Oedipus Rex comments...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Link List
- Types of Literary Criticism
- Typical Structure of a Greek Play
- Aristotle on Tragedy
- Greek Tragedy
- Drama: Ancient Greek Theatre
- Oedipus Rex (text of play)
- Oedipus Analysis/Criticism
- Video Link for "Jury", Oedipus, various poetry elements, Bless Me Ultima
- Literary Terms
- The Bible (searchable website for literary references)
- AP Lit Wiki with Source Info
- R & G Info
- "Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin
- Heart of Darkness: Applying Lit. Theory Questions
- Heart of Darkness Info
Contributors
Blog Archive
-
▼
07
(7)
- ► Jul 29 - Aug 5 (2)
- ► Sep 9 - Sep 16 (1)
- ► Sep 23 - Sep 30 (1)
Hints for Prompts
- Underline or circle key words BEFORE you begin.
- Take a few moments to brainstorm; listing or webbing works.
- Make EVERY sentence count -- no fluff! STAY FOCUSED.
- Answer ALL of the prompt. Often this requires two or three things.
- Think abstractly and divergently.
- Begin right away.
"Tis the good reader that makes a good book." --Ralph Waldo Emerson
43 comments:
You really know that you are in AP English when you read something and you notice the form it is written in. I noticed that in Oedipus Rex whenever Oedipus was trying to figure something out there were a lot of shorter sentences. When he was trying to explain something to someone he talked more in paragraphs. This could show that he is putting a lot of thought into who his real parents are, for example, or what his "punishment" should be for killing his father and marrying his mother.
Truthfully, I think it is neat how much I have already learned about analyzing works of literature, and we have only been in school for two weeks!
I noticed a rather ironic statement that Oedipus makes, "I'll scrutinize all stories," (AP Book, p 1313) when he is trying to figure out Laius' death. As soon as he says this, Tiresias is brought before him. When Tiresias tells him his "story", he does not scrutinize it but rather dismisses it as treason. This ties in with his hamartia of pride. Even though he says that he will listen to every account, he is too prideful to even consider one that accuses him of the crime.
That is a nice catch Ultimate CYTer but I am not totally convinced that his fatal flaw is pride. If you were investigationg the murder of a great and powerful king and a witness came forward and told you that you were the murderer but you had no memory of killing such an honored man...would you not discredit it? I think that the fatal flaw of Oedipus Rex is honesty.
I know that sounds crazy that a political figure is FLAWED by honesty but if you really think about it...in the very begining of the play I remember thinking that all the stuff oedipus was spouting about saving the city was too much. It either meant that he really knew how to play the game or he was too honest to begin to understand the rules. I naturally thought it was the former. When Creon entered though I knew I was wrong. Oedipus called him out for treason in front of the town and started a public dispute with his second in command...that was the truth.
A ruler that knew how to play would have filled Creons response away and then quietly dispatched him in the middle of the night, not involving the public in a matter that was not their concern.Things run smoother when you simply don't make a truth known as long as you don't put a lie in its place. But Oedipus was fully and wholeheartedly honest until the end. He could not even lie to spare others (his children and the people of Thebes) the grief and venerebility of suddenly losing him, a powerful and loved king (and we all know what happeneed the first time Thebes lost a king)
By going back and rewriting the lines for our play, the first few pages - the amazing symbolism with blindness and vision is restated over and over and over. There is so much foreshadowing and the way the play only focuses the action on a short period of time really does make it a tragedy.
I thought it was ironic that Lauis basically secured his fate by trying to exile and kill his son. Oedipus was completely clueless about his real father so he killed his father and fulfilled the prophecy without even realizing. I guess i thought it was a little funny. You go and try to "change your stars" (as William Thatcher would say) and it comes back to bite you.
I personaly really liked Oedipus. I understood it really well, probably because it was a play. I caught myself standing up, while reading, and reading it outloud to myself, pretty much acting it out the entire time. I've always loved studying greek drama and I think my background in that field really helped me with the understanding of Oedipus.
One thing I really noticed while reading, is the dialogue between Jocasta and Oedipus. Whenever they are talking to each other, she is always calming him down, using comforting words, and basically acting 'motherly' twards him. This is EXTREMELY ironic to me, since she really is his mother! I thought it was a nice touch to have that characteristic thrown in there.
I really liked Oedipus. It is a story that gets its point across by being blunt and fast which is a positive. Even though the story is a short one i still appreciated the symbolism one can find though out the whole play. This first and classic tragedy really set the bar high for many more "classics" that would follow it such as Hamlet and Macbeth. I think it's really neat that by just reading this play and discussing it with a few people in my class already i can see certain characteristics throughout the play that we still see in the movies, or in tragic Broadway plays today.
