Category: Oedipus the King

Introduction

This is an Athenian tragedy by Sophocles. The main character Oedipus is the King of Thebes. Oedipus’ own fault brings him down and in an embarrassing way. The literature work presents a perfect example of tragedy. King Oedipus is the protagonist in the play. His tragic error is linked to a natural curse on his biological father.

Analysis of the tragic error

The chronology of events begins when a young man learns about a rumor that King Polybus and Queen Merope are not his biological parents.

Innocently, Oedipus sets out on a journey with the intention of permanently moving away to thwart the Oracle, which is unknown to him. Oedipus feels that if he is far away then he may not harm his foster parents whom he now believes are his biological parents. The first part of his tragic error occurs during this journey. Oedipus meets a stranger, who unknown to him is his biological father, Laius.

A quarrel ensues which eventually leads to a fight. By the end of the war, Oedipus kills everybody except one person in the stranger’s entourage (Storr, 2008)). The cause of disagreement was a very simple argument between them over who had the right-of-way. All This takes place while the two, King Laius and his Son Oedipus are unaware of their identities. Oedipus did not even know that the stranger he was fighting was a King.

The second part of King Oedipus tragic error, ironically occurs after Oedipus uses his wisdom to free the Kingdom of Thebes. It is interesting to see how wisdom and the wish to rescue Thebes drive Oedipus into a classic tragedy. Oedipus answers the riddle from Sphinx to deliver the Kingdom of Thebes from a curse.”

What is the creature that walks on four in the morning walks on two at noon and walks on three in the evening?” The Sphinx asked, ´ Man,” Oedipus responded. The reward for this work was for Oedipus to be made the King of Thebes. He was then given the Queen of Thebes, Jocasta, to marry. The Queen incidentally was his biological mother. This opens both ends of the tragic error. The Oracle he ran away from was then fulfilled.

Oedipus is a victim of fate, killing his father and his mother. The order of events is guided by his brilliance in which Oedipus attempt to unravel the truth. This is in addition to control his destiny .This however, climaxes into the tragedy that leads to his embarrassing downfall.

When he discovers that he has a curse following him, just like ant other human being and King for that matter, sends Creon his brother-in-law to seek advice from Apollo. “King Apollo! May his joyous looks be presage of the joyous news he brings!” He says. The news from Apollo seems to bring the expected joy and hope. Creon, “Good news, for even intolerable ills. Finding right issue, tend to naught but good.”

Creon explains that evasion will only come after the murderer of Laius; the former King is found and prosecuted. With determination to avert his curse, Oedipus commits himself to apprehend the murderer and make sure justice is done. Ironically, Oedipus is the killer himself.

Further complications arise when Jocasta disapproves the blind prophet’s prophesy that King Oedipus killed the former King Laius. The news from the prophet is in fact true but a mystery to understand. Jocasta advises Oedipus not to be bothered by looking for the murderer. She says who the man is. Let it be. Twere wastes of thought to weigh such idle words.” However, Oedipus is not convinced and insists to pursue the matter.

However, an obscurity in itself regenerates in Oedipus memory regarding a babyhood story of him being an adopted youngster. Jocasta’s flow of the story looked very similar to the one the old man told him in his childhood. Members of his Kingdom through the song continue to persuade him further but he resists (Storr, 2008) He continues his probe to know the murderer of Laius, the former King.

The fatal chronology of events fulfills the prophesy of the tragic error when Jocasta discovers that her second husband is actually her son and a child whom together her first husband King Laius dumped in the forest to avert a curse. To her surprise the child was a live, a King and worst of all her husband whom they had four children together. With glaring in her face and because the situation then was an abomination, Queen Jocasta kills herself by committing suicide.

This happens shortly before King Oedipus also discovers the truth. Oedipus realizes that he in deed killed King Laius, his biological father that he was married to his biological mother, and together they have four children (Grene, 2010). The events of the situation become unbearable. Oedipus, in accepting his mistake requests for punishment. He ends up being a beggar who wanders all over.

The moral lessons

Athenians learnt a lot from the tragic error by their King, Oedipus. Among the lessons, the Athenians learnt that destiny could never be thwarted. Oedipus in quest to know the truth and his wish to control his destiny ended disastrously. His father, Laius and his mother Jocasta conspired to kill their son in an attempt to evade destiny.

This never worked as Oedipus was eventually rescued and he lived to fulfill what fate dictated. The curse that turned to be fate for the generations was brought by Laius’ moral decadence. In his youth, he raped a young woman he was teaching. Rape is a vice that is not condoned by the society. This was the source of the curse. The two Kings, Laius, and Oedipus, tried to thwart it but never succeeded.

The Athenians learnt that destiny has its mechanisms of ensuring that it is never avoided. Their King had sort advice from Apollo in trying to avoid a terrible curse that had befallen him. The response circumvented things back to King without his knowledge. Oedipus, then on following up the matter destroyed himself (Berg, 2011). It was clear to them that if something were predestined to happen, it will happen no matter what takes place.

Athenians believed in the fulfillment of prophesy. The tragic events of their King, Oedipus simply reinforced their belief. Their two Kings should have believed in fate. To the Athenians it would never have come in such a torturous way. King Laius and Queen Jocasta would not have conspired to kill their son.

This means that King Polybus and Queen Merope would never have brought up Oedipus. This would have reorganized the way fate would have happened. Most important being that Oedipus would never have bothered to unravel the mystery of his birth.

When the Athenians analyzed the order of events through the tragic error by King Oedipus, it was clear that the cause was an immoral behavior. Laius had been offered an opportunity to tutor a young woman. Laius forgot the good reception he had been given, he instead of concentrating on his job became immoral.

The society and especially in Athena upheld morals. The whole tragedy would have been avoided at the tiptop. It would be easy for Laius to uphold simple but important ethics than letting the entire generation go through pain and embarrassment.

