Category: Oedipus

People might be blinded to reality, and may not understand what truth is, regardless of whether truth is remaining before them. They will never observe truth since they are incognizant in regards to it. In Oedipus Rex by Sophocles, it is anything but difficult to perceive how visual impairment influences the progress of the story. It is said that visually impaired individuals see ‘in an alternate way’ since they sense the world in an entirely unexpected manner, for example, Teiresias in the play. Oedipus Rex is a disaster because of the substance the Sophocles, the dramatist, chose to incorporate, first, killing his dad, King Laius, at that point wedding his mom, Jocasta, and closure by blinding himself. Oedipus has been blinded to reality for his entire life. In the long run, when he looks for reality he purposefully loses his physical vision, and along these lines, blinds himself. Moreover, Jocasta does not see the genuine character of Oedipus, and when she really observes it, she will not acknowledge reality. Along these lines, visual deficiency does not generally delineate obliviousness.

The allegations of Tiresias spur Oedipus to look for reality, and after reality of the prediction turns out to be clear. Oedipus is resolved to know reality and himself, regardless of whether it implies his defeat. With acknowledgment unfolding, Oedipus sees his absence of vision and the incongruity of his judgment: ‘And it is I/who articulated these condemnations on myself!’ (824-825). Having been a firm adherent to his vision and judiciousness, Oedipus is currently left with the overwhelming information that the whole arrangement of rationale whereupon he based every one of his convictions and activities is defective. He runs over an awful destiny that his insight, yet additionally the methods by which he gains information, is restricted; Oedipus acknowledges how error prone reason is learning is finished and unending while logos, the human origination of information, is deficient and constrained. Indeed, even Oedipus’ new information is just an arrangement of thought past his previous one. With this disclosure, Oedipus understands that he can never be normally certain about his identity or how the world functions; he comes to understand that and along these lines incomprehensibly comprehend everything while not understanding everything.

During his life, Oedipus was oblivious to truth, at first, he didn’t realize that Jocasta and Laius were his real guardians. He even opposed anybody that would not give him the reason or somebody that would repudiate him. After such huge numbers of endeavors to avoid reality, he winds up surrendering about what is the genuine truth. He concurs and acknowledges that Laius and Jocasta were his folks, and he wound up executing his dad and wedding his mom; he was the one causing sadness in Thebes. After he begins to understand every one of these realities, he chose to daze himself, and become in Teiresias same position.

Charles R. Swindoll once said, “We cannot change our past. We can not change the fact that people act in a certain way. We can not change the inevitable.” Unfortunately, Swindoll’s statement proved to be very true for the character, Oedipus Rex. Throughout Sophocles’s tragic play, Oedipus Rex, the events of the past prove to be very influential towards the lives of the main characters of the play, specifically Oedipus, the protagonist of the story. Oedipus’s past greatly depicts key aspects of his present and help him establish the realization of his true identity, while also contributing to the inescapable quality of a truly devastating prophecy. This prophecy, given to Oedipus by the blind prophet, Teiresias, states that Oedipus would kill his father and marry his mother. In an attempt to prevent the prophecy from happening, Oedipus’s parents abandon him at childbirth, leaving Oedipus to believe that his adoptive parents were his biological ones. Thus, after hearing the prophecy, Oedipus also desired to escape his fate by fleeing Corinth (his presumed native land) and going to Thebes, where he inadvertently and unknowingly fulfills the prophecy. The main characters’ desires to alter their fates and escape their pasts are the very reasons why the prophecy of the play is fulfilled. Thus, the themes of blindness, self-discovery, and fate are explained in Sophocles’ tragic play, Oedipus Rex, through the titular character, Oedipus, who must contend with aspects of his past that detriment his present, such as the murder of his father, his pursuit of the truth, and his acceptance of a tragic and inevitable prophecy.

As early as the first scene of the play, the reader can infer that the protagonist of Oedipus Rex is very confident in who he is as a person and as a king. The reader first sees Oedipus being portrayed as someone whom the people of Thebes hold in high regards because of his intelligence and success in defeating the Sphinx and purging the land of Thebes. Thus, he is held in the highest esteem by his people and is quite confident in his identity, being that he is completely certain that he was born in Corinth and traveled to Thebes in his later age. Yet, Oedipus is also seen as someone who possesses an unrelenting stubbornness that manifests itself in his desire to seek justice on the murderer of Laius, the former king of Thebes. The mystery behind the identity of the killer of Laius serves as the backbone in Oedipus’s discovery of the truth, thus revealing Oedipus’s blindness and ignorance regarding his past. Therefore, the murder of his father is a key point in the plot of Oedipus Rex that helps develop the theme of blindness, both physical and metaphorical. This is seen when Oedipus states, “For whoever killed this man may soon enough desire to turn his hand in the same way against me, too, and kill me,” after learning that the reason for the famine in Thebes is because the murderer of Laius was never found, meaning the Laius’s death was never avenged (Sophocles 5). In this quote, Oedipus condemns the murderer of Laius to a cruel, yet just fate, without realizing that he is actually cursing himself. This demonstrates how the murder of Laius contributes in revealing the metaphorical blindness that Oedipus possesses due to his lack of knowledge about who he really is and who is biological parents are. The theme of blindness, seen through the unfolding of unknown aspects of Laius’s death, is also seen when Teiresias- a blind prophet brought in to reveal the murderer of Laius- states to Oedipus, “So I say this to you, since you have chosen to insult my blindness- you have your eyesight, and you do not see how miserable you are, or where you live, or who it is who shares your household,” after Oedipus chooses to insult Teiresias’s physical blindness (Sophocles 11). This quote demonstrates the metaphorical blindness that Oedipus possesses regarding the true nature of Laius’ murder, thus paving the way for Oedipus’s past to negatively impact his present, as he comes to eventually learn the truth.

The entirety of Oedipus Rex is centered around the murder of the former king of Thebes, Laius. After hearing of Laius’s murder and his killer being the reason for the plague on Thebes, Oedipus’s action from that point on are solely motivated by his desire to seek justice for Laius and his city. This aspect of his past helps reveal the theme of self-discovery, a theme that plays a major role in the development of the story. The murder of Laius serves as a key aspect of the plot that leads to a chain of events that occur as a result. Because of the murder of Laius, Oedipus learns some keys aspect of his past that he was previously unaware of, thus contributing to the metaphorical blindness that he maintains for the greater portion of the play. This is seen when Teiresias states, “I say that you yourself are the very man you’re looking for,” thus revealing the truth (Sophocles 10). This quote reveals the stubbornness behind Oedipus’s nature, as Teiresias blatantly reveals the truth to him, yet Oedipus refuses to believe such a thing because his pride and ignorance act as the source of his haughtiness. He claims that everyone around him is blind, and that only he, himself, can see the truth. However, Oedipus discovers that he does not know who he really is, making him the one who is truly blind. This quote reveals how Sophocles makes Oedipus suffer a bit because he is unaware of his true origin, and almost restrains himself from discovering the truth due to the fear of Teiresias’ claims actually being true. Thus, this example helps connect Laius’s murder to the theme of blindness because it reveals that Oedipus has been unaware of who the person he is looking for really is, himself.

However, the murder of Laius is eventually able to shed some light on Oedipus’s origin and his role in the death of his father. Oedipus exclaims, “The worse for me! I may have just set myself under a dreadful curse without my knowledge!” (Sophocles 20). This quote is spoken after Oedipus learns, from his wife Jocasta, that Laius was killed in Phocis where two roads meet. Jocasta’s description of the place, as well as the way she illustrates Laius, help Oedipus finally put the pieces together. This quote signifies an awakening moment in Oedipus’s conscience in which he begins to shed his metaphorical blindness and, rather, act on his physical sight. Thus, this demonstrates the connection that Laius’s death had to the blindness that Oedipus is beginning to shed in light of the revelation of the truth behind his role in the murder, as well as his true identity.

