Oedipus is a mythological character whose story was coined by the ancient Greek scribe Sophocles in a tragedy play. His father was the king of Thebes. Greek culture has existed from as early as the Mesolithic era (10,000 – 7000 BCE) to the Hellenistic era (323 – 30 BCE). It has evolved over many centuries to become what is known as Modern Greek culture. Each Greek era had its own cultural and linguistic influences that largely depended on the military conquests. Greek traditions are usually based on religion or paganism. Greek language and tradition has also been influenced by empires that recently dominated them. These include the Roman and Ottoman empires. Indeed the influences of such dominations are prevalent today. For example, many Greek dishes have Turkish (Ottoman) names. (McMahan, Day and Funk, 101)
Discussion
The tale of Oedipus gives the message of predestination and fate. Throughout Oedipus’ life people try to stop the events that have been prophesied. These attempts however, cause the series of events that culminate with the fulfillment of the prophesy itself. (Adams, 2)
Oedipus’ mother was called Jocasta. His parents confer with the Oracle of Apollo at Delli. The Oracle informs them that their son will one day kill the king and marry his queen. Laius (king) then orders a servant to kill the child by deserting it on a mountain. The servant disobeys and puts Oedipus in a populated area. Oedipus is found and later adopted by the king and queen of Corinth. (Adams, 3)
One day Oedipus is told that he was adopted. He confronts his ‘parents’ but they deny adopting him. He goes to see the same Dellic Oracle and asks him, “Who am I?” The Oracle does not reply as asked but tells Oedipus that he is the man who will kill his sire and marry his mother. (Adams, 6)
Oedipus decides to runs away from Corinth. Along his journey he meets a man at a crossroads and kills the man in self defense. The only eyewitness escapes. Oedipus then meets a troublesome sphinx who he kills. The people of Thebes offer him the recently widowed queen of Thebes as wife and make him their king as a reward for killing the sphinx. After a while a plague hits the land and Oedipus asks the Oracle for a solution. The Oracle tells him that the plague will end when the killer of Laius is either killed or exiled. (Friedlander, 7)
Oedipus launches an investigation into the murder of the former king. Oedipus first consults Tiresias, a blind prophet. The prophet urges him to stop the investigation, but Oedipus insists on it. Oedipus begins to recall how he killed a man at a crossroads many years before. Jocasta enters the room and tells Oedipus that her husband was killed at a crossroads. (Adams, 8)
They are soon notified that the king of Corinth had died. Oedipus does not wish to travel to Corinth because of the Oracle’s prophesy. This is because Oedipus does not yet know that he was adopted. The messenger tries to calm him down by revealing that he was an adopted child. Oedipus consults the servant who was sent to abandon him as a child and it is revealed that he was the child of Laius and Jocasta. Subsequent revelations make Oedipus and Jacasta realize that the Oracle’s prophesy had been fulfilled. Jocasta kills herself and Oedipus destroys his eyes. Oedipus is then exiled from Thebes. (Friedlander, 10)
Summary
The narrative of Oedipus the King portrays how choices and destiny intermingle. It seems to support the idea of predestination or a predetermined and unavoidable fate. (Adams, 11)
The chorus in Oedipus, the King is an additional set of characters, the Theban elders. They are divided into “strophe” and “antistrophe” for the difference. They represent “the people” of the city, and they alternately pray, bemoan their fate, or criticize the King. They were probably placed in different locations so that they would seem like a discussion among the muses or maybe even nymphs. The voice the questions of the audience. They also served to give the cast time for a brief rest, rather like an amusing but short intermission.
At the end of the first scene, the two groups of three sets of voices: strophe and antistrophe 1,2, and 3, pray to Athena, pray that war (Ares) will not come, and they openly mourn the dead and fear the future. By these means, they explain the situation, filling in where prose would have blocks of exposition, the chorus is providing this in conversation and prayer.
