During class today, I asked the question: “Is Oedipus’ rage driven by his quest to help the people and the greater good, or is it simply his temper that drives him to act with such fury towards Tiresias?” As I read the first reading from Oedipus the King, I was shocked when Oedipus lost his temper with Tiresias. It seemed to me that not only was he trying to help his people and that his frustration had finally peaked, but also that part of him simply snapped. He was completely unwilling to accept that he could have killed the king, Laius. Still curious whether Oedipus had, as it seemed to me, simply become angry because he did not want to hear the truth that Tiresius spoke, I looked to the next reading for my answers. As I read the next twenty pages of reading, fury and confusion, and finally revelation jumped from the pages. Oedipus first accused his brother-in-law, Creon, of plotting against him. He cruelly yells at his brother in law, and the climax of the scene happens on page 194 when Creon asks Oedipus, “What do you want? / You want me banished?” Oedipus cruelly replies, “No, I want you dead.” Oedipus has passed his point of helping the people to acting on sheer anger alone. When Creon asks Oedipus on page 195 what will happen if he is completely wrong, Oedipus comes back saying, “No matter–I must rule.” Oedipus’ rage no longer stems from his vow to help his people, but it now shifts to a need for power and control. Oedipus is brought back into check by his wife, Jocasta, who helps him to control his anger and brings him to a realization of his true birth.
At the beginning of the play, I was completely drawn into the story because of the fact that, as we can assume, everyone knows the story of Oedipus. Sophocles uses this fact to set up the play. The audience and reader are watching the story unfold knowing that Oedipus killed his father and slept with his mother. While we listen to Oedipus declare that he is not the killer to Tiresius as he is screaming insults at his back, we are all cringing because we know that the blind man speaks the truth. This dramatic irony leaves for a sickening feeling as we can see the tragic hero heading for his demise blinding, and we have no way of stopping him. It is interesting to me to be the second party, looking in. It is almost like when I have an out-of-body experience, and can somehow step outside myself and watch myself walking through my life. I felt an attachment to Oedipus, and though throughout the play, I had a strange span of emotions that lead me to think of him differently, I still sympathized with Oedipus up until the end. Yes, his actions in part of the play were uncalled for, and had no evidence to back him up, but I can see where he is coming from in his assumptions. Being a hot-tempered person myself, I can see how Oedipus could not look outside the box and outside of his emotions to understand the truth until the end of the play.
As I finished the play, I finally fully understood the true horror of the story of Oedipus. Before, I had considered the story revolting, not understanding how a man could even stand to sleep with his mother, and kill his father. I thought of him as cold-hearted, but I believe that Sophocles did a beautiful job of depicting this story. When Jocasta went running from the scene, screaming, I had no idea that she was about to kill herself. The agony that the prophecy caused was too great for me to bear. I felt the sorrow that Jocasta felt as she understood the truth of the story at last. As Oedipus to the pins from her hair, I was again unsure of what he would do. I figured that he would beg to be killed. When he gouged out his own eyes, I let out a sharp breath. I believe that Oedipus should not have punished himself in this way. Yes, what he did was wrong, but his did not know of his wrong doings. Why should he have to suffer so by his own hand because of something that he did not realize? The story of Oedipus is cruel and sickening, but looking at it from the point of view that it was presented in made me really think about the pain that it really caused for the people. (776)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Deby, Good post. Seeing Oedipus as one capable of leaving his rational self behind and behaving completely irrationally, but also havng the ability to come back when his wife talks to him is a good recognition of the two sides of his character. Also, when you say, "we can see the tragic hero heading for his demise blinding, and we have no way of stopping him," you're identifying the sense of fear and inevitability that Aristotle talked about as the primary response to tragedy.
Post a Comment