Good comments so far. I like that almost everyone is already using SPECIFIC examples to back up observations and claims. CHAIROSCURO -- I think the honesty thing has merit, but we have to remember that the Greeks would NOT have seen that as a flaw. Although they (and we) may have wanted to "change our stars" (that movie was on again this weekend), they would have cringed at the audacity of ANYONE -- even the great Oedipus -- thinking he could. It is hard not to overlay our own modern context and values in works like these. Yes, Oed searches for Truth, for which we can't fault him, but the play points glaringly to the idea that he relies too much on his own intellect to sort things out, instead of believing in Fate. That gouges at us because we like intellect. If honesty were the reason for his punishment at the end, it would be a dark picture indeed. If the chorus were not involved in warning so often, we could argue that his honesty might be the cause of his downfall, but Sophocles really hammers his point abouth Fate through the chorus. I LOVE the divergent thoughts though. Keep sorting through them!
In Oedipus Rex, what really stood out to me as a theme was that nothing can protect you from yourself. All of those around Oedipus tried to save him from knowing the horrible truth but he would not listen. In the end he found out that all of his downfall was his own fault. That was the worst part of it for him, I think, there was no body he could blame or punish for his misfortune except for himself!
Chairoscuro, while I see your point about saying Oedipus is flawed by honesty, I only think you can say that for a certain amount of time. Yes, at the beginning I would expect him to argue against Creon, but only because he doesn't know the identity of the man he killed and the stories don't fit together. However, as the play moves on, the evidence pointing towards Oedipus is overwhelming and he still refuses to accept it (until the very end of course). But even then, I see him blinding himself as a prideful action. Oedipus gouges his eyes so he doesn't have to look at the consequences of his actions. It's as if he's too good to look at the results of what he's done. Also, Oedipus believes he has outwitted fate, something that was unthinkable in that society. That fact, along with the rest, makes me agree with Ultimate CYTer that his hamartia is pride. Now, that doesn't mean that I totally disagree with you; I just don't think you can honestly say it is his "tragic" flaw. It's his pride (the fact that he believes there's no way he could ever have done something so terrible and wrong - it's just not possible) that costs him in the end.
While we're also on the subject of irony, I think the whole idea of sight in the drama is ironic. For example, Tiresias, the blond prophet, is the only one who can actually "see" the truth. Then, on the opposite end of the spectrum, you have Oedipus, whose vision is fine (for now...), who is blind to what sits right in front of him. So, sight is obviously very important to the work. I guess it's trying to say that wat you see with your eyes isn't always what you really see, or what matters most.
Oedipus was surprisingly good. I enjoy literature that shows the conflict within a character, and this is the extreme. The whole idea that the Greeks had that their parents sins would fall on their children stinks. I like how in the end you feel sorry for Oedipus for first off trying to fight fate and of course lose, but also that it was his fathers fault in the fist place. Storys with fate in them always annoy me because you know that they are basically screwing up their own life by doing anything trying to prevent the inevitabale ending. Oh well, on the whole i think this was a good read.
: I enjoyed reading Oedipus Rex because it was short and to the point but still, through the author’s style, created feelings of pity and devotion to Oedipus from the reader. One major symbol in Oedipus is blindness. The ironic thing is that blindness actually represents “seeing”, as in seeing the truth. Tiresias, who is blind, is the only one that knows the truth of the murder, and until Oedipus is blinded he does not fully know the truth!
Drew, I honestly do not think pride was the reason that Oedipus gouged out his eyes. It was not that he was 'too good' to see what he had created, but more that he was ashamed to see the products of incest--his children--and felt undeserving of seeing beauty in the world ever again. Suicide would have been cowardice, so instead he gouges his eyes causing him to suffer and pay for what he has done until his death.
I'd like to start out by saying, haste makes waste please recycle and then move on to say that, throughout this story sophocles or dude who translated sophocles, uses punctuation really well, to add to the overall effect of irony. In one line he says "She is his wife and mother...of his children." This is several pages before they start peicing together the story and if you read it with the pause correctly greatly adds to the irony.
I think it's interesting that when Oedipus is gathering facts, he speaks a lot less. Or when he's accusing people. Those times, he speaks in a line or so. It shows that he's either rushing to conclusions (when he argues with Creon and Tiresias) or that he's trying to find out as much as he can, like with the messengers. Then, sometimes he'll give really long speeches, showing his thoughts out loud. There are usually really big spaces between the speeches, though, when he's talking to others. However, there are two fairly close together in the beginning, but then he finds out Polybus is not his father, and he doesn't have another long speech until after he's blinded himself. I think that could either mean that he really knows what's going on now but doesn't want to think about it, or else he's thinking even faster and can't formulate his thoughts into a speech fast enough.