The chorus also provides responses and advice to the King, symbolizing his subjects as here just following the first scene:
Aye, if there be a third best, tell it too. Oedipus
My liege, if any man sees eye to eye With our lord Phoebus, ’tis our prophet, lord Teiresias; he of all men best might guide A searcher of this matter to the light. Chorus
They act as his conscience and his guide, and even his alter-ego or “devil’s advocate” as the Kind puzzles out the problems and mysteries. After all, the elders are supposed to be wise. A long scene follows between the King and Tereslas, and the chorus interrupts with a polite criticism:
To us, it seems that both the seer and thou, O Oedipus, have spoken angry words. This is no time to wrangle but consult How best we may fulfill the oracle. Chorus
TEIRESIAS and OEDIPUS talk some more and then exit, and the chorus once more takes over. They argue over the guilt or innocence of both Oedipus and Creon. They also supply a foreshadowing of things to come:
Sore perplexed am I by the words of the master seer. Are they true, are they false? I know not and bridle my tongue for fear, Fluttered with vague surmise, nor present nor future is clear. The quarrel of ancient date or in days still near know I none
For the next scene, the chorus switches to respond to Creon and be his alter-ego, his “people” as he protests his innocence. Oedipus enters and the chorus stays silent until the main part of the discussion between Oedipus and Creon is done. The chorus makes only a couple more comments until Jocasta enters. She speaks on behalf of Creon and the chorus supports her.
Believe him, I adjure thee, Oedipus, First for his solemn oath’s sake, then for mine, And for thine elders’ sake who wait on thee. Jocasta
Hearken, King, reflect, we pray thee, but not stubborn but relent. Chorus
Creon leaves and Jocasta now carries on a discussion with the chorus. After this long scene with little said by the chorus, it takes up the task of summarizing what has passed and of voicing the fear that the oracle is not to be trusted. The chorus becomes background once again until it is time to voice the deepest fears of the King, that he is his wife’s son. And has killed his father.
Strophe
If my soul prophetic err not, if my wisdom aught avail, Thee, Cithaeron, I shall hail, As the nurse and foster-mother of our Oedipus shall greet Ere tomorrow’s full moon rises, and exalt thee as is meet. Dance and song shall hymn thy praises, lover of our royal race. Phoebus, may my words find grace! Chorus
Antistrophe
Child, who bare thee, nymph or goddess? sure thy sure was more than man, Haply the hill-roamer Pan. Of did Loxias beget thee, for he haunts the upland world; Or Cyllene’s lord, or Bacchus, dweller on the hilltops cold? Did some Heliconian Oread give him thee, a newborn joy? Nymphs with whom he loves to toy? Chorus
After this, the messenger arrives and the truth is revealed. After Oedipus is led away, the chorus ends the play with a lament for him: the greatest of men, who fell so low. The great mystery of who he killed on the road, and how he came to be king is resolved. While we sympathize, as does the chorus, we understand that it was his arrogance that causes Oedipus to kill instead of simply ignoring the insult. It is the chorus that actually states his biggest mistake, that of not understanding the oracle and not believing in its power.
References
Sophocles, 2008, Oedipus the King, The Internet Classics Archive, Web.
The literary work is a reflection of what is happening in society. Authors normally voice their opinions about issues affecting the society through various themes. These themes are closely linked together through analysis of a character’s actions. In the contemporary society, the introduction of literature research has extensively increased the volume of literature in every topic of interest, especially in use of expression tools such as metaphors, to present a symbolic view that a character display in a play.
Irrespective of the level of knowledge and understanding of research facets, literature versions are inclusive of tools such as metaphors, similes, and figures. Literature comparison is about enjoying the phrases, feeling the narrator’s words in action, imagining, and placing oneself in the writer’s shoes. This analytical treatise attempts to explicitly explore the intersections between fate and free will in the play, Oedipus the King, by Sophocles. Indeed, the play is significant, although it expresses concealed implication to readers.
Intersections between fate and free will
The key aspects of Sophocles’ play capture the learners’ interest in the purpose of comedy and twist of fate. The life of Oedipus is characterized by fate. His parents, Laius and Jocasta, tried to honor the pronouncement by the oracles on the fate of their young child. Oedipus was then taken away.
In a twist of fate, Oedipus becomes a powerful prince in a distant city and later ends the life of his father. Further, Oedipus married Jocasta, who was his mother. In another incident, Oedipus was quick to run as far as possible away from a couple he thought were his real parents but ends up taking the life of his biological father (Sophocles 23).