Application

In comparison with the modern world, there is great difference in the beliefs and a change between that generation and the current one. In the modern world, leadership is learnt and the leaders do not run their countries alone. Decisions are never unilateral, to am extent that even the foreign nations influence internal affairs of other countries. Forms of leadership have also changed. Analysis of those seeking leadership including their history are done.

Religion also plays a great role in the difference. Though religion existed in the Athena, the difference is in the faith. The judicial system takes the opportunity to rehabilitate those with moral decadence. Laius would have been jailed for rape. He would never have had a chance to rule since his behavior would never allow him. In the modern society, Hitler, the former Chancellor of Germany represents a leader with a tragic error. He started the Second World War and died a painful and embarrassing death.

References

Berg, S. (2011). Oedipus the King. New York: Oxford University press.

Grene, D. (2010). Oedipus the King by Sophocles. Chicago: University of Chicago press.

Storr, S (2008). Oedipus the King: Original play. New York: Internet classic commentary.

The Greek tragedies are, first of all, focused on reflection of the social and political influences that were imposed on the authors. In this respect, Aeschylus’s The Oresteia introduces the attitude to revenge and constant fight for the power and throne. It also diminishes the significance of family bonds with an emphasis placed on the natural law and justice.

In Sophocles’s Oedipus the King, the playwright chronicles the narration about the king of Thebes and his eventual fall due to the conflict between the state and the individual values. Finally, Euripides’ the Bacchae also reflects on themes of power of self-control, as well as the role of divine rule in political life. Therefore, all three plays refer to the denial of identity for the sake of gaining dominance over the others.

The importance of Aeschylus’s The Oresteia is important because the tragedy presents the main aspects of Greek tragedy. Presenting the trilogy, deals with the themes of the inheritance of evil and retribution of crime.

Both the style and nobility of the presented ideas contribute to representation of such problems as justice and social progress, as well internal struggle with the self. Such themes are also literally interpreted in Orestes killing his mother and Aegusthus’s participation in murdering his cousin Agamemnon, who is also to blame in slaying his daughter.

The murder is also associated with vengeance, which was a socially accepted form of justice during those times. In the book, Aeschylus emphasizes this idea through chorus’s constant repetitions: “Thou biddest; I will speak my soul’s thought out, Revering as a shrine thy father’s grave…Pray in set terms, Who shall the slayer slay”^[1]. The author’s message, therefore, shapes his political outlook on the social organization, as well as eternal struggles between leaders.

In Sophocles’s Oedipus the King, the main hero faces a difficult decision concerning his role as the ruler that confronts his role as a rebel. By rejecting other claims than his own, Oedipus represents as classical personality portrayed in Greek tragedies. The protagonist is reluctant to listen to other people’s opinion because of his aspiration to resist to greater forces. In the play, the author emphasizes, “Do not seek to be master in everything for the thing you mastered did not follow you throughout your life”^[2].

As it can be seen, the main hero fails to identity his actual purposes, as well as to reconcile with his origins. Euripides’s The Bacchae once again emphasizes the impact of power on distortion of self-identity^[3]. Hence, the king Pentheus strives to compensate his sorrows through gaining more powers. Similar assumptions are connected to the Dionysus’s denial of his mortal roots and aspiration to reach a new status.

In conclusion, it should be stressed that all three authors introduce the political and social contexts in the play to emphasize the hero’s attempts and purposes in life. In particular, the main mythological narrations are strongly associated with family rivalries and revenge for the sake of greater divine purposes.

All the stories also represent the characters’ eternal fight with their origins and identities for achieving grater goals their lives. Finally, the authors introduce a religious aspect as the most typical one in Greek culture because it had a potent impact on power and control. The confrontation between state and the personality is also an important theme illustrating the political situation at those times.

Bibliography

Aeschylus. The Oresteia: Agamemnon, the Libation-bearers, and the Eumenides. US: Digireads.com Publishing, 2005.

Euripdus. The Bacchae. US: Richer Resources Publications. 2008.

Sophocles. Oedipus the King. US: University of Chicago Press, 2010.

Footnotes

1. Aeschylus. The Oresteia: Agamemnon, the Libation-bearers, and the Eumenides. US: (Digireads.com Publishing, 2005) 2.
2. Sophocles. Oedipus the King. (US: University of Chicago Press, 2010) 75.
3. Euripdus. The Bacchae. (US: Richer Resources Publications. 2008).

The conflict of superiority emerges in the sense that when the system of justice seems not to be in favor of the other parties, conflict tends to arise. In some cases those who are usually oppressed in this case are those without powers.

On the other hand Gilgamesh tries to know more about what life is and in this case the consequences of this make him suffer. In the case of Oedipus it is also from his inquisitive nature of whether those with him are his real parents or not that he comes to terms with his father who he later kills after cab disputed argument.

Gilgamesh focuses on the choices that people have to make and the tribulations that have to face when they have to satisfy some needs or desires. Most of the people who often are seen as potential and well established are sometimes taken aback by some events or friend where at a later state they usually regret. Most people usually forget the reason of their abilities given to them and since their attributes are seen to be unique they usually try to influence other with them.

In the case of Enkidu, he uses his strength to undermine all those going against his will and he is not putting in mind what the results will be to other in the society. He is also a character that practices immorality owing to the enormous strength he has. Enkidu is inconsiderate and has greed in that he is able to persuade Gilgamesh to kill their rivals and be able to take the overall rule.

Gilgamesh fails to utilize the opportunity given to him to become immortal and leaves it to the snake.In today’s society anxiety usually exists with everyone trying to prosper or access the spirit of changing ones life but what is usually difficult is making the first step to attain the change. Gilgamesh fails to make the first step that will ensure he is immortal and leaves it to the snake which takes all his opportunity by consuming the herb. In this situation it is only the confusion from the gods that ha resulted to this to happen in the long run.

