concepts that characterized almost every work of Geek drama. Most of such works focus on family relationships, adultery, incest, and the like issues. Aeschylus Oresteia and Sophocles Oedipus the King are the Greek tragedies that are the most successful in expressing the subjects of family and tragedy. The stories which they present strike the reader with unexpected turns of events and intricate plots. Oresteia consists of three main parts, Agamemnon, The Libation Bearers, and The Eumenides which are interrelated. These parts present the tragedy in the family of Agamemnon who once sacrificed his daughter Iphigenia; the story and the subsequent parts of it depict the revenge which Agamemnon faced for his actions. Oedipus the King deals more with the issue of fate and its inevitability; however, it closely touches upon the problems of family relations as well for Oedipus killed his father (though unaware that it was him) and married his mother (without knowing that she was his biological mother). Like all the Greek dramas, the two stories under consideration have tragic endings. Each of three parts of Oresteia reveals the subjects of family and tragedy with Agamemnon presenting the story of a Clytaemestra killing her husband, The Libation Bearers telling about Orestes and Electra killing their mother, Clytaemestra, in revenge for her murdering their father, and The Eumenides depicting how the ghost of Clytaemestra revenges her son for killing her; similarly, the interrelation between family and tragedy in Oedipus the King is exhibited through Oedipus killing his father and marrying his mother.

What should be mentioned above all is that in Oresteia the tragedy starts developing with Agamemnon sacrificing his daughter, which further serves as a ground for his wife, Clytaemestra, killing him in revenge. The first part of the drama, Agamemnon, presents the revenge of a mother who grieves the death of her child. It is not a secret that women have more affection for their children than men, which is why a woman can hardly be able to murder her own child; instead, she will readily give away her life to save him/her. Agamemnon, however, chose to sacrifice his daughter, Iphigenia, to appease Artemis in whose temple Agamemnon killed an animal without permission. In this way, Agamemnon sacrificed the life of his daughter for gaining favorable winds during the Trojan expedition in which he participated (Morford and Lenardon 322); in revenge, his wife Clytaemestra murdered him as soon as she found out how her daughter died. This is only a part of Agamemnons family drama. Another part is presented through his wife committing adultery while he was absent from home. In this way, Agamemnon presents imperfections in the family under consideration with the tragedy of this family rooting in the wifes unfaithfulness to her husband and the fathers sacrificing his daughter in exchange for the gods favor.

In addition, Agamemnons children continue ruining the family basing on their fathers sins in The Libation Bearers. Electra and Orestes, Clytaemestras children, seem to be guided only by the hatred for their mother who killed their father. As Orestes says, not without justice did I kill my mother, / stained as she was with murdering my father (Aeschylus, Shapiro, and Burian 145: 1163). The most interesting fact about this is that neither Electra who instigates her brother to kill Clytaemestra, nor Orestes, who is furious with his desire to revenge for the death of his father, cares about the fate of their sister, Iphigenia whose death bred the tragedy in the family. This means that Orestes considers women less important for the family than men, which is typical for the Greek drama where the men are presented as warriors and the heads of the families. Despite this, however, it is still Agamemnon who should be blamed for the tragedy which further developed in his family, for it was namely his action (killing the animal in Artemis temple) that led to the death of Iphigenia, the murder of Agamemnon by Clytaemestra, and the murder of Clytaemestra by Orestes.

Finally, The Eumenides presents the closure of the drama which developed within Agamemnons family over the years. This part of Oresteia reveals that Agamemnons family has never striven for mutual understanding; all members have lived their lives in revenge. Thus, Clytaemestra sought revenge for the death of her daughter, whereas Agamemnon, being a ghost, incited his son to kill Clytaemestra for being unfaithful to him (McDonald 35); eventually, Clytaemestra, even as a ghost, wishes to revenge her son for killing her. This shows that Agamemnons family was never united because even when the members of his family died, they continued taking vengeance on each other. It is remarkable, however, that neither of them admitted his/her fault, as well as neither, was remorseful of his/her sins even after death. This family lacked forgiveness, mutual understanding, and desire to improve relations between its members. Each of them was driven by their own goals, the goals which eventually ruined the family. Thus, the tragedy of Agamemnons family consisted in the selfishness of each of its members and their unwillingness to forgive each other or at least meet somebody halfway.

While the tragedy in Agamemnons family develops from its members attitude towards each other, the tragedy of the Oedipus family is rooted in a prophecy. Oedipus father was prophesied that he would be killed by his own son who would afterward marry his own mother; this being the reason, he ordered to murder the infant as soon as the latter was born. This proves once again that the mans place in a family was more important than that of a woman, at least in Greek drama. Oedipus mother, naturally, attempted to save her child, which consequently led to the fulfillment of the prophecy. This means that the prophecy was the root of the tragedy of this family; however, was it not for the cowardice of Oedipus father and his fear to die from the hand of his own son, the prophecy could have failed to realize. Therefore, fear and cowardice served as a ground for the tragedy which developed in Oedipus family.

In sum, numerous families experience tragedies due to different reasons. In a case with the works under consideration, these reasons were selfishness, revengefulness, and cowardice. In Oresteia, the members of Agamemnons family pursued their own goals, while, to maintain the welfare of the family, they had to pursue the common ones. In the case of Oedipus family, the cowardice of his father who feared the fulfillment of the prophecy was the reason for the tragedy which started unfolding after Oedipus was born.

Works Cited

Aeschylus, Shapiro, Alan, and Burian, Peter. The Oresteia. Oxford: Oxford University Press US, 2004.

McDonald, Marianne. The Living Art of Greek Tragedy. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2003.