Also, as Oedipus was on his long journey, with the primary intention of changing his fate, he meets a horrendous monster called the Sphinx. Oedipus was successful in disentangling the dilemma of the Sphinx and was rewarded the gift of being the ruler of a distant kingdom called Thebes. As a portion of the victory package, Oedipus was given the green light to marry his mother, who was the queen of Thebes. In a twist of fate, the queen of Thebes was his biological mother.
Oedipus ends up honoring everything he struggled to avoid as fate had planned. All these events occur without any of the parties, realizing the influence of fate in their positions. It is only at the end of this story that Oedipus and the mother realized that the predictions of the oracle were accurate.
The story ends with a tragedy involving the death of Oedipus’ mother. Oedipus suffered the same fate since he could not live with the death of his wife, who doubled up as his mother. From this reflection, it is apparent that the tragedy confirmed the influence of fate in the life of the characters. Thus, trying to escape the fate was punishable by the gods through death (Sophocles 15).
Sophocles depicted various stages of the play’s episode through the associating dependence of mankind to the gods. For instance, the main character Oedipus, is arrogant is retorting to the Chorus that, “You pray to the gods? Let me grant your prayers” (Sophocles, 13).
The considerable key notion of play is fate and prophecy that demonstrates how human has decayed due to fate and needs to acknowledge god’s reverence. Furthermore, Sophocles presents his mental picture of the path towards Supreme Divinity in his play. This is viewed as the likelihood for the human heart to fate rather than to descend choice at a personal level in the conservative society (Sophocles 16).
Sophocles employed irony that is conspicuous in the representation of the main character, Oedipus. Oedipus states that “no skill in the world, nothing human can penetrate the future” (Sophocles 13) when explaining to his wife about the fate which he attempts to twist in vain.
The illustration of the character of Oedipus shows how the author succeeded in tossing the implication of words, and thus, readers must catch such implications (Sophocles 18). The play is analogous of its relation regarding vast imagery, visual outcome, and a typical rhythmic construction that presented special consequence of fate.
The main theme presented by this play is personal identity as a component of realism. A literary writing attempt to portray a certain piece on thoughts of characters not explicitly expressed. Recognizing themes of loyalty, honor, and tragedy, Sophocles sarcastically ridicules fate and religious beliefs as a determinant of the position of an individual in the society. The main character Oedipus in the play, Oedipus the King, is full of pride which he loses at the end and has to bow down to fate.
Destiny is depicted as having forced the rather tensed society to embrace sudden change to escape the plague. The audience is moved by Oedipus, imaginative exploration of memory manipulation, and how fate can wreak havoc on humanity. Also, Sophocles tried to blend the high-concept vision of the world with his own stylized and highly dramatized language in reflecting on the life of Oedipus.
He created a very human story that combines stories of both self-discovery and fate. Sophocles succeeded in convincingly mingling the ‘futuristic’ and the ‘realistic’ imaginations to create a world of exotic exploitation and mind control characterized by time variances and societal imbalances, as contributed by fate (Sophocles 19).
The theme of tragedy is illustrated in the play, Oedipus the King. Indeed, the author considers time as a marvelous nasty task. Oedipus intends to turn over features of time to command over time.
However, he fails miserably due to the underlying supernatural forces that had sealed his destiny at birth. However, with intelligence and braveness, Sophocles reflects on the tragedy in an open, attractive, and agitating language. Thus, his dedication possibly overlaid the approach for understanding fate in the sundry time. The key antagonists and protagonists accept fate eventually in the play.
Interestingly, acceptance of fate is presented as a redeemer of what each character stands for. Oedipus, in the play, Oedipus the King, is a hero. In the climax of the play, revelations point Oedipus as responsible for the death of his father as was prearranged by fate at his birth through the prophecy. Particularly, the death of Oedipus father forms the focal storyline (Sophocles 11).
In summary, every event that occurs in this play confirms the predictions of the oracles. None of the characters were in a position to modify his or her fate. Those who tried to change fate were met with tragedy in the form of death. The death of Laius, Oedipus, and Jocasta symbolized punishment by the gods for defying fate.
Works Cited
Sophocles. Oedipus the King. Ed. Grene David. Chicago: University of Chicago, 2012. Print.