Gilgamesh is brought into light after the discovery of Enkidu in the forest and his powers though present is revealed as he fights and defeats Enkidu whom they later become great friends. Gilgamesh is also not only a warrior and a leader, but also a considerate person since he is more concerned with the protection of the people of Uruk.his heroic status is felt by all within his ruling.

His demonstration of power is brought forward as he is able to build strong fountains and cedar gate from the forest to protects his rulings. Considered a superman he is portrayed as having distingtive aspects as compared to the people he is governing and in this case he is able to do all acts in his power s without being challenged.

By taking the long journey to the cedar woods, he is standing a test of courage and showing that he also can possess and have power more than the other gods since he sees that in uruk he has no challangers.He intends to establish his name in the place where the greatest of the men are written.In this concept Gilgamesh undertakes a journey to the cedar forest where he and Enkidu have to characteristically fight and kill that rulers of the forest.

This journey to them is an adventure and acts as a chance to increase most of their territorial rule. This journey however signifies a transgression owing to the fact that the two had to inflict judgment by fighting and killing to attain selfish intense. However the ruling of the gods in this case will be so severe.

How does divine justice differ from human justice-and is there any way that one can reconcile itself against the other.

As it can be portrayed what human justice entails is the physical attributes that are depicted on the person who is not the offensive. Justice is sought by force in the context of the human understanding as compared to the way the Supreme Being carry out theirs. The divine justice on the other hand entails a task test whereby Gilgamesh is forced to undertake some task and overcome them so as to embrace what the divine being consider s justice.

The judgment that are passed by the divine tends to have a negative impact with a close associate of the characters in question.for example in a case of Gilgamesh, Enkiduwho was his close friend succumbs to Oedipus sickness as a result of the gods and dies whereas with oedipus the king, his father whom he barely knew succumbed to his death after the oracle attribute that his son will kill him.

on the other hand the manner in which the ruling of oedipus the king deployed to his people is also an aspect that is depicted in that he refuses to listen to the plight of the people concerning his governance. From all this it is definite that divine justice prevails since even if the overall human justice has taken place, the resultant impacts the divine justice takes a great troll to the characters.

it is also depicted that the concept of the divine prevails since in the case of Gilgamesh his s quest of presuming another life is not an appealing task to the Gods.This case also prevail in the case of Oedipus the King where he is told of his future consequence by the prophet Terasia.All this happening depict that what are set by the supreme are more superior judgment as from those set by man.

The quest for immortality seems to be the driving factor for Gilgamesh since undergoing through this adventure depict his heroic actions of trying to live a life without death.from the advice he received from Enkidu of a possibility of immortality he clearly embarks o and adventurous journey that he clear ought s that it will make him immortal

In establishing nobility he seeks immortality where he wants to get more honor by slaying a more immortal being unlike having to challenge lesser beings that are not immortal and of little abilities as compared to his. In this concept fighting the gods depict a great success to his rule ant that is a great reason why he and Enkidu undertake the same task of fighting all the superior gods that try to suppress their efforts (Andrew 2000). Oedipus the King in his part tries to run away from th realty that is at hand but at the end of it all he still returns back to what fate had in mind for him. He marries his own mother after killing his own father. This is in accaordance to the oracle.

It is only the human judgment that can be able to join the supreme judgment in that the supreme beings are the centers of control I this cases since at the bend Gilgamesh prays to Shamash and divine assistance to overcome the challenges that he is journey to attaining an immortal life. This is also in the case of Oedipus where he has to leave his children to Creon showing that only the Supreme Being prevails.

Works cited

Allingham, P.Notes on Heroic Poetry (2008).

Andrew G, ed. The Gilgamesh story : The Poem and Other Texts in Akkadian and Sumerian. Babylonian Epic New York: Penguin Classics, 2000.

Stephanie. Mesopotamia and the ancients myths:, Gilgamesh, Formation and Others. New York: 1998.

‘Oedipus the King’ A Work of Greek Literature

Greek literature has always been of interest to writers and scholars. This is because they often used very intricate writing styles that are as intriguing as they were decades ago. This subject attracts a lot of research and criticism of the scholarly world. Michael W. Cox and S. Nassar are some of the scholars who seek to interpret Greek methodology in the way stories are narrated and written. One of the most outstanding and intriguing works is ‘Oedipus the King’. It is a story that includes love and tragedy in the same work just as with other classical Greek plays and literary works.

Analysis Play of Michael’s W. Cox and S. Nassar

In the article that Michael W. Cox has written, he tries to give his thoughts on his understanding of the famous play ‘Oedipus the King’. In the play, Sophocles chose to ignore the more common use of recognition and reversal, which dominated Greek plays. As Michael W. Cox notes, Sophocles included sadness and protagonist in his play. Jocasta in the play is a grieving mother who had lost a son in infancy and blames it on her husband. She lives all her life bearing all the pain that her husband was responsible for. However, the tragedy lies in her waiting; she later discovered that her son was alive and was the one who murdered her husband. She has spent years grieving for a son who was to later bring in more grief to her than she could ever imagine. Michael W. Cox argues that the writer tried to write this story differently from the typical Greek methodology.

Michael W. Cox thinks that Jocasta’s lack of grief at the death of Laius was much more than the grief for the death of her infant son. It is in his opinion that Jocasta may have been angry all along because Laius had sexual proclivities and transgressions that may have contributed to Jocasta’s lack of grief at the death of Laius.

S.Nassar, on the other hand, looks at the play from another angle and bases his argument on the point that Jocasta may have been genuinely affected by the death of her infant son. Nassar thinks that the death of a child is not an easy tragedy to deal with this death affected her whole life. The premonition was that the young boy was to eventually kill his father, this is why the husband, Laius, involved Jocasta in an attempt to kill the infant. They tied the infant’s legs tightly and left him on a hill to die. Luckily, a farmer saved the boy. It is noteworthy to note that the tragedy spans a long period. Jocasta spent all her life grieving for her son even though she was an accomplice to the crime. She could have saved her son by running away with him instead of tying his feet and leaving him to die. She gained nothing all her life after the death since she was never happy. The life she chose to save was her husband’s over her son’s though her husband kept giving her emotional pain by having affairs all over the place.