Morford, Mark P.O. and Lenardon, Robert J. Classical Mythology. Oxford: Oxford University Press US, 1999.

Introduction

The play by Sophocles Oedipus Rex is an eminent example of the ancient Greek tragedy. The plot of the play describes the tragedy of Oedipus who does not feel his identity for his family and the society in which he lives. The tragedy of the play is in the fact that the king realizes that he killed his father and that he slept with his mother. The theme of unwritten laws which go apart from rational reasoning is highlighted in the play. The research paper promotes the scope of investigation in terms of the main features of the play and its performance. In this respect, the idea of Greek tragedy and classical Greek literature is imposed into the paper with a mere extent of subtlety. The points of play production, its features, and implementation are included in the discussion. The features of the stage, actors, their costumes, chorus direction, and music provide the whole understanding of Sophocles main idea of the play. Also, the analysis of outlined aspects gives a background for an observer about how to estimate the conceptuality of the play.

Evaluation

Stage Setting

In the tradition of classical dramaturgy of ancient Greeks, the concept of the pay and its representation was driven in terms of the natural play of actors and without decorations. The thing is that the play itself should represent the reflection in actors of the main feelings of their characters. This standpoint was at a core in ancient Greece. The production of the play according to its original performance should include, first of all, a particular place. In Greece for performing dramaturgy theatres were built in a circle form with an open-air place. The hollow of the theater represents conditions for the acoustic effects so that to hear actors well. The amphitheater with its particular stair-step structure made of wild polished-up stone would surely place a viewer into the atmosphere of ancient theater.

Another step concerns the stage setting. In this respect, the play should be provided in an empty place of circle form without a folding screen. Such a setting makes it possible for the observers to get involved with the whole representation of the play. Every character in Oedipus Rex becomes then the object of great concentration of viewers attention. The critical observers of the ancient epoch in drama admit the following idea about scene-setting throughout the pay:

Throughout the play, the scene with at least one door represents the facade of the royal palace of Thebes. Even when the action takes place inside the palace, such as Jocastas suicide and Oedipuss self-blinding, there is no shift of scene (Dunkle para. 1).

Thus, the stage setting and the whole preparatory outlook on the play should consider the traditional constituents of Greek plays. The role of the place for actors and viewers should contemplate the formation of acoustic effects so that the main idea of the play could be identified.

Costumes

Costumes in play form a special attitudinal framework of a viewer as of particular intentions toward a character. In this respect, the costumes of an original play should include stunning patterns in the Greek cultural tradition of dressing. Moreover, the whole representation of characters is possible with changing of their initial costumes in different scenes. For instance, when Oedipus does not recognize the roots of the plague, he stays in a merely stable state of his soul. Here the actor should be in a glorious dressing. On the other hand, when the truth becomes apparent to him and Oedipus follows the example of Tiresias, his dress is better to change into red grave clothes. This is why the features of each stage of the development of pay are colored especially according to the scenes and episodes. Moreover, Aristotle in his Poetics outlines: Sophocles is supposed to have been the first playwright to use painted scenery, and contemporary vase-paintings can offer faint clues as to the appearance of the costumes and masks (Cited in Sophocles 1). Thus, the coloring of the costumes presupposes the innovative implementation of stunning dressing of actors along with masks and paintings on actors. Such a method of face paintings is applicable in the scene when Oedipus pokes out his eyes.

Chorus

The choral parties are inalienable features of the play. Using their implementation in the play particular atmosphere can be made. The background of Oedipuss reasoning is shaped by the chorus. The scene when Jocasta hangs herself is also supported with a trembling signing of choral artists. The role of the chorus is to put a viewer into the picture of what happening on some emotional level. The words of the chorus serve as the direction to Oedipus in his passions. Chorus represents the ideas of rationale. In terms of Greek mythology, it is similar to gods revelations. Thus its extraordinary role cannot be simply exaggerated. The difference between Oedipus and chorus is in the fact that chorus can see and Oedipus cannot (Travis 46). Hence, the members of the chorus should be apt in emotional feelings, so that to project the features of excitement and trouble of plague in Thebes. The chorus should be trained in making more attention to the distinctiveness and brilliance of the singing. In this respect, musical support is of great significance.

Music

The music in the play is similarly important as the destination of the chorus. Music is the source of the inner representation of the scenes. In other words, the components of play should be designated using music. First, one should remind that it is a tragedy. Greek tragedy contemplates that the music helps a viewer determine the reception of the play. It serves as the way to perceive the details and the meaning of words by actors in terms of choral parties. The thing is that the music leads the chorus in singing. It outlines possible drops and splashes of characters attitudes or actions. The main instruments for the original sounding of the play are: double flute, drums, tambourine, and sometimes the kithara (Introduction to Oedipus the King para. 10).

Conclusion

The play by Sophocles Oedipus the King is the representation of genre peculiarities of dramaturgy in ancient Greece. This tragedy inspires with the main ideas and intentions imposed by the author to illustrate the truth of Oedipus. Furthermore, the setting should illuminate the features of original Greek theater with particular framing of the stage. Actors and instrumentation of the play do not need additional decorations. Every definite scene or episode is commented on by a messenger. The role of chorus and music indicate the sensual background of the play. They serve as the supporting tools for Oedipus in his reasoning and evaluation of actions done.

Works cited

Dunkle, Roger. Oedipus the King. Brooklyn College Core Curriculum Series. Web.

Introduction to Oedipus the King. Web.

Sophocles. Antigone, Oedipus the King, Electra. Translated by Kitto, Humphrey Davy Findley. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Travis, Roger. Allegory and the tragic chorus in Sophocles Oedipus at Colonus. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999.