The murder of Laius leads Oedipus on an unrelenting search for the truth, which proves to be the source of his downfall. Oedipus’s relationship with his past provides a contribution to the development of the theme of self-discovery, which is seen throughout the play. While Oedipus’s search for the truth becomes a pivotal aspect in the plot of the story that help the truth unfold, it also forces him to contend with some aspects of his past that prove to be crucial in the development of his identity. Thus, this unyielding desire to bring a sense of verisimilitude to the land of Thebes, as well as to his own household, inadvertently leads Oedipus on a path of self-discovery. FINISH

Sophocles once inquired, “Fear? What has a man to do with fear? Chance rules our lives, and the future is all unknown. Best live as we may, from day to day. This message, states by Sophocles, is one Oedipus, Jocasta, and Laius would have all done well to contend with. THIRD POINT

Oedipus Rex, a story known for its masterful display of Greek mythology, is such a uniquely written play in the sense that the main events of the plot are unfolded through the usage of the past to solve the mysteries of the present. It is through the events of the past that the main characters develop a concrete understanding of the inevitability of fate. The protagonist of the story, Oedipus, comes to fully understand the consequences of his unrelenting pursuit of the truth, and how that pursuit contributes to the development of the themes of blindness and self-discovery. it is through the murder of Laius that Oedipus soon discovers the truth of his past and his ignorance to aspects of his identity that he had previously been unaware of.

The story of Oedipus introduces a king faced with a hamartia that ends up being his downfall. Throughout the story, Oedipus seemed destined for misfortune. Faced with an internal conflict; he is forced to find the truth of his past and fall from his grace. Oedipus’s pride plays a major role in his downfall. Although, the fault of his actions both lies on Oedipus and the gods. Oedipus’s search for the truth reveals his pride; his blindness to accept the truth, as well as the victim of his actions.

Oedipus’s tragic flaw is his pride. Oedipus believes that he has worked for everything he had gotten and that he is a generally good person. When he was first informed about the prophecy he quickly fled the town he believed his parents were in to save them from himself. Oedipus was willing to be a drifter; alone without a place to call home. After defeating the Sphinx and saving Thebes from destruction and sorrow, he believed he was being rewarded for giving up his comfort and happiness to save; who he assumed to be his parents, that it was his peripety. Sadly, he was mistaken because his fate had much more installed for him.

There are numerous arguments that Oedipus was a pawn of the gods; that he didn’t have a say in the matter of his destiny. Bowra stated, “The activity of the gods is an essential part of King Oedipus. Oedipus is their victim. They have ordained a life of horror for him, and they see that he gets it. He is even the instrument by which their plans are fulfilled. The prophecy … leaves him no escape. He fulfills it in ignorance of what he is doing, but he must fulfill it” (185). The gods have already decided to use Oedipus as an example; to be more humble, so his life has been mapped out since before his arrival to the world. Therefore, there was no possible way for Oedipus to really make important decisions about his life. The gods had essentially placed Oedipus in a maze; he could take various roots, but he would eventually end up where the gods had wanted him. The god’s minds were also set on the example being Oedipus because he was the perfect candidate; the lesson could only be learned by a person of significance and intellect, they had to be special.

Albeit, Oedipus isn’t all innocent in his story; he made his choices. Whitman says, “But there is no will of the gods, so far as Oedipus is concerned, except insofar as his own will possesses a divine force. The Olympians have not willed his fall; they have foretold it. To say that the gods are responsible, as Oedipus does means at most that they permit life to be as it turns out to be” (194). The gods only offered Oedipus a glimpse of what his future could be, they “foretold” it; they didn’t set it in stone. Oedipus was free to make his choices and it was his own choices that lead him to what the gods had prophesied.

There is no clear answer of who was at fault when it came to the choices of Oedipus’s life. On one hand, the gods did choose Oedipus as the one to be made a lesson of; setting a vision. Although on the other hand, Oedipus was free to make his own choices; he ended up killing his father at his own will. The balance doesn’t tilt one way or the other, so it can be assumed that while the gods had set a path for Oedipus, he was still given the option of not fulfilling the prophecy. In the end, Oedipus is able to achieve his anagnorisis through the search for the murderer of Laius; which was what the gods had essentially wanted.

Oedipus’s search for his truth reveals his pride; his blindness to accept the truth, as well as the victim of his actions; both Oedipus and the gods. As the story progresses, Oedipus is faced with an internal conflict which leads to his fall from grace; his pride playing a major role. Albeit, the cause for Oedipus’s downfall lies on both the shoulders of gods and Oedipus. The tragedy of Oedipus exhibits that the search for oneself can lead to unexpected truths; not all truths are liberating, but accepting them and taking responsibility; all actions have consequences, allows the light to shine on your true self.

Works Cited

1. Bowra, Cecil Maurice. Sophoclean Tragedy. Clarendon Press, 1945.
2. Whitman, Cedric H. Sophocles: A Study of Heroic Humanism. Harvard University Press, 1951.

In literature, it is very common that the hero faces victory or defeat. In Oedipus Rex, by Sophocles, Oedipus experiences defeat due to a tragic flaw and not his fate. The fate he was worried he would fulfill, being the murderer of his father and husband of his mother. The prophecy ended up being fulfilled either way but that was not the reason for his downfall. His downfall was due to the pride and self-confidence he had. His pride was what made him blind to see the truth and reality he was living in causing him to end up blind and exiled from the place he was born.

Oedipus’ downfall arises from the moment he decided he would leave the city, Corinth, were where he grew up with his adoptive parents. Not knowing, that when he chose to leave and go against the gods to prove that he would not live the life he was doomed for. He would walk directly into his downfall. His pride and arrogance led him straight to where he would not knowingly, murder his father. He later realized what he had done when he has to uncover the truth of who he is. He declares that he is the killer when he confesses to his wife and tells her, “Watching as I was passing, from the car with his goad’s fork smote me upon the head. He paid, though! duly say not; but in brief, smitten by the staff in his right hand of mine, out of the middle of the carriage straight he rolls down headlong; and I slay them all”(Sophocles pg.29). It was the fate that Apollo had set for him but because of his pride, he satisfied the prophecy that could’ve been avoided if only he had stayed in Corinth. But to expose this truth he had to save the city, Thebes, from a plague that was created by the murderer of Laius.

His downfall continues when his pride led him to go against Creon and believing that both Creon and the prophet were plotting against him. He accused Creon of telling the prophet to accuse him of being the murderer of his father, he believed that Creon wanted to become king. “Is it not folly, this attempt of yours, without a following, without friends, to hunt after a throne, a thing which is achieved by the aid of followers and much revenue” (Sophocles pg.20). Because of his pride, Oedipus fails to see that a man, whom the people of Thebes consider to be trustworthy, is innocent and is telling nothing but the truth. Still, he refused to believe him and wanted him dead for suspicion that he would take his place. His pride went as far as to believe it was not only Creon that wanted him gone. When he blamed the senator for wanting him gone as well, “Now, understand it well; seek this, you seek my death or exile!” (Sophocles pg.24). Because of Oedipus’ pride, he was not capable to trust and understand that the people wanted to reveal the truth and save their city from the plague. He proceeded to be prideful and demanded his questions to be answered. Not knowing that what he was looking for was not at all what he desired to discover, for this would further add to his downfall.