The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle once identified the key ingredients of the tragedies that his culture is so famous for. These ingredients include a character with a fatal flaw, the realization of the fault for a particular problem, and the final sudden reversal of fortune. For many tragedies, the fatal flaw is demonstrated as excessive pride, which usually serves as the driving force of the play’s action. It is common, even beneficial, to have pride in oneself, but when it becomes expressed as arrogance or in defiance of one’s fate, it is considered excessive and often leads men to engage in activities that will lead to their downfall. Aristotle (1998) stated, “the tragic hero falls into bad fortune because of some flaw in his character of the kind found in men of high reputation and good fortune such as Oedipus.” This attitude, commonly found in men of high station is not specifically identified as pride in the case of Oedipus and, indeed, different readings can place Oedipus’ great flaw in a number of areas. It seems as if Sophocles intended to emphasize the more common interpretation of Oedipus’ flaw being excessive pride, but other interpretations, such as Pier Paolo Pasolini’s 1967 film Oedipus Rex, present other possibilities as the main character is brought through the three primary elements of tragedy.
In both the play and the film, Oedipus is quickly demonstrated to have a fatal flaw. In the play, the action opens as Oedipus is approached by plague-stricken masses asking for help from him as king. He responds to their appeals saying, “What means this reek of incense everywhere, / From others, and am hither come myself, / I Oedipus, your world-renowned king” (pp. 4-8). In this statement, Oedipus’ pride in his social position is clear. In the film, though, he is seen as somewhat insecure, even as a child when he cheats at a game, and then as a haunted man with a burning mystery searing his dreams, both showing him to be a man of deep passions.
Throughout the remainder of the action in the play, Oedipus’ personality clearly reflects excessive pride in his ability to force things his way. When Oedipus learned of the prediction that he was doomed to kill his father and marry his mother, he was full of self-pride to defy the fates and leave Corinth. The film depicts this as a heart-wrenching decision to never go near his parents again in order to save them followed by a time of desperate wandering through barren wastelands. While both versions indicate extreme passion involved in the killing of Laius and the claiming of Jocasta, the Oedipus in the play greets his subjects with almost concealed disdain and the Oedipus of the film greets them with sorrow and deeply shared concern. While Sophocles sets his character up to battle pride, Pasolini prepares him to come face to face with the consequences of passion.
It is easy to see the irony in both play and film that if Oedipus had not been so determined to escape and prevent the prophecy, he would have not unwittingly fulfilled it. This is foreshadowed by Creon in the play just before the truth of the story is realized. Creon tells Oedipus, “You are obstinate— / obviously unhappy to concede, / and when you lose your temper, you go too far. / But men like that find it most difficult / to tolerate themselves” (pp. 814-819). In this one short statement, Jocasta’s brother sums up the entire tragedy. He points to Oedipus’ stubbornness and pride in being unwilling to consider the possibility that he might be the murderer he seeks. As a result of his own impatience and driving desire to bring honor and further pride to his name, Oedipus becomes excessive in his proclamations regarding motives and punishments to be handed down and then suddenly realizes that he cannot escape the horror of his crimes. This horror is demonstrated in the film to great effect as the confused Oedipus slowly becomes overwhelmed with the possibilities, finally screaming out his confession in a now-customary burst of passion.
By the end of the story, Oedipus has come to realize that everything he has done has only served to bring him closer to his evil destiny. In the process of trying to avoid fate, he has committed some of the greatest sins imaginable to him – defiled his mother’s bed, murdered his father, and spawned monstrous children born of incest. Rather than face the truth and unable to take the severe wound to his pride, Oedipus stabbed out his eyes with broaches and walked away from Thebes forever, thereby sealing his doom through further prideful actions. The sudden reversal of fortune has Oedipus walking away from Thebes a blind, homeless beggar rather than the respected king he should have been based upon his more noble qualities. While this is a surprise, it is nevertheless a logical possible conclusion to the events that have taken place. This concept is brought out to a greater extent in the film through the change in setting. Pasolini begins and ends the film in a contemporary setting to when the film was made.
While the play suggests that Oedipus went wandering into the desert a self-blinded beggar man, the film indicates that he has been wandering a tortured individual for much longer than a normal lifespan.