Of course I don't have any intelligent comments on symbolism or diction and how it relates to the overall meaning of the work. However, I think this work says a lot about the harm in knowledge of the truth. Both the herdsman and the blind prophet try to avoid telling Oedipus the truth about his true identity and the murder of Laius. However, Oedipus is so concerned with obtaining truth that he disregards these two men and their warning of what the truth might do to him and the city of Thebes. It was fate that he would kill his father and marry his mother, but what harm would come if the truth was kept a secret?
I had an idea for theme of Oedipus today in class when we had that 2 min brainstorm, but I would really like someone's input or ideas. I thought as I was reading a recurring theme could be knowledge versus wisdom with respect to Oedipus, Laius, and Jocasta. Laius and Jocasta both had the knowledge from Apollo's prophecies about their own fates and the the fate of their son. However, they did not display wisdom in trying to avoid the fates by leaving their son on a mountainside to die. Oedipus exhibits the same struggle in that he is given bits of knowledge about his true identity throughout his life (Apollo's prophecies) but he again shows a lack of wisdom in trying to run from his house in Corinth (attempting to avoid his fate). I think this also ties in to the theme of fate, the struggle between knowing what will happen to you and having the widsom to know how to react to this knowledge.
Allison, I think that's a really good point. Basically the Greeks were saying that the wise are those that who know not to challenge the gods/divinity. You could also use Tiresias and Creon to back up your theme statment and make it even stronger. Tiresias was wise (and therefore respected) because he knew that it was futile to go against fate as ordained by the gods. Creon was also wise because at the end of the play, despite Oedipus' repeated pleadings, he wanted to consult the oracle before taking any action. You could also tie this in with hamartia because Oedipus, out of his foolishness, tried to outwit the gods...
Chairoscuro, the same thought occured me to regarding hamartia. I was doubtful. In the beginning of the play, Oedipus seems like such a nice guy. He really cares about the city and is willing to do anything for it. If he was really proud, then he could have tweaked the situation so that his glory wouldn't have been tarnished or so that no one found out the truth.
But after watching Oedipus on YouTube, I realized that Oedipus' flaw really is pride. See, Oedipus viewed himself as the savior of the city and took pride in that. HE had saved it and because of HIM everyone was happy. Therefore, he was willing to do anything for the city and when he found out that he WAS the cause of the suffering, he just couldn't take it.
Oedipus wasn't proud because he thought he was better than anybody else, but because he viewed himself as the god of thebes and the one responsible for everyone's happiness.
Plus, as Mrs. Harder mentioned, Sophocles was trying to send a specific message to the audience and "don't be honest" isn't really a good moral message to be sending to the people.
I hope you can understand what I'm trying say! :)
I would recommend watching Oedipus on YouTube. You can really see the role of the chorus and how they represent what you're supposed to think. It almost seemed like they were trying to brainwash/hypnotize the audience into feeling certain emotions...greek propoganda...
Allison, I agree with you and your views on the theme of knowledge versus wisdom with the many conflicts you listed, and also the connection you made between this theme and the theme of the avoidance of fate.
If one was to recieve the prophecy predicting his or her future, the wise thing to do would be to accept the fate. Having faith in such a higher power as the gods is an ability that Laius, Jocasta, and Oedipus all lack in their decisions to think themselves advantaged so as to successfully 'outwit' the gods. Of course this ties into the theme of pride, but all themes must intertwine in a work of literature so as to make it whole.
Each theme leads to the next. This includes Molly's theme of "nothing protects you from yourself" and chairoscuro's theme of dishonesty, both of which tie into the theme of avoiding one's own fate and being to prideful to live up to it.
On the topic of irony, I believe that this is the most 'attention-grabbing' (if you will) aspect of Oedipus Rex. If I was to watch this play in person, after having read the play and also having the foreknowledge of the events in the play, the dramatic irony would outright make me chuckle in my chair. Before reading Oedipus for this AP English class, I had read it twice previously for my sophemore reading class elsewhere and also a drama class I took. Everytime I read Oedipus Rex, I have looked forward to the appropriate yet revolting dramatic ironies illustrated, such as in line 264 when Oedipus declares a vendetta against the man who killed Laius. He says, "It's I who have the power that he had once,/ and have his bed, and a wife who shares our seed,/ and common bond had we had common children/ (had not his hope of offspring had bad luck-/ but as it happened, luck lunged at his head);/ because of this, as if for my own father,/ I'll fight for him..." (l. 264-269) Not only the famous "...as if he were my own father phrase...", but also the mention of "the same seed" and the "bad luck- (being Oedipus) -"[lunging] at his head", are examples of complete dramatic irony. Not only has he mentioned sleeping with a relative his mother), but he has also mentioned the bad luck of a lack of offspring and the bad luck chancing on his head within two lines. That is no coincidence by any means.