Conclusion

Once again Oedipus lets his pride get the best of him when he demanded that the prophet, Creon delivered to him, tell him all he knows. For this reason, he brought his downfall to himself, by cursing the person who killed the previous king, Laius, to not be accepted by anyone “Whoever he be, I order that this land, whose power and throne are mine, none entertain him, none accost him, none cause him to share prayers or sacrifice offered to heaven, or pour him a lustral wave, but all men from their homes banish him.”

Effects of the past have come and affected people’s present as well as their future. In Sophocles’s Oedipus Rex, the reader sees how no matter how hard Oedipus himself tried to escape his past, it only caught up him sooner or later. Oedipus was sentenced with a prophecy at birth, due to this prophecy his past catches gig to him throughout time. The prophecy was that Oedipus will kill his father, the king, and marry his mother, the queen. Both his parents wanted to make sure this did not happen, that they would somehow end the prophecy before it became true. By Oedipus, parents trying their best to end the prophecy and that is where the whole mess begins, some readers believe this prophecy would end up happening one way or another. No one can escape their fate, what is meant to be will be. Another thing that in ways ruined Oedipus’s life and let things go the way they happened was his tragic flaw, this added a lot of heat to the fire as it is. Oedipus Rex is contended with his past because of his prophecy, his parents, and unfortunately, his tragic flaw, although when Oedipus did do his duties as King and focuses on his parents.

Back in 441 B.C the Greeks strongly believed a person’s fate was determined even before birth. A person’s fate was set in stone and there was nothing anyone can do to change that. In Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex, the main character Oedipus decided to take matters into his own hands as scholars have looked into. As stated in the literary journal Antigone’s Flaw, “Upon hearing the Delphic prophecy of patricide and incest, the well-intentioned Oedipus took radical steps to thwart fate–fleeing his parents and his home in Corinth” (Lines 1999). As soon as Oedipus came to learn about his prophecy and his fate that will soon be upon him, he did everything in his power to stop it. Oedipus believed by running away from who he believed were his parents, would help him stop the prophecy but little did he know that is one of the reasons his prophecy actually came true. The Greeks strongly believe that a person is born with their fate already determined for them and there is nothing a person can do to change your fate. As Oedipus tries to run away from his fate, he finds the King of Thebes who in fact is his real father. Without even knowing it Oedipus kills him, making part of the prophecy come true. After this happens Oedipus becomes the king of Thebes and marries the Queen who is actually his biological mother. As stated once again in the literal journal Antigone’s Flaw, “After Oedipus became King of Thebes, Delphi some again, suggesting that the only way to end a serve blight plaguing Thebes was avenged the murder of the former king, Laius” (Lines 1999). This was set in stone in the prophecy and Oedipus went in with his life not knowing what he really did. Oedipus later on even goes out of his way to find king Laius’s killer when little did he know it was him all along. Unfortunately for Oedipus, the prophecy is not the only thing from his past to catch up to him.

Whether people believe it or not, parents are the biggest influence on a child’s life but unfortunately for Oedipus, his parents’ belief about the prophecy was stronger than their love for him. Both the King and Queen did anything in their power to make sure the prophecy on their end would not happen. Readers believe that what the King and Queen did to their son Oedipus was inhuman. Oedipus’s parents did not want to kill their son themselves so instead, they got a servant to kill him on a mountain but the servant himself felt bad and gave the baby to the King and Queen of Corinth and that is where the mess begins. The King and Queen have no idea that their plan did not work to their advantage but instead made the prophecy come true years later. Due to the King and Queen doing anything in their power to stop the prophecy, only made the prophecy come true. Once Oedipus found out about the prophecy, he decided to leave Corinth away from who he thought were his parents all his life in order for this prophecy not to come true. Some readers believe the King and Queen of Thebes, better known as Oedipus’s biological parents are the real reason the prophecy did end up coming true. They both tried so hard to stop it that it ended up happening. Readers believe that if Oedipus would have known who his real parents were all along there would have been a lower chance but the prophecy actually coming true. In the end, this whole mess is ultimately the King and Queen’s fault and they all pay for it at the end. The King and Queen of Corinth took pity on Oedipus and adopted him, they named him after his ankle wounds, his name means “swollen foot”. When the truth finally came out the Queen flees the science in distress and kills herself, she hangs herself in her chamber. After finding his dead wife as well as the mother he tears out two golden pins from her gown and pricks his eyes (Sophocles). Oedipus’ parents might have played a huge factor in the prophecy coming true trying their best to stop it but then there Teiresias and Creon who knew the truth and refused to Just say it from the beginning. Everyone played a key role in this tragic story and everyone paid their dues at the end of the day. It is ironic how it all turns out, Oedipus and his parents all tried so hard to stop the prophecy from coming true, and everything they did only made it happen. There was no way for Oedipus to escape his fate nor running away from his past, things only caught up to him. What is meant to be will be, no matter what the situation is. Sometimes running away from the past can only make things worse in the long run. That is something Oedipus, unfortunately, had no idea he was doing, not knowing the truth about his biological parents is what started this whole mess in the first place. When looking at this story a little more closely, some readers believe the prophecy was always really meant to happen the way it did and no one knew it so Oedipus, as well as his biological parents, tried to stop it this way instead but it only came back to them in the long run.

Oedipus’ tragic flaw only added more heat to the fire. Some readers believe that his tragic flaw is only a result of all the things he has gone through in his life. In the literary journal Abraham and Oedipus: Paradigms of Comedic and Tragic Belief, it is even stated that “Oedipus emerges as a tragedy of belief…. And it is in the pathos of his belief that Oedipus wins sympathy and breaks hearts” (Savoie 2013). Oedipus Rex was written as a tragedy. Some readers see Oedipus be naïve and that is another reason why the prophecy ended up coming true. Not once did Oedipus stop and think to connect the dots and see what was right in front of him this whole time. His whole life was a lie but his biggest flaw was his temper, anger, and blindness to the truth. Those three things led him to not only his prophecy coming true but his own death. Oedipus had really bad anger and temper which he at times could not control and would let it get the best of him. The perfect example of this was when he found out the prophecy came true and indeed he was King Laius, his father’s real killer. Oedipus vowed to everyone including the Queen he would find the King’s killer or anyone helping the killer and would have them pay for what they did but little did he know it was him all along. When it comes to Oedipus and his tragedies, Diderot’s Tableaux, Greek Tragic Form, and Gengangere, “It is a different kind of tragedy, whose shape is not the protagonist’s search for self-truth, but rather the revelation of the consequences of her rejecting that truth in favor of the world’s demands..” (Templeton 1997). This article is explaining how Oedipu’s tragedies did not come from what necessarily happened but the consequences of those things and how he reacted to it all with his anger and bad temper. Tragedy places a really big role in this story but Oedipus is not the only one affected by it. Oedipus had children with his wife Queen Jocasta, who also happens to be his own mother. In the end, those kids not only have the same mother and grandmother but have also lost their parents. Queen Jocasta ends her life due to finding out the truth then Oedipus on the other hand stabbed his eyes out and exiles Thebes away from his kids. This would be a perfect example of a time where Oedipus did not know how to handle his anger and bad temper. It is a known fact that Teiresias and Creon knew all along with the truth and that the prophecy had come true. Oedipus, Teiresias, and Creon did not have the best relationship, there were multiple times when Oedipus took out his anger for any reason on either one of them. In fact Oedipus calls Creon a trader and believed both Creon and Teiresias were plotting against him. Even though they did not have the best relationship when Oedipus’ second prophecy was coming true and had stabbed his eyes out, he made Creon promise him to look after his kids who had done nothing wrong in this whole mess and Creon agreed. The complex nature of Oedipus’ hamartia, is also important. The Greek term hamartia, typically translated as ‘tragic flaw’ (Dictionary). It is closer in meaning to a mistake or an error, failing, rather than just a flaw. Oedipus fits this, for his basic flaw is his lack of knowledge about his own identity. Oedipus’s great downfall is due to his tragic flaw, it gives a sense of pity towards him, first, he blinds himself instead of killing himself and will suffer eternal suffering.