Thus, the elements of classic tragedy are carried throughout both play and film to slightly different interpretations. In both, a fatal flaw within the character of Oedipus drives his actions that eventually seal his own doom. Seen as it is throughout the various elements of the classic tragedian format of first demonstrating a noble characteristic to tragic proportions, then becoming aware of it and then suffering as a result of it, it cannot be missed that Sophocles was trying to illustrate to his audience the dangers of an absence of humility and common sense when he highlighted Oedipus’ excessive pride.
Pasolini seems to have been more interested in warning his audiences about the sins of excessive passion. This is, in some sense, what Aristotle was trying to communicate regarding the purpose of tragedy, which he describes as “an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play … through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation of these emotions” (Aristotle cited in Friedlander, 2005). By illustrating the various things that can go wrong when one believes they have no flaws, Sophocles and Pasolini hoped to encourage a closer connection with truth as a means of avoiding Oedipus’ fate.
Works Cited
“Aristotle.” Critica Links. (1998). The University of Hawaii. Web.
Although theater is one of the most important kinds of art and entertainment, its modern interpretations seem to have more popularity and success with the audience than classical plays. Still, ancient playwrights were the ones who started the tradition, and it is crucial to pay due respect to their works. To make classical theatrical shows easier for the modern audience to understand, it is necessary to analyze their elements, single out the most complicated of them, and come up with a way of remodeling them. Sophocles’s Oedipus the King is one of the most acclaimed plays, but because of the chorus, it may be not successful with the viewer nowadays. Thus, it seems reasonable to introduce some other characters replacing the chorus in order to make the play more accessible to the audience.
The Most Difficult Aspect to Comprehend
In Oedipus the King, there are several elements that might seem complicated for a modern theatergoer. For instance, the Greek notion of fate, which is the leitmotif of the play, may seem strange for the present-day down-to-earth person. Thus, when one of the characters says “we are sure / that the gods must have helped you to save our lives,” the audience might feel skeptical about it (Sophocles 38-39). Another confusing aspect of the play is the idea of prophecy. While it was very popular in Sophocles’s times, the “prophetic powers” to which so much attention is paid in the text are not likely to be accepted well by modern viewers (Sophocles 323). However, if these elements are concerned with text issues, there is another one which is represented by many characters on stage: the chorus.
The chorus is rarely used in modern theater, and it may be the reason why those who view Oedipus the King in a traditional production find it difficult to comprehend. In the plat, the chorus consists of fifteen people who appear next to the orchestra from time to time and sing long passages. For instance, at the beginning of the play, lines 1-150 are told by actors whereas lines 151-215 are sung. The singing is mostly aimed at praising the gods, and Sophocles uses flattering language here: “the sweet-sounding voice of Zeus” (151), “in awe we invoke you” (155), “O you three with your threefold power” (161).
Further, the chorus leads a dialogue with Oedipus, and then later, it again interrupts the play in its usual manner. However, it is possible to talk about interference in the context of modern theater. Meanwhile, in the times when the play was written, the chorus was considered as an important element, and it completed the performance rather than seemed irritable and unnecessary.
Another function that the chorus performs is that of prophecy. Singers present some characters or predict events, which may seem queer for the audience who might find such presentations redundant. For instance, in the conversation between Oedipus, the Corinthian messenger, and the shepherd, the chorus interrupts the characters numerous times. Singers let Oedipus know who the shepherd is: “I know him well – he was Laius’ man, / one of his trusty shepherds” (Sophocles 1117-1118).
Then, the chorus again interrupts the conversation by expressing its opinion about life: “Your fate, / O wretched Oedipus, / is the example I take, / to prove the gods bless nothing” (Sophocles 1194-1196). This and similar instances do not seem natural, the chorus constantly interrupting conversations, expressing its opinions, or trying to convince characters in something.
In the final part of the play, it is largely only Oedipus and chorus that are on stage. Whenever Oedipus says something, there is an answer from the chorus. Moreover, the opinions of the fifteen Theban elders change very quickly. When Oedipus tells the audience he blinded himself, the chorus exclaims, “How could you dare such a dreadful thing – / to blind yourself? (Sophocles 1327-1328). However, soon after that, the chorus sings, “better, / it seems to me, to be a dead man than a blind one” (Sophocles 1367-1368).
At this point, the chorus irritates not only the audience but Oedipus himself, who tells the men, “Do not tell me how things are best done nor try to give / me advice” (Sophocles 1369-1370). Finally, apart from such dialogues, the chorus also deprives the audience of the possibility to make their own conclusions about the play. Similarly to the introductory part, the ending one is led by the chorus that explains the moral of the story.