The intertwining themes and the dramatic ironies dripping with only Sophocles's creative, yet cruel, twists, Oedipus Rex stands as the focal point of all tragedies known to us today.
I thought one of the themes running through Oedipus was the contrast between Truthful reality and the deceptive reality that one can often live in. Oedipus emphasizes the fact that Truth is not custom-made to fit each individual's personal beliefs or assumptions. The story emphasizes the idea of an absolute Truth that is incontrovertible and not open to interpretation by flawed humans. Truth, as Sophocles sees it, is not something that fits everyone in different ways. Whether you like it or not, Truth is concrete and observable, and no one can change that.
I agree with Drew about blindness. Oedipus was so blind that he was unaware of what was going on around him. However, when he literally did become blind by gauging out his eyes it was at that point he could "see". I also think that a possible theme could be that what you do not know can and will eventually hurt you. This statement relates to Oedipus and Jocasta and their relationship.
To me just about everything in this play could be viewed as a symbol. One thing that i didnt think of until the essays today was how almost every external action in the play was just used to magnify an inner struggle. Even the main action in the story (Oedipus' search for the killer) could symbolize the searching and sifting through his own memories and he winds up finding his own true identity along with the culprit.
I want to answer Lore's question about what harm would come from the truth about Oedipus being kept a secret. If no one had found out that Oedipus was indeed the killer of Laius, then the people in the city would have continued to live under the tortures of famine and plague. If the truth had remained in the shadows then the people would continue to fill the "murky realm of Pluto...with groans and tears." Sometimes, it may be tempting to prefer ignorance or deception as it often brings about a temporary happiness, but as Tiresias states so wisely: "I am free, strong in the strength of truth." Only in truth can someone be free, and the very fact that truth has subjugated deception is enough to make a good person truly happy.
Man if I was Oedipus there is no way I would have gouged my eyes out. Gahlee! I would rather drink poison or jump off a building or something. I just could not bring myself to poke my own eyes out and live the rest of my life in exile and blind as a bat. Anyways...I thought Sophocles did an awesome job of taking a plot that on paper does not look too exciting and turning it into a play that you can't look away from whether you're reading or watching it. He turns a field goal of a plot into a touchdown of a play, to put it in football terms. He more than makes do with the limited number of characters and limited setting provided in the Greek theater through his use of exaggerated emotion and quick, continuous action. The massive dose of dramatic irony (Gah, Oedipus, get a clue!) fed to the audience doesn't hurt his cause either. This is a quality play put together by a master playwright that deserves to have survived for 2300 years.
Yeah, I think I would have preferred death over gouging my eyes out with two little pins (imagine how long that would have taken!), but as Oedipus points out to the Chorus, he didn't want to face his parents in the underworld. Also, Oedipus has to do something dramatic, otherwise the play's meaning wouldn't be as effective. I mean, suicide is so ordinary (Jocasta already did that). But who in the world would ever think of poking their eyeballs out? Now that's orginal! (at least it probably was during Sophocles' days)
The thing that really hit me the hardest in this play was the idea of being blind to the truth but literally seeing, and vice versa. It is very interesting how Tiresias is the only one who "sees" the truth...that Oedipus is responsible for his father's murder, yet he is the only one (mentioned) who is literally blind. So, everyone else, especially Oedipus, is "blind" to the truth, but can literally see. However, when Oedipus finally "sees" the truth, he blinds himself. It is just interesting to me how that is played out.
Oedipus was a play that really hit hard. It really is a play that I will forever compare other tragic stories to. I love how Sophocles gets straight to the point through out the whole play. What really struck me the most was Oedipus' recgonition. I loved the dramatic irony when we knew Oedipus' fate and he did not. That element made the play real suspenseful for me. In the end I felt real bad for Oedipus, it was so like a tragic hero to gourge his eyes out, because he could not bear to look at his children, or his dead wife, or all the beauties in life when he did something so wrong. Great play, I loved it. Now, I just have to work on those essays
I was impressed by the effectiveness of Sophocles's use of unity of time and place in this work. For such a simple device, it is really quite powerful. By setting the entire play on the palace steps (represented by the skene), Sophocles removes any externally dramatic scenes that could potentially distract from the main conflict - which is the internal conflict.