The tragedy in this play consists in the fact that Jocasta lacks self-thought since she could have made the right decision and saved herself from all the years of pain and heartache that she suffered because of her actions. She is not the victim rather is part of the tragedy for the actions she took in the early years of her relationship with her husband. The couple was very selfish and chose to follow the prophecy that said that their son would kill his father rather than act like normal parents and save their son’s life at any cost. The pain and outcome of the play are very disastrous and unimaginable yet are well predicted.

“My son/ he was three days old and his father bound his ankles/ had a henchman fling him away/on a barren trackless mountain” (790-90); this is Jocasta’s depiction of the circumstances that led to her son’s death. The whole story is a tragedy since the parents’ thoughts of what would happen to their son did not come to pass, but rather all future predictions happened as they had been predicted. The messenger says that “Jocasta wailed for Laius, dead for so long/ remembering how she bore his child so long ago/ the life that rose to kill him (1374-76). It is open to anyone reading the play to make a personal conclusion as to the degree of pain and suffering that Jocasta went through in her life. It is not clear to say whether she bore more pain for the death of her infant son or the slaying of her husband. The fact that her son ended up being her second husband may just be the biggest tragedy. However, it may well be the right way to make her pay the price for the lack of maternal instincts that she failed to show to her three-day son.

This paper is aimed at discussing the role of prophecies in the play Oedipus the King by Sophocles. In particular, it is necessary to show how different characters attempt to respond to the predictions, which they do not wish to come true, and explain the effects of their actions.

Overall, it is possible to say that by attempting to prevent the prophecies from being fulfilled, they only seal their fate and eventually suffer the misfortunes that they fear so much.

In order to better illustrate this argument, we need to speak about such characters as Laius and Oedipus. Laius is the rule of Thebes; he learns from oracle that his son Oedipus will kill him and usurp his throne.

This is why he orders Oedipus to be killed but they fail to execute his order and save the child. The main thing is that by giving this command, Laius starts a chain of events which eventually results in his death. Oedipus slaughters him without realizing that Laius is his father. Provided that this character decided to take no action in response to the prophecy, the disaster could have been averted.

This is the cruel irony of this tragedy. The main error that this character commits is that he prefers to escape his destiny rather than face it. He decides to kill his son rather than try to educate him. Certainly, Laius does not believe the course of events cannot be changed but he attemps to do by relying on brutal force instead of courage, perseverance, and love.

In his turn, Oedipus behaves in a very similar way. He is adopted by Polybus, the King of Corinth. For a very long time, he does not know that Polybus and his wife Pariboea are not his real parents. Yet, he learns from oracle that in the future, he will murder his father and marry his mother.

Oedipus flees Corinth in order to avoid this catastrophe, although he does not believe himself to be capable of committing such an atrocity. Again, if he had chosen to stay at home, the oracle’s prophecy might have never come true. Both these characters prefer to run away from danger rather than face it. This might be one of the reasons why misfortunes befall them. As it has been said before, Oedipus accidentally slaughters Laius and marries Jocasta, his mother.

It should be noted that Oedipus mistakes his father for a mere townsman with whom he had a quarrel and killed. He feels practically no remorse for killing this person. Oedipus’ primary concern is that this man is not his father. For a long time, he lives thikning that no danger threatens him and his family. However, later he learns terrible truth about himself.

Overall, prophecies are the main drivers of the plot. Every step that characters take is an attempt to escape destiny; yet, these prophecies turned to be self-fulfilling. Sophocles makes the readers think about possible outcomes provided that the main characters had decided to take no action or to behave in a different way.

Sophocles does not try to depict human beings as creatures who are entirely devoid of free will. Both Laius and Oedipus are very strong-willed people, but sometimes they lack courage to face challenges. Through these characters Sophocles urges the reader think primarily about the ethical implications of their actions.

Works Cited

Sophocles. Oedipus the King (transl. by David Grene). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2010. Print.

‘King Oedipus’ written by Sophocles is perhaps one of the most complex, intriguing, and tragic stories that have ever been written in the history of literature. This story delineates the saga of Oedipus with a strong emphasis on the crucial role of destiny in deciding human fate. This classic work unfolds the miserable life of Oedipus, the King of Thebes, who, after having killed his father, ‘Laius’, becomes the king of Thebes and marries his mother ‘Jocasta’. This story is nothing short of a treasure in terms of the use of literary devices, and various other techniques employed by the writer to elevate this work to the status of one of the most valid masterpieces of all times in literature. It will be a most challenging endeavor to confine the relevance of this story to the study of literature in a 3-page essay. However, if one narrows it down to two or three aspects it will be possible that one can do justice to it. Any literary critic or reader will immediately recognize the various elements that contribute to make this work one of the best samples for an understanding of literature. Therefore, I strongly feel that this story is a valuable piece of literature for modern students especially in terms of plot development, characterization, and philosophical content.

The author’s craftsmanship in plot development is conspicuous by his choice of beginning the story at the Royal Palace at Thebes where the citizens have gathered and a priest speaks of the grievances of the people due to the onslaught of bubonic plague in the country, which has been causing tremendous misery and devastation for the masses. He explains to the king, the gruesome details of the “tide of death from which there is no escaping, death in the womb of women; and pestilence, a fiery demon gripping the city.” (p. 26). The King is quite apprehensive of the miseries, sympathizes with the people, and proclaims that ‘whatever the God requires, upon my honor, it shall be done. (p. 27). This earnest acceptance of his responsibility by Oedipus pulls him into a whirlpool from where he finds no escape. Any modern student of literature should be able to take cue from the author’s clever design of how the central character, as a King, is made to proclaim a commitment which draws him further into the vortex. Subsequently, when Oedipus insists that Teiresias tell him the truth and even threatens him with dire consequences if he fails to do so, Oedipus allows himself to be sucked deeper into the under currents of his destiny, which seals his fate. Another element of effective plot development, from which a student can recognize the author’s techniques, becomes evident by the manner in which the author has chosen to unravel the misery of Oedipus’ destiny through the messenger from Corinth and the servant of Laius, who finally confirm that Oedipus is the killer of his father.