Even though Oedipus had his major downfalls, he did do all his duties as king of Thebes. He did everything he could for the people of Thebes, the Queen and even tries to get justice for the King’s murder. Oedipus’ story is very ironic and tragic, readers have sympathy and pity for him even with his flaws. Through it all Oedipus is a perfect example of a tragic hero, he went against all odds and the Gods to try and avoid the prophecy from coming true even though, it backfired on him and his past caught up to him. After the first prophecy came true then came another one which was a result of the first one. The second prophecy was given by Teiresias, who knew all along the first prophecy had indeed come true. In other words, the second prophecy talks about how once the truth comes out about the first prophecy, Oedipus will be exiled from Thebes to never return, he will leave his kids and suffer eternal pain forever. Oedipus does go through a change at the end of the story once he finds out the truth and sees it was all in front of him all along. Oedipus was naïve and blind to the truth all along, he really tried the best he could with what was given to him. Oedipus tried his best to escape not only his past but his destiny as well. Greek Gods are strong believers in destiny and believe a person’s destiny is set and stone at birth and there is nothing that person can do to change it. Meaning no matter what Oedipus would have done differently or in this case, any other character would have done differently, the prophecy would some way still have come true. Even though the prophecy was bound to happen there were certain events that only made matters worse and made this story even more tragic for everyone involved. That being Oedipus’ flaws, his temper and his anger only made matters worse and harder on everyone around him. His temper and anger were his reactions to everything that was happening around him, as well as all the vibes and thoughts he had but never would he had imagined this was the truth behind it all. Oedipus strongly believed characters like Teiresias and Creon just simply did not want him as King of Thebes and that they were plotting against him when in reality they both just knew the truth but did not speak up about it once they both connected all the dots. Unfortunately for Oedipus, he had no one would be really one hundred percent on his side, making him realize what was right in front of him and guide him in the right direction. Instead, he had himself and let his bad temper and anger get the best of him.

Oedipus Rex is contended with his past because of his prophecy, his parents, and unfortunately, his tragic flaw, although when Oedipus did do his duties as King and focuses on his parents. It is no secret that no matter how hard a person tried to escape their past, it will always catch up to them. Oedipus is a perfect example of this, even though he himself did not even know he was running away from his past it still caught up to him. Even though readers pity Oedipus he is still at fault for the ways things turned out to be. There were things that could get been handled very differently. Things like his temper, his anger towards certain characters, and most importantly his way of not seeing what was right in front of him all long. It is human nature to react to a situation a person is put in but Oedipus let it all get in the way of seeing what was really important in his life. Oedipus is not the only character at fault, every character in Oedipus Rex by Sophocles, played a major role in this tragedy. First and most important were Oedipus’ biological parents for wanted their own son killed in order for the prophecy not to come true. Secondly comes Oedipus’ adopted parents, both the King and Queen of Cornith could have come forward and told Oedipus they are not his biological parents once Oedipus heard about the prophecy and tried to escape it. Some readers may overlook the King and Queen of Cornith but they do play a key role in the tragedy of Oedipus’ life after all. Then comes Teiresias and Creon, they both knew before Oedipus finally put all the pieces together and did not fully confront him but let him on. Oedipus was very naïve and did not want to see all the signs that were in front of him. Some readers believe Oedipus just did not want to see the truth that was right in front of him but rather live in the unknown and believes he had beat his prophecy. Finally comes Queen Jocasta who knew about the prophecy for so long, and did not find it weird her husband King Laius was murdered then marries a man that could be his son’s age. Queen Jocasta killed herself soon after finding out the truth about her second husband who in reality was her son she thought was dead due to orders from her and her late husband King Laius. Queen Jocasta believed that ending her life was the best way out of the tragedy her life had become. The prophecy came true, King Laius was killed by their son Oedipus and then marries not only her husband’s killer but her son who was sent to get killed in order for this not to happen.

Conclusion

The past caught up to every character in this story, not only the past but karma. Everyone in this story sooner or later paid for all the bad and evil they ever did. Unfortunately, there are some characters in this story who were not at fault and those were Oedipus and Queen Jocasta’s children. Those children are not at fault for their parent’s mistake or most importantly their mother’s mistake, who is also their grandmother. In the end, they are the ones who suffer the greater loss, not only do they come to find out the truth of their own family tree but they also lost both of their parents due to this prophecy. Unfortunately, Oedipus Rex by Sophocles did not end with a happy ending instead it was a tragedy from beginning to end and every character played a key role in that.

One of the classical Athenian playwrights for tragedy is Sophocles, and is well known for his drama, Oedipus Rex. His plays contain characters who have noble qualities and are liable to their tragic fate. Fate is inevitable in the context of the play. Sophocles intentionally presents fate to be inevitable to ensure the submission of society. In the play, Oedipus Rex, written by Sophocles, displays a society who fully worships the gods and defying them leads to consequences, the certainty of fate, and experiencing hardships. Therefore, the characters associated with the prophecy and planning to escape from truth confirms the idea of the inescapable fate.

Furthermore, Oedipus and his birth parents decides to act upon unreasonable behavior that leads to self-harm and teaches a lesson. In the end of the play, Oedipus punishes himself by banishing from the country and gauging his eyes out when he realizes that the Oracle came true; to kill his father and marry his mother. According to Oedipus as he declares his banishment to Choragos, “Do not counsel me anymore. This punishment that I have laid upon myself is just. If I had eyes, I do not know how I could bear the sight of my father…” (Sophocles, Antistrophe 2. 140-144) . The gesture of gauging his eyes, teaches the cohesion of fate and the consequences of eluding the unpleasant future revolves around the god’s decisiveness. Additionally, the mother and wife of Oedipus, Jocasta fails to accept and tolerate of the prophecy becoming true. In correlation to the notion of retribution to the gods, “[Second Messenger] The queen is dead… I do not know: it was none of us who aided him. But surely one of the gods was in control,” (Exodos 35. 26-34). As the second messenger announces the death of queen Jocasta, it is evident that the messenger assigns the responsibility upon the gods of the situation. Thus, proves the immeasurable powers of gods the ability to set a person’s role in society. Moreover, the name Oedipus translates to swollen foot, and refers to the consequences his birth parents plan to stop from the prophecy happening. The messenger of Corinth reveals the truth of Oedipus’ foot, “[Oedipus] Ah stranger, why do you speak of that childhood pain? [Messenger] I pulled the skewer that pinned your feet together…. That was why you were given the name you bear!” (3.113-116). It is apparent that his experience traumatizes his childhood, and as a result, the pain uncovers that his fleeing from Corinth acts as bait of the inescapable fate. Likewise, the gods have capabilities to bring destruction upon the people by punishing those who do not abide from the rules, and teach a lesson of the importance of fulfilling the roles as an individual.