Dean, you have a good point about Tiresias' comment and Truth subjugating deception. Many of you have touched on this when examining blindness vs. sight. Lots of you have seen the irony and reversal in the fact that Oedipus is known for his clear vision in solving the riddle of the Sphinx. What better balance than to have one who sees so clearly move toward "blurry vision" in the things he will not see (like the murder of Laius), then on to total blindness at the moment he sees best. In the larger story, he is blind to Fate and his role in it, then he sees. In the supreme moment of recognition and reversal itself, though, he illustrates the opposite parallel -- he sees and then he falls into a blindness of his own making. His useless eyes are the price of more acute vision. He has to become like Tiresias, blind yet knowing more. This is ironic on so many levels, and is also poetically just as well, since it is Tiresias' vision that Oedipus denies. My question: WHY IS IT FITTING THAT OEDIPUS USES JOCASTA'S BROOCHES TO BLIND HIMSELF?
BRAD'S COMMENTS: I loved Oedipus Rex for many reasons. I enjoy all the tremendous ironies all throughout the play and that adds to the “buildup” of the play. As more and more truths are learned things begin to fall in place and the imagination of Oedipus is let loose. The whole play builds up fantastically to the climax, when everyone learns the horrible truth. At this point mental chaos ensues and the results are violent. Absolutely a marvelous play.
I think the reason Oedipus gouged his eyes out was because he believed he lived in this world that was so peaceful and perfect, but come to find out that was far from the truth. He was afraid to face the world he had created, with his incestuous relationship with his mother, his murdering of his father, and his little girls whose lives were ruined because of his sins, so he came to the conclusion that he no longer wished to see the world he lived in.
Though I saw a lot of symbolism and diction throughout Oedipus, what really stood out to me was the irony. Writing the essay got me thinking about the irony of the external and internal factors of the whole play. It made me realize how ironic it was that an internal realization can bring someone to do such a shocking external action (Jocasta's suicide, Oedipus' blindness). I also never really fully understood how prideful Oedipus truly was until I glanced back over his first speech to the city. I think the dramatic irony had me focusing on the outcome of the entire play the first time i read it and that caused me to miss a few things, such as the irony that Jocasta tried to kill her baby boy and in the end this action causes her to kill herself. Writing the essays also showed me exactly what Sophocles meant when he said that the unit of time was so important. I also found it interesting that the climax and great realization occur at the same time in Oedipus, which i agree do make the tragedy all the better.
Alekhya, why on earth do you not find "don't be honest" and acceptablr moral lesson.
;)
I didn't agree with Drew on that comment that Oedipus blinding himself is a prideful action. I think it's quite the opposite--I believe that his recognition/reversal completely humbles him (and pushes him far below merely "humbled"). In our class we talked about how Jocasta did not have many other choices besides killing herself, and that ultimately it was the thing to do--I believe the same is true of Oedipus's blinding. He has understood and comes close to accepting truth, and it is so overwhelming that he has no other choices. I think he recognizes pride is his flaw in some way or another, because if he had kept that pride he wouldn't have ever reached the recognition/reversal point.
The irony in Oedipus Rex is what stood out the most to me, mainly with the whole seeing versus not seeing thing. Tiresias is the one who cannot physically see yet sees the truth. Oedipus can physically see yet he does not see the truth. The huge irony comes in when Oedipus finally learns of the truth he blinds himself.
Oedipus Rex has to be the most ironic work of literature that i have ever read. There is of course the huge irony that Tiresias is the only one who sees the truth, even thought he is the only one who physically can not see. I also found it really ironic that the very son that Jocasta tried to have killed ends up marrying her and destroying her life and fulfilling the prophecy anyways. There is defiately some karma there, or as the ancient Greeks would say, fate.
diction people. you never really think too much about how things are being said because we're all so concerned with WHAT is being said, however if you really take a moment to look, not only with oedipus, you can see that the use of punctuation can even show the characters personality or mood.
For whatever reason I don't see the link to the "No Exit" discussion so I, knowing that my comment is due tomorrow, will write it here.
I thought the most interesting thing about "No Exit" was the irony of Sartre's created hell. The thought of hell not being a place of physical torment but rather one of excruciating psychological torment is an interesting thought to consider. This thought also raises the question of which form of torture would be worse. In my opinion physical torture would be much worse to have to endure throughout all eternity and I don't think that Sartre did a good enough job (and I am making no comment on how well-written the literature is) trying to convince me that "Hell is other people." Arguing and bickering for eternity might be bad but in my opinion it is much more pleasant than having to endure being chewed by Satan eternally while wallowing in a stinking pit of blood and other bodily fluids.
Post a Comment