Wow... Oedipus is depressing. But I guess back in ancient times when tragedy was a popular genre for plays, someone gouging their eyes out was entertaining, at least to the Greeks. Anyways, I guess a good place to start with this blog would be to pick up on in-class discussions. I remember our class contemplating on whether not Oedipus was a "good guy" or a "bad guy". Although he isn't a very genuine individual (like when Oedipus says he suffers more than anyone, even though he is not being directly afflicted by the plague), he does seem to have his country in mind. Personally, I believe that Oedipus is a man that has good intentions, but with a little fate, he finds a way to screw over everything. In more academic terms, Oedipus is oblivious to the world around him; as his insecurity turns to paranoia, and his confidence turns to abhorrence, Oedipus begins to collapse on himself like a dying star. Although Oedipus is certainly not altruistic, he does his best to rid the city of the plague and discover the true murderer, even though all of this is done in ignorance. So after marrying mommy and killing daddy, and basically having the worst luck of any human ever, he gouges his eyes out. Not exactly a happy ending, but hey, you can't fight fate...or can you?
Fate is an interesting concept. I suppose it depends upon how we define fate. Is fate a possible path that has been intended for our future? Or is it an undeniable, unchangeable destination that has been cemented in our lives and cannot be altered? Or is fate a myth, pure fabrication? Im not really sure. I'm no philosopher but if i had to take a guess, I'd say that fate ( at least in terms of the supernatural) is not real. I believe that each of us is free to do as we wish and to make unexpected or unpredictable changes in our lives. Some might say "well it was fate that made you make those changes and fate that caused you to come to that conclusion." One could make an argument that fate is simply an end result, no matter what the result is. In that capacity. fate would be undeniable but at the same time, it's influence could not be proved. If fate were susceptible to free will and choice, it would create a alternate reality, without proof of its existence. In oedipus case, fate's intervention was quite apparent,; however, in real life we don't prophecies and we don't have oracles. This is where "willful suspension of disbelief" comes in. Does fate exist? Oedipus' literary universe it does, outside of that, who knows....
Something else we talked about in class that I wanted to review was Oedipus' name. I think we were trying to understand why Oedipus is named the way he is. Mr. Bahlman told us that Oedipus can be translated into "misshapen foot" or "swollen foot". As I was reading I stumbled upon a couple lines that referenced Oedipus birth and how the tendons in his feet were bound together. During a dialogue between Oedipus and the messenger on page 644, the messenger says, "...the tendons of your feet were pierced and fettered...so that from this you're called your present name". So to clarify the discussion we had in class, Oedipus is named so because of the injuries he sustained to his when he was bound up and abandoned in the wilderness. Polybus must have noticed the abnormal scars and damage found on Oedipus' feet and ankles, and named him rightly so. If you wanna know a little more about the correlation between the scars and Oedipus name check out this website: http://www.shmoop.com/oedipus-the-king/scars-on-oedipus-feet-symbol.html
The end...
WC: 627
The most depressing fact that kept in my mind through the whole story was: 'What in the hell did people in this story have done wrong?!' I mean, it is perfectly OK with me when evil character is punished because of all the bad thing he/she have done before. However, I cannot find something that makes Oedipus and his family (wife/mother and daughter/sister)to be punished so harsh. Yes, Oedipus killed this king and his servants on the street, but according to the oracle, it was his fate to do so. Later on, as you wrote, he actually was trying to solve the problem as a king!! How about his wife/mother and daughters/sisters? They definitely did nothing evilly wrong throughout the story!! Maybe this is the exact reason why Oedipus is called as tragedy or perhaps it is just ancient Greek culture. But for me,,, this is a story which does not have any convincing part to make me read..
ReplyDeleteI agree that Oedipus had good intentions, they just blew up in his face. In my opinion, he is altruistic. If he wasn't he may not have kept his word to punish the murderer. He seemed to portray a good king but when his life started to reveal itself to him, he began to panic. When people get scared, they start to act stupid. They will do or say anything, and I think that is what happened with Oedipus.
ReplyDeleteYou briefly touched on a relationship between fate and the willful suspense of disbelief. I think there is a deep relationship between fate and the willful suspense of disbelief. This is that if something is someone’s fate, no matter how improbable the circumstance is, it will not break the audiences willful suspense of disbelief. As you said Oedipus’s fate was extremely improbable. If the story was told with out a prophecy; and as just a man discovering his improbable history, I think it would destroy the audiences willful suspense of disbelief. Given that the greeks enjoyed tragedies that made them feel better than their lives. This relationship seems useful to writers that they could make unbelievably horrid circumstances with out breaking the audiences willful suspense of disbelief.
ReplyDelete