Secondly, the gods ensure the prophecy to be predetermine through natural forces and the irrational decisions Oedipus make to cheat his way from freedom. First in foremost, the gods cast upon a sphinx to cause a plague in the city of Thebes as punishment for their crimes, as a result, Oedipus fulfills his prophecy of becoming king and marrying his mother. Oedipus’ people beg for their savior to save them, “You saved us from the Sphinx, that flinty singer, and the tribute we paid her so long; yet you were never better informed than we, nor could we teach you: A god’s touch, it seems, enabled you to help us,” (1. 38-42). The play writer, Sophocles purposely enforce this quote to indicate that the gods have full control of Oedipus’s fate since the beginning and are impotent to avoid fate. Furthermore, once the plague starts, the truth starts unravelling the actions Oedipus brings into the city of Thebes. Kreon, brother of Jocasta, goes to Delphi to find answers to end the plague, “In plain words the god commands us to expel from the land of Thebes. An old defilement we are sheltering. It is a deathly thing, beyond cure; We must not let it feed upon us longer,” (1. 98-103). This quote manifests the resolution to end the suffering, but proves that fate will retaliate in response to Oedipus’s refusal towards his destiny. Additionally, the prophet, Teiresias, acts as a god of being able to see the future and his encounter with Oedipus assures that his destiny came true. As Oedipus argues with Teiresias, “What does it matter? Whether I speak or not, it is bound to come,” (Parados. 125-126). His bold statement of Oedipus’ destiny proves that a strong entity has an obligation to keep life balance. In conclusion, the gods’ determination to keep life in order causes fate to be inevitable under no circumstances, and the source of the characters’ agony.

Also, those who are below the hierarchy functions as the proletariats in the society, because they do not have full control of their fate and need to undergo failures to learn. In the beginning of the play, Oedipus’s children are the working-class people who suffers from a disease specifying a lesson from the gods for glorifying the sinful man, Oedipus. The city of Thebes continues to suffer, “Must tell you: Thebes is tossed on a murdering sea and can not lift her head from the death surge… The herds are sick; children die unborn, and labor is vain. The god of plague and pyre raids like the detestable lightning through the city,” (1. 26 – 31). Without doubt, the Thebans are indicating the terrifying powers the gods can afflict upon Thebes and her downfall, and is due to the fact of their foolishness and unwary of the situation. Furthermore, Oedipus’s adversity keeps the stability of the hierarchy between the bourgeois and the proletariat. Oedipus’ cluelessness of the state of his position, “Thus I associate myself with this oracle and take the side of the murdered king. As for the criminal, … And as for me, this curse applies no less if it should turn out that the culprit is my guest here, sharing my hearth,” (3. 27 – 33). Oedipus lacks knowledge and intelligence which brings the gods to purposely cause him misfortunes, and therefore he is incapable of changing his role in society. Finally, the daughters of Oedipus will continue to suffer and feel miserable because of their father’s name. “Is there any evil wanting? Your father killed his father… Endangered you at the fount of his own existence! That is why they will say of you. Then, whom can you ever marry? There are no bridegrooms for you, and your lives must wither away in sterile dreaming,” (5. 263 – 267). Obviously, Oedipus curses his own daughter and declares that his daughters will be in a position of loneliness because they carry their fathers’ name in vain, and implies that fate is unavoidable. Hence, misfortune will continue to follow Oedipus and those who associates themselves to him will need to condone the consequences.

The city of Thebes abides from the rules of the gods, and disobeying them leads to further consequences. The gods serve as an equilibrium in the society and ensures that each person has a role, and if the person does not fulfill their role, there will be repercussions. Oedipus, a victim of trying to outrun fate from the gods, face hardships and learns that fate is inevitable because gods are powerful. Gods will guarantee the preordain prophecy of a person through having full control of their life, the power to plan events and fall into deep misery. In the end, fate is a cycle that a person must follow and choosing to break the cycle will disrupt the future.

One of the classical Athenian playwrights for tragedy is Sophocles, and is well known for his drama, Oedipus Rex. His plays contain characters who have noble qualities and are liable to their tragic fate. Fate is inevitable in the context of the play. Sophocles intentionally presents fate to be inevitable to ensure the submission of society. In the play, Oedipus Rex, written by Sophocles, displays a society who fully worships the gods and defying them leads to consequences, the certainty of fate, and experiencing hardships. Therefore, the characters associated with the prophecy and planning to escape from truth confirms the idea of the inescapable fate.

Furthermore, Oedipus and his birth parents decides to act upon unreasonable behavior that leads to self-harm and teaches a lesson. In the end of the play, Oedipus punishes himself by banishing from the country and gauging his eyes out when he realizes that the Oracle came true; to kill his father and marry his mother. According to Oedipus as he declares his banishment to Choragos, “Do not counsel me anymore. This punishment that I have laid upon myself is just. If I had eyes, I do not know how I could bear the sight of my father…” (Sophocles, Antistrophe 2. 140-144) . The gesture of gauging his eyes, teaches the cohesion of fate and the consequences of eluding the unpleasant future revolves around the god’s decisiveness. Additionally, the mother and wife of Oedipus, Jocasta fails to accept and tolerate of the prophecy becoming true. In correlation to the notion of retribution to the gods, “[Second Messenger] The queen is dead… I do not know: it was none of us who aided him. But surely one of the gods was in control,” (Exodos 35. 26-34). As the second messenger announces the death of queen Jocasta, it is evident that the messenger assigns the responsibility upon the gods of the situation. Thus, proves the immeasurable powers of gods the ability to set a person’s role in society. Moreover, the name Oedipus translates to swollen foot, and refers to the consequences his birth parents plan to stop from the prophecy happening. The messenger of Corinth reveals the truth of Oedipus’ foot, “[Oedipus] Ah stranger, why do you speak of that childhood pain? [Messenger] I pulled the skewer that pinned your feet together…. That was why you were given the name you bear!” (3.113-116). It is apparent that his experience traumatizes his childhood, and as a result, the pain uncovers that his fleeing from Corinth acts as bait of the inescapable fate. Likewise, the gods have capabilities to bring destruction upon the people by punishing those who do not abide from the rules, and teach a lesson of the importance of fulfilling the roles as an individual.

Secondly, the gods ensure the prophecy to be predetermine through natural forces and the irrational decisions Oedipus make to cheat his way from freedom. First in foremost, the gods cast upon a sphinx to cause a plague in the city of Thebes as punishment for their crimes, as a result, Oedipus fulfills his prophecy of becoming king and marrying his mother. Oedipus’ people beg for their savior to save them, “You saved us from the Sphinx, that flinty singer, and the tribute we paid her so long; yet you were never better informed than we, nor could we teach you: A god’s touch, it seems, enabled you to help us,” (1. 38-42). The play writer, Sophocles purposely enforce this quote to indicate that the gods have full control of Oedipus’s fate since the beginning and are impotent to avoid fate. Furthermore, once the plague starts, the truth starts unravelling the actions Oedipus brings into the city of Thebes. Kreon, brother of Jocasta, goes to Delphi to find answers to end the plague, “In plain words the god commands us to expel from the land of Thebes. An old defilement we are sheltering. It is a deathly thing, beyond cure; We must not let it feed upon us longer,” (1. 98-103). This quote manifests the resolution to end the suffering, but proves that fate will retaliate in response to Oedipus’s refusal towards his destiny. Additionally, the prophet, Teiresias, acts as a god of being able to see the future and his encounter with Oedipus assures that his destiny came true. As Oedipus argues with Teiresias, “What does it matter? Whether I speak or not, it is bound to come,” (Parados. 125-126). His bold statement of Oedipus’ destiny proves that a strong entity has an obligation to keep life balance. In conclusion, the gods’ determination to keep life in order causes fate to be inevitable under no circumstances, and the source of the characters’ agony.