Suggestions for the Play’s Modernization
Since the major problem for the modern audience seems to be the chorus, my direction of the play would involve getting rid of this character. Instead, I would have a few other roles that would perform the various functions of Sophocles’s chorus without irritating the viewer or creating a strange atmosphere on stage. To substitute for chorus’s praising and worshipping songs, I would create a character that would be sickeningly flattering and whose words would be treated without trust. To cover for the chorus’s apprehensions and fears, I would have a female character who would be Oedipus’s aunt or cousin. Finally, in some episodes, such as revealing secrets or predicting the future, I would delete the chorus’s verses altogether so that the audience could interpret events by themselves.
Conclusion
Although the rhythm of people’s lives is becoming faster and faster, everyone still should find some time for entertainment. Theater is one of the ways in which people can get distracted from their chores and spend time in a pleasant place with some crucial ideas to consider. To make modern theater more accessible for the audience, some classical plays should be adapted. In Sophocles’s Oedipus the King, the chorus seems to be a redundant element whose functions can be performed by newly introduced characters. Suggested changes are expected to draw viewers’ interest to the old play and breathe new life into it. Theater is an important element of people’s social life, and it should be modernized and adjusted for the audience’s better understanding.
Work Cited
Sophocles. “Oedipus the King.” The Theban Plays: Oedipus the King, Oedipus, at Colonus, Antigone, translated by Ruth Fainlight and Robert J. Littman, The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2009, pp. 1-63.
While effective leaders, both dead and living, speak volumes through their deeds, their ineffectual counterparts do so by words. Leadership lies not in the terminologies, but in the actions. Although the words may appear charming, provided they do not bring forth excellent results, then the leader is worthless.
A good leader ought to bear traits, likeable to its entire people, regardless of their gender, race, religion, and tribe. Dramatists have set out to address the issue of leadership defining what is and what is not expected in leaders. It comes in handy in Sophocles’ Oedipus the King and Aeschylus’ Agamemnon.
In Sophocles’ chef-d’oeuvre, Oedipus is an effective leader of Thebes, ambitious, development oriented and courageous, to mention a few. On the other hand, Clytemnestra, a character in Agamemnon, is the daughter of a king and a Greek leader. She stands out as a liquidator, vindictive, and one who lacks even the least of leadership attributes, for she cannot tackle minor issues like family disputes. Baxton says, “Clytemnestra is not a passive witness, but an agent of evil” (Para. 5).
While Oedipus is an effective leader of Thebes, Clytemnestra hardly bears what it takes one to pass for a leader in any society. Oedipus is a loving and a clever leader bearing some practical wisdom while Clytemnestra is a hatred-driven leader, a murderer who cannot stand in for his people when most needed.
Oedipus Vs Clytemnestra
Love is not the getting and having in times of joy, it is the giving, serving, and sharing in times of crisis. It is among the rare traits, which stand out only during predicaments. Without love, all is in vain, leadership included. It takes the will of an effective leader to restore peace in a plague-hit society.
Oedipus is such a leader, who assumes his full responsibility as a king to bring salvation to his people. The people find no solution of the hassle and opt to seek assistance from their leader who, out of love, responds. This is no more than a sign of the effectiveness of Oedipus the king because if it were not so, then his people could not have thought about him, as one who is able to restore peace for them.
To the surprise of his people, as they ask him to take action against their affliction, Oedipus responds to them that he has already dispatched a person to find out the reason as well as the underlying solution. In fact, Baxton posits that, “If it were not for Oedipus’ cleverness, the citizens would have suffered untold disasters at the merciless hands of the Sphinx. …Oedipus was well liked by the people of Thebes” (Para. 6).
In his attempts to follow up the murder case, he says, “Upon the murderer, I invoke this curse…whether he is…” (Potter Lines 246-249). His words show how he is out to free his people from the hands of murderers. Unfortunately, ineffective leaders are unlovable, detached, selfish, and irresponsible fellows whose leadership styles are ever wanting.