Sophocles has created a well-rounded, striking character in Oedipus who can stand as a sterling example for students in understanding the mechanics of characterization. The diverse characteristic traits one finds in Oedipus make him a complex human being. Sophocles has paid meticulous attention to every minute detail of Oedipus’ character, which any student can discern for a better understanding of the process of sketching characters. Sophocles, on one hand, portrays Oedipus as a chivalrous person, who, as a king, is benevolent to his subjects. The author illustrates his care and concern for the citizens of his kingdom by the instance where he commits himself to do all in his power to remove the evil from Thebes. Later, as the story unfolds, this trait appears more solidified when Oedipus forces Teiresias to reveal the truth about Laius’ slayer, even though it signals the beginning of his doom. On the other hand, Oedipus, as revealed by his misapprehension about Creon, and the way he disregards his mother’s request not to pursue the truth at his peril, creates in the reader’s mind an impression that he is not able to judge people correctly, and his unwillingness to listen to good reasoning becomes his undoing. However, despite all the sins he committed, he emerges as a nobleman of strong character traits who was doomed by the acts of destiny. An analysis of such a complex character will, no doubt, provide the students a good sense of how an intriguing character can be created.

Finally, ‘King Oedipus’ is a worthy book for any student because of how it integrates relevant philosophical content so seamlessly into the threads of the story. When Creon states that “the shedding of blood is the cause of our peril,” the author wants to imply that violence is an evil that mars the peace and well-being of humans, which is a theory that applies to any society at any given time. (p. 28). Similarly is Oedipus’ proclamation that “To help his fellow men with all his power is man’s noble work.” (p. 34). However, the most important philosophical content that directly relates to Oedipus’ tragedy is Teiresias’ logic that “When wisdom brings no profit, to be wise is to suffer,” which he expresses in answer to the statement of Oedipus, quoted above. The deployment of these theories which are most relevant to modern human life, in the apt places in the story, at the appropriate occasions, will provide the students with a clear idea as to how such philosophical thoughts can be integrated into the fabric of narration to create impact in the readers.

From the above discussions, it becomes apparent that ‘King Oedipus’ by Sophocles employs several literary devices like plot development, characterization, integration of philosophical content, etc in a most illustrative manner. A proper analysis of these ingredients throws ample light into the mechanics of narration and will enable an inquisitive person to understand how to effectively use these elements to create emotional and intellectual impacts with a story. Thus, one can confidently state that ‘King Oedipus’ is a valuable piece of literature for modern students to understand the art of storytelling.

Works Cited

Sophocles. The Theban Plays: King Oedipus. New York: Penguin Books USA Inc, 1974.

The way Sophocles has presented his ideas by creating a character like ‘Oedipus’ shows Sophocles concerns about good and evil deeds, which later become actions and influence the person associated with them. The more anyone is related to the deeds, the more he suffers. This is what is shown in the movie “Omen.”

Both stories revolve around curses initiated from fates of good and evil, prophecy, and Satan. Similarities are found in both, but at different time intervals like in Oedipus in the beginning. Laios, the king of Thebes, learns through prophetic forecasting that his own son will kill him. In fact, in both the stories, children are adopted and not born. Omen captures the sequence in a terrifying manner where Damien is the son of wolves who kills the actual baby and takes place as Thorn’s son while Laios being more realistic than Thorn, tries to get rid of his son.

In Oedipus, when Laios and his wife, Jocasta, bears a son, Laios entrusts the infant to one of his herdsmen with orders that he leave the baby to die on Mt. Kithairon, exposed with its ankles pierced and pinned together. The same thing happens in ‘The Omen’ but in the end, when ambassador Thorn realizes his mistake of not killing ‘Damien.’ Therefore in Omen part 1, in the end when Thorn tries to kill the six-year-old Damien, he is caught. Therefore the story remains with Damien.

In Oedipus, the story initiates with the attempt of Laios to kill the boy which later becomes the King. Laios’ attempt remains an attempt, and so does in Omen, the ambassador fails to kill the boy. Here we can see what fate upholds for us could never change. Despite all the efforts to kill the curse (or source of the curse) father fails to kill the evil.

The only difference between the ‘Oedipus’ and ‘Omen’ is that of mode in which the crime is committed, or in other words, is the curse initiated. Oedipus is commenced by what I would call as direct mode, i.e., it is not revealed before the people that he is the killer of the former king “Laius,” therefore Oedipus’s curse is hidden while in Omen, “Damien” serves as the son of Satan, who indirectly curses all the people who surround him and his ‘identity is revealed upon them but in the end. Therefore, he who knows about the ‘Damien’ is killed unintentionally by nature. We can also say that Damien (the child) is a curse not only to his country but also to the ambassador ‘Thorn,’ who thinks until his 6^th birthday that Damien is an ordinary child. Thorn remains unknown to his son’s reality until he finds the photographer and the father, who, in accordance with the biblical passages, tries to prove to Thorn that his son is not actually his own but the son of Satan.

The difference between Oedipus and Damien starts with their “discoveries,” as in Oedipus, Sophocles has revealed about his crime in the end, while in Omen, Damien is declared as evil in the beginning. Oedipus kills his own father, so does Damien but after a long series of killings. The killings start with his maid, and it seems it does not have any end. The curse due to which circumstances get worse is of Damien’s so does in Oedipus, the whole town starts to destruct due to the curse on Oedipus while in Omen, it starts with his own home.