Also, those who are below the hierarchy functions as the proletariats in the society, because they do not have full control of their fate and need to undergo failures to learn. In the beginning of the play, Oedipus’s children are the working-class people who suffers from a disease specifying a lesson from the gods for glorifying the sinful man, Oedipus. The city of Thebes continues to suffer, “Must tell you: Thebes is tossed on a murdering sea and can not lift her head from the death surge… The herds are sick; children die unborn, and labor is vain. The god of plague and pyre raids like the detestable lightning through the city,” (1. 26 – 31). Without doubt, the Thebans are indicating the terrifying powers the gods can afflict upon Thebes and her downfall, and is due to the fact of their foolishness and unwary of the situation. Furthermore, Oedipus’s adversity keeps the stability of the hierarchy between the bourgeois and the proletariat. Oedipus’ cluelessness of the state of his position, “Thus I associate myself with this oracle and take the side of the murdered king. As for the criminal, … And as for me, this curse applies no less if it should turn out that the culprit is my guest here, sharing my hearth,” (3. 27 – 33). Oedipus lacks knowledge and intelligence which brings the gods to purposely cause him misfortunes, and therefore he is incapable of changing his role in society. Finally, the daughters of Oedipus will continue to suffer and feel miserable because of their father’s name. “Is there any evil wanting? Your father killed his father… Endangered you at the fount of his own existence! That is why they will say of you. Then, whom can you ever marry? There are no bridegrooms for you, and your lives must wither away in sterile dreaming,” (5. 263 – 267). Obviously, Oedipus curses his own daughter and declares that his daughters will be in a position of loneliness because they carry their fathers’ name in vain, and implies that fate is unavoidable. Hence, misfortune will continue to follow Oedipus and those who associates themselves to him will need to condone the consequences.

The city of Thebes abides from the rules of the gods, and disobeying them leads to further consequences. The gods serve as an equilibrium in the society and ensures that each person has a role, and if the person does not fulfill their role, there will be repercussions. Oedipus, a victim of trying to outrun fate from the gods, face hardships and learns that fate is inevitable because gods are powerful. Gods will guarantee the preordain prophecy of a person through having full control of their life, the power to plan events and fall into deep misery. In the end, fate is a cycle that a person must follow and choosing to break the cycle will disrupt the future.

Sophocles’ Oedipus is one of the most striking shocking heroes all throughout the whole presence of drama. His odd predetermination drives him to deplorable ruin that leaves both the peruser and the group feeling genuinely impacted. As demonstrated by the importance of the Greek scholar, Aristotle, Oedipus’ tricky story qualifies him as an appalling hero. Oedipus is the exemplification of Aristotle’s depiction of an awful hero through his ability to spare his reasonability and insight, despite his imperfections and tie. The Aristotelian viewpoint on a deplorable hero doesn’t reveal the nonappearance of significant quality or even the beastliness of the hero, considering a bumble of judgment. The disaster and drama so perfectly fit the Aristotelian characteristics of Oedipus.

Considering Aristotle’s importance of a lamentable hero, it will in general be found that Oedipus fits the character portrayal reliably through various characteristics that he appears and the origination of his wretched fall:

There remains than the man who has the mean among honorableness and insidiousness. He isn’t extra-standard in morals and honorability however then doesn’t fall into frightful karma because of detestation and evil yet since of some hamartia of a sort found in men of high reputation and good karma, for instance, Oedipus and Thyestes and well-known men of relative families (Adade-Yeboah, Ahenkora,& Amankwa, 2012, pg. 2).

Aristotle’s significance as a stunning hero totally fits the character of Oedipus by virtue of the various characteristics he appears in and the origin of his fall. In spite of the way that Oedipus is anything but a blessed individual, his momentous ability to outfox the Sphinx and grasp the problem gives him much love.

Oedipus procures a blessing as King, a remuneration for saving the people of Thebes, which grants him more power as he comes a sanctified pioneer of the city. The Priest watches out for Oedipus: ‘Phenomenal Oedipus, O momentous King of Thebes’ (Sophocles, 425, pg.860). In spite of the way that this near exemplary nature has been dangerously recolored through his distorted relationship with his mother, Jocasta, paying little mind to that he didn’t understand she was his mother. Following Aristotle’s thought, Oedipus’ annihilation doesn’t originate from his underhandedness, anyway from a mix of components.

One factor that essentially adds to Oedipus’ demolition is his disdain towards Tiresias, which gigantically reflects his own inadequacy. Oedipus loses his temper when the outwardly debilitated prophet endeavors to alert him: ‘Am I to hold up under this from him? Destruction Take you! Out of this spot! Out of my sight!’ (Sophocles, 425, pg. 870). By losing his temper, Oedipus displays the slip-up of judgment that Aristotle suggests in his definition. The commitment to disaster is put on the deficiency that reveals that misguided has been done; regardless, Aristotle won’t hold an issue to the hero whose tolerability and honesty he in spite of everything stays consistent. Aristotle targets human goof, limited to the nonappearance of moral quality as it is the purpose behind the catastrophe. Regardless of the way that Oedipus is accountable for interbreeding and character imperfections, his decency is unquestionable, as he reveals fault and obligation. Close to the completion of the play, even his hatred is recouped. He shows plentiful information after he gets outwardly weakened and bound to remove. ‘… or execute me, toss me, Into the sea, away from men’s eyes forever… taking everything into account, no one but I can hold up under this fault… ‘ (Sophocles,425 pg. 894). Aristotle’s point is endorsed by Oedipus’ quality, a shocking hero’s goodness insists that he isn’t detestable, just fit for submitting mistakes.

As a rule, the tolerable assortment of the language basically improves the play and engages the play to be esteemed by different groups. ‘Aristotle acknowledges that the language must be sweet in misfortune. The level of language used by different characters should fluctuate to depict the social stands of the characters’ (Adade-Yeboah, Ahenkora, and Amankwa, 2012 pg. 1). Likewise, he bases on significant language mirrored all through the entire play, and stresses that fiasco must be focused on.

Aristotle presents that there is a marvelous association between debacle and emotions. For him, it is conveyed through pity and fear. Konstan battles:

The likelihood that the object of pity doesn’t justify his predetermination is accessible in the definition Aristotle offers in the Rhetoric; in Poetics, nevertheless, Aristotle manhandles the possibility of closeness in order to explain the dread that debacle starts. If the characters before a group of people are adequate, for example, the ourselves-the setting shows that the sense is morally practically identical then we will experience their fear as our own. (Konstan, 1999, pg. 1)

Clearly, the group reacts to the gathering of events in the play; having compassion toward Oedipus about his fate and the issue he faces.

Aristotle praises an impressive strategy that makes the play progressively charming and improves principles:

The massing of the various exercises is noteworthy. The greatness of the plot along these lines lies in the blueprints which must have the size and not include probability. Without a doubt, the unpretentious control of the plot which brings expectation in like manner completes the divulgence (Adade-Yeboah, Ahenkora, and Amankwa, 2012 pg. 1).

He feels that the exercises should be reflected through a possible plot to which the group can without a lot of a stretch relate and identify the accomplishment of a real calamity.

Finkelberg fights what Aristotle calls: ‘for the creation of a full-scale pipedream of real experience and, in this manner, for the group’s excited conspicuous confirmation with the characters. Simply such energetic conspicuous verification would provoke the most ideal shocking delight that Aristotle searches for’ (Finkelberg, 2006 pg. 6).

Following Aristotle’s idea of the plot, Oedipus the King has an unmistakable plot that makes expectation and totally attracts the group. Through the organization of real experiences, genuine emotions are made by the people who can identify with the experiences and can find a strong relationship between the fanciful characters and themselves. The groupings of events don’t follow a consecutive solicitation, which updates the strain of the plot. For instance, as the play begins, Oedipus is starting at now the King of Thebes; regardless, reality with respect to his natural watchmen isn’t found by the group until later.