Clytemnestra cannot pass for an effective leader as the reactions of her people suggest. The song by the security guard pictures her leadership as all wanting. He sings, “only to weep again the pity of this house…no longer, as once, administered in the grand way” (Aeschylus Lines 16-18). He represents the rest of Clytemnestra’s subject, in his cry of poor governance and affliction. In fact, all the people claim that she is the root cause of their sufferings when they say, “for one woman’s promiscuous sake” (Aeschylus Line 62).
Unlike Oedipus, who receives warm love from his subjects, she is hated since she is an ineffective leader. Oedipus focuses his services towards his people while Clytemnestra is an egocentric leader who cares only for her needs. This is unlike effective leaders who portray high levels of selflessness like Oedipus.
Oedipus’ chief concern is the well-being of his subjects: a true spirit of a servant leadership. Baxton, referring to Oedipus says, “Oedipus acted without regard for who would benefit or suffer from the fruition of his inquiry“(Para. 7). When he sacrifices to unravel the truth behind Thebes’ conflicts, he says, “Time alone can make it clear a man is just while you can know a traitor in a day” (Sophocles Line 613). Oedipus, as an effective leader longs for peace to prevail amongst all the people of Thebes.
He does not serve to benefit some, but all his people and that is why he is seriously devoted to finding out the truth, which in turn will free his people from the bondage of struggles. To assert this, he declares, “I cannot yield my right to know the truth” (Sophocles Line 87). This is a sign of a leader, who can die for, rather than kill, his people. On the other hand, Clytemnestra stands out as one who is only after her own satisfaction.
Selfishness and irresponsibility describe the predominant characters of an inefficient leader. Clytemnestra bears such a description. Baxton observes, “Clytemnestra had to use her influence and persuasion to get everything she wanted” (Para. 5). Instead of taking care of the people she leads, she uses her powers as a leader to deprive them of their rights regardless of their innocence. She is far from forgiving because she cannot extend mercy to her very own husband. To feel emotionally satisfied, she kills him claiming not to love him.
This painful scenario represents the experience of the rest. When she tells her husband, “I never loved you! Tantalus you slew, my first dear husband; and my little son, you tore him from my breast” (Aeschylus Line 623), she pictures her case as a leader who cannot be liked by people. She is a murderer, rather than a savior, of her people as opposed to Oedipus’ caring nature. While Oedipus stands properly for his people, Clytemnestra pictures the reverse as the next paragraph elaborates.
Whether a leader is effective or ineffective, the content of their character will tell it all; surely, words can always lie; however, actions will always tell the difference between an effective and ineffective leader. An effective leader ought to represent his people and ought to reduce the weight of their burdens. Clytemnestra is not of this caliber. Instead, when approached by any of her people, she only leaves them with more sorrows, pains, and heavy laden with stress and depression.
For instance, when Cassandra seeks the solution of her fate from Clytemnestra, the leader says, “I’ll waste no time with the girl” (Aeschylus Line 1064). As a good leader, she ought to take time to check into Cassandra’s problem. She rudely drives her out saying, “take up the yoke that shall be yours” (Aeschylus Line 1071). She ventures into a lonely music with feelings of being unrepresented. According to her, loving Clytemnestra is just but a dream, far from reality.
In fact, she is being referred to as a wretched woman (Collard Para. 4) On the other hand, when Oedipus’ people approach him for a solution concerning the plague, he reveals a good representation of his people by seeking the solution of the problem even before they address it to him. They in turn love him for this because they feel represented unlike Clytemnestra, who cannot lead even her own children, a case that explains the mystery behind her death in the hands of her own children.
Conclusion
Though dead and forgotten, Sophocles and Aeschylus speak volumes through their works. Through the characters Oedipus and Clytemnestra, the two playwrights have pointed out different leadership practices that leaders depict, some of which are good while others are bad. Oedipus’ leadership practices qualifies him for an effective leader for he not only serves his people whole-heartedly, but also loves and represents them in a manner that makes them love him back.
However, Clytemnestra stands out as an illustration of leaders who, instead of serving for the benefit of their people, serve to satisfy their own desires and according to whom the old adage ‘the end justifies the means’ holds true. They can kill like Clytemnestra, provided they are satisfied in the end.
Works Cited
Aeschylus. Agamemnon. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1953.
Baxton, Jeremy. The Drama: Its History, Literature, and Influence on Civilization. London: Historical Publishing Countries, 2002.