There is another difference between Oedipus’ revelation and Omen’s. Later, when in Oedipus, the Prophet Tiresias meets with Oedipus, he refuses to declare everything to him for he knows the consequences would be worst. While in Omen, ‘Damien’ as a child is not bothered about anything, but when his father Ambassador Thorn meets Father, he is informed openly about what kind of a ‘child’ he owns, therefore that night ‘Damien’s’ curse kills the Father. The same thing happened with the photographer who discovered a supernatural symbol with photos that belonged to ‘Damien’s curse (victims).

In both the stories, it is the fight between good and evil. Evil in ‘the Omen’ in the form of symbols like 666 is stronger as compared to that of Oedipus because of the fact that Oedipus, despite killing his own father, acts as if he seeks the killer, there is a sense of self-defense and unintentional recognition deep inside the heart of Oedipus, which helped him to stay ‘good King’ in the eyes of his people, while Damien is an open evil who does not even bother to stay good. This is evident from the scene in part1, which was about Damien’s condition when his parents Robert and Katherine Thorn, forcefully try to take Damien to the church.

Both the stories revolve around three aspects; fate, god, and war – war between good and evil. Fate is all that is perceived as evil or good and depends upon a person’s intentions. Both stories have many similarities at different sequences in different conditions as both revolve around evil deeds but one main difference that is only noticed after a careful analysis. Oedipus upholds deep inside him a small ray of hope that keeps him going throughout the story. With hope comes light, and light welcomes goodness. Despite all the killings he committed throughout his Kingdom, in the end, he realizes his ‘identity’ and makes a suicidal attempt by piercing his eyes from Iokaste’s broaches. He then himself chooses his punishment to be exiled from his Kingdom. This never happened in ‘the Omen.’ Damien never accepts his defeat and is devoid of this single ray of light and hope and therefore remains as a symbol of evil.

References

Donner Richard. “The Omen” 20^th Century Fox.

Introduction

Each dramatic work has unique characteristics, the study of which gives an understanding of the main essence of the work. These features are literary devices that are used to form a literary work. As part of this work, such poems as “Everyman” and “Oedipus the King” will be compared.” The main aspects that will be taken as the basis of the analysis are theme, characters, and symbolism. The study of literary works with the help of literary tools is valuable because it contributes to their better understanding and perception.

Theme

“Everyman” is a poem that raises serious moral themes that provide a basis for reflection. This is especially true of literary works, which show how the protagonist overcomes vices, which teach to live by moral principles. This is one of the most prominent themes within this play. As a device to convey the main message, the author uses personification and allegory. Thus, the main character, Everyman, represents not a specific person but the whole of humanity. The author shows how following sins can lead to damnation through this character (Sebastian 3). Thus, the author shows him as a man who succumbs to all possible sins (Various 23). This helps to better show the morality of the work, which is based on the importance of performing good actions, not following vices, and observing morality.

“Oedipus the King” has an easier-to-define theme that the first play. This is because it permeates the entire work and runs through the entire narrative of the main character. Hence, the leading theme in this play is the confrontation of freedom and human destiny. This is because the work talks about a young man’s prophecy was to kill his father and marry his mother (Sophocles 15). Trying in every possible way to change his fate, Oedipus tried to follow his desires. However, despite his attempts, he still fulfilled the prophecy, which plunged him into a terrible state and left his own kingdom (Huang 15). Therefore, the author of the play shows that a person cannot resist fate, and free will is only an imaginary aspect of the activity of individuals.

Characters (Protagonist, or Antagonist)

Of particular importance in any work are the protagonist and antagonist. Through these characters, the authors can successfully and more clearly convey the work’s central message. Thus, the main feature of the play “Everyman” is that the main protagonist has no name and is not a specific character. He was married several times, constantly cheated on his spouse, and had a bad relationship with his children, except for one daughter. As already mentioned, the nameless Everyman is a collective image of all mankind. The issue is that in this literary work, there is no obvious antagonist, a character whom the protagonist would oppose. However, it can be said that it may be death itself since it is against it that the play Everyman fights and is afraid of it.

The main protagonist in “Oedipus the King” is Oedipus himself, who is the center of the narrative of the work. As a child, he was removed from his own home because of a prophecy that was destined for him. He tried to resist his fate; however, unknowingly, he still killed his father and married matter (Falkenstern 161; Lauriola 323). The similarity with the play “Everyman” is that the main antagonist is not a person in this literary work. This is since Oedipus is constantly struggling with fate, which is the antagonist. It is it that creates problems and obstacles in the hero’s life, overcoming which he does not realize that he still follows it.

Symbolism

In both works, symbolism plays a rather serious role. It is on par with the rest of the discussed literary devices, helps to better betray the central message of the plays, and gives complexity to stories. In the play “Everyman,” symbolism is expressed through the work’s main characters, such as Good Deeds, Confession, and Death. Hence, in the example of Confession, it is a character that helps the main protagonist to realize the perniciousness of following sins and to redeem himself from them (Kessler 57). This can be interpreted as a symbol of reconciliation in the church. An equally important symbol is Death, which directly means the end of a person’s life. It becomes an agent that gives the main character an awareness of the inevitability of what awaits him.

In “Oedipus the King,” the leading and most prominent symbol is the eyes of the main protagonist. This distinguishes this work from “Everyman” since the characters are separate from the protagonist. The eyes of Oedipus represent, on the one hand, a strong vision and vision of how the fate of the character should develop. However, at the same time, they symbolize blindness to fate and events that Oedipus cannot prevent in any way. When a character gouges out his eyes, it symbolizes the acceptance of the truth and the fate of Oedipus.

Conclusion

In conclusion, literary works carry specific lessons and messages that can be transmitted with the help of literary devices. Among them, such as themes, characters and symbols can be highlighted. These elements add complexity to the works and contribute to a more detailed disclosure of morality in them. Such plays as “Everyman” and “Oedipus the King” have more distinctive features than similar ones, but they have similarities, and literary devices are used to reveal the essence of the stories.