Aristotle progresses a plot that suggests equality of culmination, satisfaction, significance, and multifaceted nature. (McManus, 1999) This is directed by the length and multifaceted nature of the play as it relates to the genuineness and criticalness of the plot. This article develops a comprehensive relationship between the movement and the plot that are dependent and fundamental to the play: ‘Fiasco, by recommendation, is an ‘action that isn’t joking.’ The action is associated up with the plot considering the way that the plot is the pantomime of the action. By the day’s end, the plot is a mix of individual showings. ‘Genuine’ suggests that the movement must incorporate a person of high class, a nobility’ (Adade-Yeboah, Ahenkora, and Amankwa, 2012 pg. 2). This portrayal organizes the character of Oedipus who isn’t only a privileged person yet moreover a calm and incredible man. According to Scheeper’s article: ‘Aristotle negates the ‘childishly’ sorted out unfortunate plot, which incorporates a better than an average man coming to the incident, as absolutely profane, and dismisses the direct great plot, where a horrible man gives up to hardship, as totally un-miserable’ (Scheepers, 2005, pg. 137). As in Oedipus the King and through the character of Oedipus, he acknowledges that the hero shouldn’t be morally abhorrent, anyway upstanding.

Aristotle uses Virtue and significant quality as two huge thoughts in his references to the terrible hero and fiasco. The group generally identifies with the characters through these two thoughts; despite the character’s exercises and how they can be related to the group’s own lives. This explains the group’s sentiments through the introduction or scrutinizing. As Konstan explains:

The setting in Poetics appears, as we have seen, that the relevant motivation behind equivalence because of disaster is acceptable comparability: it is, generally talking, in character, rather than age, family, or calling, that we are intently looking like the heroes of a play (Konstan, 1999, pg. 2).

Notwithstanding the way that drama is an invention of the real world, it may address an impression of a character that some may identify with. As Gillet and Hankey express: ‘The reactions portrayed in Oedipus clarify character characteristics just as the activity of uprightness in coordinating what we may do in conditions that interface with our characters in potentially miserable habits.’ (Gillet and Hankey, 2005, pg. 1)

Aristotle’s thoughts of a despicable hero, disaster, and drama are strangely critical. The Aristotelian terrible hero is an incredible character with contributed greatness, whose fall begins from a bumble in judgment, not from the character’s wickedness. What’s more, Aristotle’s importance of a catastrophe sees the imitated authentic experiences and all the while revealed crucial basics of drama. Sophocles’ Oedipus totally speaks to Aristotle’s view as a stunning hero, as he makes sense of how to gain exemplary nature and savvy, notwithstanding the way that his temper has been attempted which drives him to his unavoidable ruin.

King Oedipus is a prominent example of how fate inevitably controls his life and leads him to his predestined denouement. He attempts to escape Delphi’s prophecy by committing acts of sacrifice to save his family and his citizens. Though the intentions were there, Oedipus ultimately brought the prophecy to life because of these same actions. He banished himself from Corinth to save his father but killed his father on the way to Thebes. He answers the Sphinx’s riddle correctly, but then he ends up marrying his mother. The way these events pan out is almost comical in how ironic it seems. In Kitto’s Greek Tragedy, he asks, “Is Sophocles telling us that man is only the plaything of Fate? Or does he mean, as Bowra suggested, no more than that the gods have contrived this awful fate for Oedipus to display their power to man and to teach him a salutary lesson?” (Kitto 138) These questions create skepticism of the Oracle of Delphi’s intentions for Oedipus’ life. The ambiguity of outcomes gives an aura of mystery over the legitimacy of fate and whether it can be told, but undoubtedly the theme of fate interlays with power. A common trend in Sophocles’ work is whether power and fate go hand-in-hand and if this relationship is relevant in every character’s development.

This relationship is tested in Antigone when King Creon disobeys the will of the gods by forbidding the burial of Polyneices. The ancient Greek practice of proper burials was a sacred tradition to bring human souls to the underworld. By banning this for him, King Creon faces the consequences of disrespecting the gods and angering them. In a twist of fate, Creon ends up with his family dead and his citizens displeased. The chorus agrees that Haemon makes a rational argument when he mentions how the citizens believe that Antigone’s life should be spared. They go as far as to chant, “Proud words of the arrogant man, in the end, meet punishment, great as his pride was great, so, at last, he is a school in wisdom.” (Sophocles 1350-2) These last lines of the play summarize the cause of his denouement. In this case, the illusion of fate has become more relevant in this context than the illusion of control. Creon has total control over his decision to execute Antigone and finds no remorse at first. Once he finds out about his retribution, it is then that he realizes the consequences of his wrongful choices. The chorus then provides context about his vengeance and how the gods’ contributed to his punishment. Whether the gods were actually at fault, or they were looking for an explanation for this unusual act of equalizing the scales, the audience may never know what Sophocles’ intent was. Hence why the illusion of fate is more distinguishable in this case.

In the same play, Antigone has her comprehension of fate and decides to accept it rather than dismiss it. Antigone, Creon, and Oedipus all have their fates given, but the way they each respond to them varies significantly. Creon chooses to act in belligerence and ignorance. Oedipus decides to run from it altogether. Antigone goes to embrace her actions and the fate that comes along with them. Antigone knew the consequences of burying her brother but still chose to accept said results and followed through to the very end. She claims, “But my fate prompts no tears, and no friend mourns.” (Sophocles 881) She has nothing left to lose and accepts the fate that is her death. In this case, Antigone is known as the powerful heroine in this story, even though it seems like she gave up in the end. However, this acceptance of her purpose is not a mere pathetic abandonment of her motivations, but rather, her resolute faith in the justice she was fated to serve. The same case is made in Electra’s story. When Electra decides to take revenge upon her mother and kill her own blood, the chorus provides the audience with insight as to what the gods would think about this unorthodox method of resolving conflict. The chorus sings, “But through thy loyalty to Heaven’s eternal cause wearing the stainless crown of most perfect renown, and richly dowered by the mightiest laws.” (Sophocles 1093-7) Meaning, the chorus believes that the gods condone Electra’s resolve and that her fate is sealed. Her destiny is to punish her mother and reach the equilibrium of justice, and she can fulfill it in the end. In doing so, we see her power as the anti-hero shine through. Electra determines her own fate and successfully achieves it, which proves that her power is generated within herself and displayed through her actions. Through these interpretations, we recognize that the theme of power and the theme of fate go hand-in-hand and Sophocles uncovers how the manipulation of these qualities influences each character.

Sophocles has no qualms against portraying women as strong and powerful leaders. Yet, the society he lived in at the time had different perspectives on the role of women and how they should be represented in the community. So why did he choose to bring light to this matter? One could argue that “Sophocles surely had seen such men and knew that the male gospel of unquestioned intellectual and spiritual superiority was not supportable, that it was an untruth that indicted any— man, ruler, the state itself— who would mindlessly embrace it.” (Hanson 104) The typical standard for women’s rights very nearly ended at housekeeping and rearing children. Women were not allowed to vote, nor were they allowed to own or inherit the land. Even though they were an integral part of society, their general portrayal in theater and daily life reinforced these values even more. A model that fits the stereotypes of women back in that time is Ismene, Antigone’s sister. She is passive and submissive, both traits that confirm the stereotypical “weak and inferior” attitude towards women back then. Ismene says, “If, in defiance of the law, we cross a monarch’s will?–weak women, think of that, not framed by nature to contend with men. (Sophocles 59-61) Ismene is frightened for her sister’s life because of the power a man holds and how dangerous it can be when confronted by a man. She reasons by saying that women, by nature, can not even compete with men and their strength. What Sophocles does next is surprising, since he decides that Antigone will ignore Ismene’s pleas to be compliant and exceed the plot in an unusual way.