Collard, Christopher. Aeschylus Agamemnon. USA: University of California, 2001.
Potter, David. Oedipus Play Review. West Virginia: W.VA Press, 2003.
Sophocles. Oedipus the King. Ed. David Grene. USA: University of Chicago, 1991.
The roles of free will and fate in a person’s life are discussed in literature since ancient times. Oedipus the King is one of the most famous tragedies by Sophocles, which is developed to discuss this conflict in detail. The tragic destiny of Oedipus can be explained from two different perspectives. On the one hand, Oedipus is a victim of the gods’ will and prophesied fate. On the other hand, the downfall of Oedipus is a result of his wrong decisions. Even though the role of fate and prophecy is significant in influencing the life of Oedipus, the king’s destiny can be discussed as a direct result of his actions, choices, and decisions.
Oedipus is described in the first lines of the tragedy as a hero who can protect Thebes from all the threats, but the king is rather vulnerable to fight against his fate and dramatic prophecy. Thus, the significant role of the prophecy is accentuated in many lines of the tragedy.
Tiresias emphasizes the impossibility to avoid prophecy while accentuating the king’s impossibility to see obvious things, “You have your eyes but see not where you are / in sin, nor where you live, nor whom you live with. / Do you know who your parents are?” (Sophocles 413-415). From this perspective, a range of choices made by Oedipus prevents him from seeing the things about their true nature, and his further downfall becomes supported by his choices.
Although the dramatic fate makes Oedipus suffer and fall, the king chooses this path as a result of many decisions. According to Dodds, everything that Oedipus “does on the stage from first to last; he does as a free agent” (Dodds 42). Thus, the destiny of Oedipus is the unique combination of fate-bound events and a series of choices made by a free man.
Dodds notes that the main cause of Oedipus’ fall is not his fate because “no oracle said that he must discover the truth – and still less does it lie in his weakness; what causes his ruin is his strength and courage, his loyalty to Thebes, and his loyalty to the truth” (Dodds 43). Oedipus knows his fate, but it is a series of his actions, which leads to the tragedy because the king has the free will not to act or focus on changing his life. From this point, the knowledge of his fate provides Oedipus with a certain range of choices, but only Oedipus can build his destiny.
The conflict between free will and fate is still important to be discussed while being placed in a larger context of popular literature. Not only Oedipus tries to cope with the possible consequences of the prophecy. Such a literary character as Harry Potter also pays much attention to finding the ways to decrease the impact of the prophecy on his life. Thus, the conflict of fate and free will can be discussed as the conflict produced by the knowledge of the fate and by a series of the person’s choices and actions which can be oriented to avoiding the fate or accepting it. If Harry Potter accepts his fate, Oedipus is oriented to avoid it, and he makes the wrong choices from the first steps. Accentuating the necessity to accept the fate, Jocasta notes in the tragedy, “Do not concern yourself about this matter; / listen to me and learn that human beings / have no part in the craft of prophecy” (Sophocles 707-709). The tragic irony of Oedipus’ life is in the fact that if Oedipus accepts his fate, there is a chance to avoid it.
It is possible to assume that there are many paths for a person to choose, and this choice is a result of the person’s free will. Furthermore, there are also many events and situations which can be discussed as key ones in people’s lives, and these key life moments can be prophesied. A person can have some control over his or her life while making daily choices.
However, there is always a thread which leads a person according to fate. From this point, the control over the life and future is real only while focusing on the actions here and now, but this control is rather hypothetical while speaking about the person’s fate. Thus, Oedipus’ everyday choices lead him to his fate, but his reaction to the situation and his blindness are only the results of the king’s free will.
While discussing the conflict between fate and free will, it is possible to note that a person cannot learn whether his or her actions lead to changing the dramatic life events or make them closer. The tragedy of Oedipus described by Sophocles is in the fact that his extreme desire to avoid the destiny makes him the victim of his fate because of the actions which are the products of the king’s free will. The discussion of this life paradox makes the reader focus more on the problem of the free will and fate and analyze life events.
Works Cited
Dodds, Eric Robertson. “On Misunderstanding the ‘Oedipus Rex’”. Greece & Rome, Second Series 13.1 (1966): 37-49. Print.
Sophocles. Oedipus the King. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2012. Print.