Works Cited

Falkenstern, Rachel. “Hegel on Sophocles’ Oedipus the King and the Moral Accountability of Ancient Tragic Heroes.” Hegel Bulletin, vol. 41, no. 2, 2020, pp. 159-176.

Huang, Yan. “Study on the Reasons of Oedipus’ Tragic Fate.” International Journal of Education Humanities and Social Science, vol. 2, no. 2, 2019, pp. 13-16.

Kessler, Samuel J. ““My Father’s Face”: Judaism, God, and Ritual Practice in Philip Roth’s Everyman, Indignation, and Nemesis.” Studies in American Jewish Literature, vol. 41, no. 1, 2022, pp. 34-59.

Lauriola, Rosanna. “Oedipus the King.” Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Sophocles, 2017, pp. 147-325.

Sebastian, John T. “Morality Plays.” The Encyclopedia of Medieval Literature in Britain, 2017, pp. 1-6.

Sophocles. Oedipus the King. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2018.

Various. “Everyman,” with Other Interludes, Including Eight Miracle Plays. DigiCat, 2022.

The play Oedipus the King is a Greek tragedy that is written by Sophocles and was performed for the first time in 429 BC circa. The play has been regarded by the public as the Greek’s best tragedy play (Ibsen, Henrik 1998). The director attempts to portray in this film, some of the peoples’ positive characteristics as the sources of their downfall. In this case, Oedipus is a very determined and proud individual. Throughout he was determined to achieve whatever he set out to achieve. In his quest, he showed exemplary pride as he could not accept what he came across and this has been his undoing.

The play starts at a time when Oedipus has been king for a while and also having fulfilled the dreaded prophecy, his doomed fate which he had been trying to avoid. In the first scene, he undergoes suffering from his subjects as he states his vow to bring the king’s murderers to justice. The director aims at portraying Oedipus as a confident person and this is very evident in Oedipus’ opening speech in the play as it exudes the authority of a father to his people and brings out his strong characteristics of pride and confidence in the way he is accustomed to facing everyday issues.

The director chose the plot that influences the main aspects of the whole story to be brought into focus. He has used artificial devices of the Greek theatre to artistically render this plot, and it’s the plot he used unlike the story itself that has enabled the play to come across to the audience as tragic. This is evident in the fact that we don’t concentrate on the main story as it was originally written covering an expansive period, but the director has used his plot to collect the essentials of the story and repackage them in a confined period on a stage without necessarily changing the storyline. Thus he maintains its logical composition.

Oedipus’ past is reverted to via his acquired consciousness, without relaying the story as a disjointed record of events over time. He has thus employed swift conflicts leading Oedipus to rediscover himself and his origin as the culprit he is so determined to bring to justice for slaying Laios, his predecessor.

With this plot, the play is portrayed as a tragedy not due to what Oedipus had already done, but due to his reawakened conscious recollections, he realizes the appalling and bizarre nature of his past actions. By the swift recall of these mental agonies, they are made passionate realism in the present only by the plot due to Oedipus awareness.

It was tragic for Oedipus’ parents to plan to kill their son. Later on, Oedipus gets to marry his mother and they have a son and a daughter who are his brother and sister. This is tragic since, in all societies, incest is not viewed favorably. This misfortune befell Oedipus because of deception in the play. When Oedipus came to know the truth of what he had done, he bore out all his eyes. This is quite a tragic end to Oedipus a king and a son who loved his mother and was loyal to her.

Oedipus’s parents did not take time to explain to him about the prophecy, maybe if they had, nothing of the sort would have happened because he might have always put it in his mind to avoid it in the future. When Oedipus was adopted, his new parents did not bother to tell him who he was and where he came from, or who his parents were. This deception contributed greatly to the tragedy that later befalls Oedipus.

In the tragedy of Oedipus, the imagery of blindness, sensory deficiency, and deafness are highlighted. All these are caused by the refusal of Oedipus to accept the truth. This can also be attributed to the significance of the senses of sound and sight to the acceptance of the by the characters in the play and also by the audience. The literary devices used to enhance this reliance upon physical perception include the ever-present synesthesia, or mixing of the senses, as well as the use of music and poetical passages, all of which underscore once again the necessity of sensation and feeling to the explication of human emotions.

The proceedings have been introduced gradually to build suspense and add irony. Dramatic irony is whereby the audience knows the fate of a character before it happens. This has been used to project the tragic nature of the story which is mainly enhanced by the contrast between Oedipus’ unawareness and the audiences’ consciousness.

The Chorus has agonized with Oedipus and they have steered our interest to the truth personified in their vision of the human circumstances which have been portrayed as defined by fate. Various characters attempted to evade fate by changing destiny at many opportunities but they were always thwarted by the gods. This has portrayed them as always making wrong judgments and therefore it is on the humans’ ability to make choices and fate that the play is based.

Oedipus decides to find the truth about the people who murdered Laius. His main intention could have been to save the people of Thebes, but because of this choice that he made, he unknowingly put himself in danger since he administers his very own lethal injection. Teresias comes in and warns Oedipus about the possible consequences of the choices that he makes when he prophesies the consequences of the search for the truth.

Because of Oedipus’ pride and ego which had come as a result of the pedestal fame that the people of Thebes had placed on him, he refused to take the help that Teresias was offering and he persisted in searching for the truth that he desperately needed ( Sophocles 1984). On the other hand, his opinion of him being above all the other gods made him assume and shun the assistance that Jocasta was offering when she once again warned him of the possible consequences of looking for the truth of the people who murdered Louise.

Since people make their own choice and everyone is held accountable and responsible for what he or she does, Oedipus failed in one way or another and his mother Jocasta can not be held responsible for the mistakes that her son did and neither can she be criticized on his behalf since she honorably tried all the possible ways to save her son but the high image that he had on himself would not let him accept the help that was being given by Heresies and his mother Jocasta.