Not only does Antigone go against the willpower of men in the beginning, but a specific man in general, King Creon, who believed he had the same divinity as the gods themselves. Her bravery and her complexity made her more than a daughter, sister, or niece, but also a ruler in her own right and an unconventional hero. She is a distinct contrast to Creon in the sort of values they represent. E.W. from The Economist argues, “Kreon, in Hegel’s view, stands for the masculine law of the state, whereas Antigone represents the feminine law of the home.” (E.W.) Creon stood by his decision based on his responsibility to his citizens, and Antigone stood by her decision based on her responsibility to her family. By fulfilling Antigone’s objective, the notion represents a win for all women and society in general.

Another example of a strong female lead Sophocles created is Electra, who plots to kill her mother, Clytemnestra, and her step-father, Aegisthus, for the murder of her father, Agamemnon. Electra is considered one of Sophocles’ most successful dramas due to its controversial and unorthodox storyline. The main plot serves to exhibit a nonconformist perspective on what a woman was allowed to be back in that time, and this pushed the boundaries of how women were portrayed in society. Electra’s personality is exhibited not only through her actions and words in the play, but also through the way her lines are structured to be. Bollack, the author of The Art of Reading: From Homer to Paul Celan says,

“The female part overflows with vocal, narcissistic, spontaneous, and irrational outpourings; it is extremely lyrical, with the stressed syllables of its dochmiacs and syncopated iambs (batches and cretics), with the exception of the trochees of the epode and the final recapitulation.” (Bollack)

The tone and articulation of Electra’s lines give intuition to her emotions when she is reunited with Orestes. The sing-songy style and her over-the-moon excitement show her passionate and reckless response to the good news. The same intensity can be assumed for the opposite end of the spectrum, which is proven through her unrestrained desire to kill her mother.

Electra’s betrayal of her own blood counteracts the notion of what an ideal lady was supposed to be back in that time: passive, compliant, and weak. However, one could argue that she is also defending her own blood since the plan to kill her mother started with getting revenge for her father. Her ambivalence is not brought up from her personality or character, but rather says, “Electra is a victim of circumstance, imprisoned in the narrative of a past that she did not create and cannot control.” (Wheeler 384) Because of her motives, one cannot say that her plan was unprovoked, nor can they assume her morals are driven by the malicious intent of striking first rather than striking back. Electra’s ambiguity throughout the play is not determined by the revenge plan itself, but rather, by her reactions and her stubbornness to stick with her reactions. This makes her contributions to the play far more significant than any other character. However, Electra is not the only leading female character leaving an impact on the play.

Though Clytemnestra (Electra’s birth mother) is the villain of the story, she is also another significant model of a woman portrayed in a non-traditional manner. Electra ends up helping kill her own mother, and Clytemnestra helps to kill her own husband. Both of which are strikingly similar. Specifically, Clytemnestra’s character counteracted the “virginal and pure” stereotype that was valued in the patriarchal world. “In societies acknowledging only two, rigidly differential sets of gender roles, women wishing to succeed in ‘male’ spheres frequently assume wholesale the masculine set.” (Wheeler 383) Though untypical for a woman to be portrayed as “strong”, the only fitting way to do so was to do it in a masculine way. This reinforces patriarchal values since it supports the notion that the only way to be strong is to be masculine and act more like a “man”, rather than the fact that a woman can be strong and still act like a “woman”.

Clytemnestra opposed the idea of how a woman should behave when in a relationship with a man. Instead of valuing compliance and loyalty, she decides to go with another man and ends up killing her first husband. The general topic of adultery is more accepted by men than it is by women, but Sophocles allows Clytemnestra to do what others thought was unacceptable. She still has her authority and power regardless of her act of adultery, which makes her strong and dangerous. Wheeler, the writer of the chapter Gender and Transgression in his novel The Classical Quarterly notices that,

“She decided to commemorate Agamemnon’s murder after taking her (gender-transgressive) revenge; she owns the household’s property; it is she whom Chrysothemis fears and Electra blames for her plight; and she is responsible, at least jointly, for the plan to imprison the latter.” (Wheeler 385-6)

She is portrayed as a person with bad morals because of her adultery and lack of guilty conscience, and the justice that gets served seems rightfully deserved since a woman should not be capable of doing such a thing back in the time. Even though she is the antagonist in this play, Clytemnestra is still a force to be reckoned with in her own right, and that makes for the creation of a frighteningly powerful figure, even though she is only a woman. This contributes to the argument that women are not just weak and gentle creatures, but can also be vicious and forceful.

Creon in oedipus the king merges the significance that power and fate bring to change the course of a person’s life, not just through the eyes of the traditional man, but also through the modern eyes of a woman. By shifting the course of action when these themes come into play, the audience can truly capture the dynamic of each character along with the purpose of why these themes are essential to highlight the morals of each story. So, the audience can ask themselves, how can the lessons taught by Sophocles be incorporated into one’s own life? The kinship developed from Sophocles’ characters with people in real life can transform and evoke a new sense of lucidity about society and the world.

In the play, “Oedipus the King”, the story evolves as a murder mystery where Sophocles underlines the irony of a man determined to find, reveal, and punish the murderer of Laius, which ends up him hunting himself. The idea of sight and blindness in this tragic play is a comparison, with blindness symbolizing wisdom or knowledge, entwined with light and truth. While sight symbolizes ignorance, darkness, and fabricating the truth. The references to sight and blindness, both metaphorical and literal are used frequently in the play. The writer Sophocles uses the dramatic techniques of foreshadowing, symbolism, and irony. Also, applies the Chorus for various purposes.

During Oedipus’ conversation with the priest, he boastfully says, “I Oedipus whom all men call the Great.” We can see that he thinks highly of himself because he has done for the City of Thebes, and from what he has heard from the people of Thebes (line 7). For instance, Oedipus answers the sphinx’s riddle that saved the City of Thebes. Which no man could do before him, made Oedipus arrogant because of rescuing the city from the plague. With this, we can see Oedipus being blinded by his pride in being able to solve the riddle. He was first to see the truth though no one else could, it gave him the impression of being crafty and full of knowledge. During his search to find Laius’s murderer, he will soon stop being delusional and realize his foolish actions but way before he realizes it. Further along in the story, we see Oedipus going through a series of events during which he chooses to remain blind.

Later in the story, his pride makes him deny the truths that are being presented to him throughout his journey. This pushes him to believe and allegedly accuse Creon, his brother-in-law, and Teiresias, the blind prophet, of treason. This demonstrates Oedipus’ blindness to the truth, also the fact that Polybus and Merope are not his real parents. Also, both his wife and mother as Teiresias says, “To her that gave him birth, a son and husband both” (line 510-511). Oedipus is “The land’s pollution” as Teiresias call him, stating to Oedipus as Laius’ murderer whom he is searching for and shockingly discovers Laius is his father. During their meeting, Teiresias tells Oedipus “You have your eyes but see not where you are in sin, nor whom you live with.” (lines 457-458). Here Sophocles uses the prophet’s words to reinstate Oedipus’ lack of foresight.

Creon is now King of Thebes, and Oedipus is now banished away forever. If Oedipus never would have unblinded himself from the truth that was in front of him, then he could have remained gullible to the fact he was the infection of the city. To the fact that he may have never fulfilled his prophecy.