Another outstanding theme in the play is the consequences that the sins of the parents have on future generations (Sophocles 1984). Oedipus was not told about his origin not only by his parents Laius and Jacasta but also by the queen and the king of Corinth Merope and Polybus who adopted him after his parents thought that he was dead. If Oedipus was informed that Merope and Polybus were not his real parents and if he was told who his real parents were, most probably he could not have killed his real biological father Laius and he could not have slept with his biological mother Jacasta after he was crowned the new king of Thebes after overthrowing Sphinx.

This hiding of the truth to him leads him to live in darkness for a long time until he realizes the truth of the crimes he had committed against morality and when his real mother Jacasta committed suicide (Ibsen, Henrik 1998). If the parents did not hide the truth from their son Oedipus they could not have died prematurely. His parents died because of their sin and possibly they could not have died at their age if they had not attempted to disobey and defy the gods. The consequences of the sins of Oedipus are that Oedipus was treated as an outcast and even his children and the other generations that followed were also not accepted in the society. This was quite impractical because the generations that followed were innocent and maybe they could not understand why they had to suffer the humiliation.

The first fateful choice occurs when a prophecy is made that when Oedipus is born he would slay his father and marry the mother. Oedipus’s fate was sealed as he was born because when his parents learned of the prophecy they planned to have him killed to evade the prophecy.

This led to failure to change fate as he does not die as planned. Another stab at changing fate was when Oedipus was in Corinth as an adult and heard about the prophecy from the drunkard and he went to find the truth but he did not get a conclusive answer. After this, he left his adopted parents and homeland to escape the curse and protect his parents, but this was in vain as he soon met his father and unknowingly killed him.

Mimesis can be referred to as the simulation of life is the imitation of life, the formation of, by use of plot, the creation of an alternate realism with independent through the plot of an alternate reality with its original meaning. Oedipus is a person like everybody else and his life’s riddle is comparable to the ambiguity of reality to humans, but the play does not try to relate to us any of the said similarities. In this play thus mimetic drama has been used to generate in the audience a touching reaction instead of clarification of issues.

Works cited

“Defining Characteristics in Oedipus Rex.” 123HelpMe. Web.

Free Essays. “Jocasta is Not to Blame in.” 123HelpMe. Web.

Ibsen, Henrik. Four Major Plays. Trans. James McFarlane and Jens Arup. New York: Oxford UP, 1998.

Sophocles. The Three Theban Plays. Trans. Robert Fagles. New York: Penguin Classics, 1984.

In Oedipus the King, one of the persons, who receive prophesies that project a doomed end, is King Laius; who is the biological father to Oedipus. The oracle that King Laius receives is that he is to be killed by his son (Bloom 117). Since Oedipus is still an infant, his father King Laius decides to kill him and after tying his legs with pins, he orders his wife, queen Jocasta to kill the boy. Jocasta however hesitates to kill Oedipus and instead gives the task to a servant.

The servant does the same and takes the boy to a hill to die from exposure, but the infant is saved by a shepherd, and taken to another kingdom; where the young boy is adopted by a childless King Polybus of Corinth.

The abovementioned prophesy is however fulfilled when Laius meets with Oedipus later in life. Being in the same road and both having chariots, they start to argue on who should use the road. King Laius then attempts to strike Oedipus who appears to be insolent, but Oedipus manages to wrestle him down and kills him.

This happens without either of them knowing about their identities. Oedipus then proceeds to kill the rest of the people accompanying King Laius but leaves one of them. The decision to kill Oedipus leads to the king’s death and as the oracle had said, king Laius dies by the hand of his son without knowing.
Oedipus is another character who receives information from the Delphic Oracle that he is to kill his father and marry his mother (Bloom 118).

Although Oedipus hears rumors that he is not the biological son to the king and queen, he decides that he does not want to harm them. When he confronts king Polybus and queen Merope about his true identity, they both maintain that indeed they are his biological parents. He therefore leaves Corinth and decides to stay away from Polybus and the queen so as not to harm them. Getting away from his parents seems as the best option for Oedipus.

On the way, he meets his biological father Laius and without realizing about their identities, they start to quarrel and Oedipus kills his father as well as those with him except one servant. By killing his father, Oedipus fulfils two prophesies. One is that told to his father when Oedipus was a child and the other is that which made him leave Corinth; that he is to kill he father.

Oedipus then arrives back to his father’s land, Thebes and he is approached with the riddle of the Sphinx (Bloom 99). This riddle jeopardizes the future of people of Thebes who appear to be imprisoned in form of a curse.

Oedipus manages to crack the riddle that had been provided by Oedipus. It showed that he was aware that man was the reason behind the riddle. This is because man followed traits akin to the riddle’s questions.

When Oedipus cracks this riddle, the Sphinx commits suicide by throwing herself off the cliff. This helps in breaking the curse that has long existed in Thebes and the people feel that Oedipus needs to be rewarded (Sophocles and Grene 12). The kingship is issued to Oedipus after he cracks the riddle of the sphinx.

This makes him to be the king of Thebes and goes on to marry his mother, the former queen of Thebes. Oedipus kills his biological father by asserting that his perceived parents were safe in Corinth and that they would make it hard for Oedipus to hurt his parents.

Both Laius and his son Oedipus find ways of avoiding fulfillment of the prophecy, but each method they choose, helps in pushing the prophecy to reality. While his father orders for Oedipus to be killed, Oedipus leaves Corinth, out of fear of hurting Polybus and Merope, since he thinks that they are his true parents.

He ends up killing his father on the way and upon arriving in Thebes; he manages to crack the riddle and is rewarded with kingship and as a result the queen becomes his wife. Unknowingly, he marries his mother and although they come to realize later about the situation, both of the former predictions come true.

Works Cited

Bloom, Harold. Greek Drama. Broomall, PA: InfoBase Publishing, 2004. Print.

Sophocles and David Grene. Oedipus the King. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2010. Print.