Oedipus Rex or Oedipus the King
The Oedipus’ Fate Essay
Oedipus’ life was a series of tragedies from birth to the point of blindness. This tragedies can be assumed to stem out of the fact that Oedipus ’ was an individual with a strong character which made him want to know the truth and as a result the tragedies befall him out of free will.
However, Oedipus was already doomed to succumb to the fate which was foretold long before his birth via the oracle which was at Delphi. From the time the oracle predicts this to Oedipus’ parents Jocasta and Laios, they immediately take action to ensure that the oracle is not fulfilled. Little do they know that the fate of Oedipus’ will come to occur in their lives which would be a series of tragedies that blindly lead them to believe that the oracle would not be fulfilled.
From an initial reading, most readers assume that the tragedies that befall Oedipus and his family are mere actions of free will by both Oedipus, his parents and the shepherd but it is actually the fate that was already predicted by the oracle which leads to all the tragedies that Oedipus goes through in the entire play. The essay thus intends to show that it was due to fate that the tragedies befell Oedipus rather than free will as it appears.
Oedipus’ parents try to avoid the fate that the oracle predicts concerning Oedipus. They send the shepherd to get rid of the child by leaving the child in the jungle so that he might die due to exposure but instead the shepherd does not leave Oedipus to die, rather, he takes him to his home country and Oedipus is left under the care of the queen and king of Corinth.
“Come, then, say, on. Rememberest thou a boy Thou gav`st me once, that I might rear him up As mine own child?” (Sophocles 1168)This causes Oedipus to believe that the queen and king of Corinth are his real parents which causes him to flee from them to escape the fulfillment of the oracle but finally this belief acts a catalyst for the fulfillment of the oracle and Oedipus and his parents (Jocatsa) are forced to come to the realization that they could not control fate.
Fate also plays a tricky game on Oedipus when in his attempts to discover the person responsible for the death of Laios; he comes to know that it was actually him who killed his own father.
Oedipus met with his father and killed him believing that it was a group of bandits while in actual senses it was his father. His quest to discover what happened to the king Laios leads him to his predetermined fate, ‘Tis enough”.
Oedipus replies, I cannot yield my right to know the truth” Oedipus finds it difficult to restrain himself from looking for the truth even though he has already been warned that the truth might lead to disaster on his part. “Whom did he speak of? Care not thou for it, But wish his words may be but idle tales.” (Sophocles 1176).
Jocasta tries to steer away Oedipus from venturing into asking more questions because she had already deciphered the end of the story. Had he listened to what he was told instead of being stubborn then maybe the fate would not have been completely fulfilled.
It so happens that the priest who is currently in Apollo is blind and Oedipus mocks him by telling him that he can never be blind but fate has it that he would be the one responsible for gouging out his eyes leading to blindness. “Woe! woe! woe! woe! all cometh clear at last.
O light, may I ne`er look on thee again, Who now am seen owing my birth to those To whom I ought not, and with whom I ought not In wedlock living, whom I ought not slaying.” (Sophocles 1200).
At this point Oedipus prefers that he would rather be blind so that he would no longer look upon the evils of the world and those that he had already done. Fate had it therefore that he should become blind despite the fact that he had been mocking the priest
In Oedipus the king, Sophocles raises various questions about fate, should individuals be concerned in knowing their fate instead of living their lives freely or after knowing ones fate, which action is best to take. To ignore fate and live life, or to try as much as possible to control and evade fate.
Oedipus and his parents know their fate and try as much as possible to control this fate but all their actions lead them to the fulfillment of the oracle. Thus, it can be concluded that had Jocasta and Liaos lived their lives without seeking to know their fate then they would have lived happily and the same applies to Oedipus.
Sophocles. Oedipus the King. E.d Cavender, Kenneth. San Francisco: Chandler Pub. Co, 1961.
The role of prophecies in Oedipus the King Critical Essay
This paper is aimed at discussing the role of prophecies in the play Oedipus the King by Sophocles. In particular, it is necessary to show how different characters attempt to respond to the predictions, which they do not wish to come true, and explain the effects of their actions.
Overall, it is possible to say that by attempting to prevent the prophecies from being fulfilled, they only seal their fate and eventually suffer the misfortunes that they fear so much.
In order to better illustrate this argument, we need to speak about such characters as Laius and Oedipus. Laius is the rule of Thebes; he learns from oracle that his son Oedipus will kill him and usurp his throne.
This is why he orders Oedipus to be killed but they fail to execute his order and save the child. The main thing is that by giving this command, Laius starts a chain of events which eventually results in his death. Oedipus slaughters him without realizing that Laius is his father. Provided that this character decided to take no action in response to the prophecy, the disaster could have been averted.
This is the cruel irony of this tragedy. The main error that this character commits is that he prefers to escape his destiny rather than face it. He decides to kill his son rather than try to educate him. Certainly, Laius does not believe the course of events cannot be changed but he attemps to do by relying on brutal force instead of courage, perseverance, and love.
In his turn, Oedipus behaves in a very similar way. He is adopted by Polybus, the King of Corinth. For a very long time, he does not know that Polybus and his wife Pariboea are not his real parents. Yet, he learns from oracle that in the future, he will murder his father and marry his mother.
Oedipus flees Corinth in order to avoid this catastrophe, although he does not believe himself to be capable of committing such an atrocity. Again, if he had chosen to stay at home, the oracle’s prophecy might have never come true. Both these characters prefer to run away from danger rather than face it. This might be one of the reasons why misfortunes befall them. As it has been said before, Oedipus accidentally slaughters Laius and marries Jocasta, his mother.
It should be noted that Oedipus mistakes his father for a mere townsman with whom he had a quarrel and killed. He feels practically no remorse for killing this person. Oedipus’ primary concern is that this man is not his father. For a long time, he lives thikning that no danger threatens him and his family. However, later he learns terrible truth about himself.
Overall, prophecies are the main drivers of the plot. Every step that characters take is an attempt to escape destiny; yet, these prophecies turned to be self-fulfilling. Sophocles makes the readers think about possible outcomes provided that the main characters had decided to take no action or to behave in a different way.
Sophocles does not try to depict human beings as creatures who are entirely devoid of free will. Both Laius and Oedipus are very strong-willed people, but sometimes they lack courage to face challenges. Through these characters Sophocles urges the reader think primarily about the ethical implications of their actions.
Sophocles. Oedipus the King (transl. by David Grene). Chicago: University of
Chicago Press. 2010. Print.
Critical Analysis of Oedipus Rex Essay (Critical Writing)
Sophocles lived during a time when the Greek society excelled in theatre and drama. Art was a main attraction in the Greek society as was politics. The advancement of art in the Greek cities cannot be compared to any in the other civilizations that existed at the time. Sophocles lived in the same period with other playwrights such as Euripides and Aristophanes.
Sophocles wrote over 200 plays, but of these only about five are still existent. Apart from Oedipus, other famous plays attributed to Sophocles artistic genius are Antigone and Elektra. Most of Sophocles’ plays emphasize the tragedies of life and the pain inherent in the dynamics of human existence (MacCollom 231).
However; Sophocles did not live long enough to see the decline of Greek literature to which he had greatly contributed. Years after his death, the Greek city states were embroiled in conflicts that ultimately led to their fall and the decline of the arts (Leefmans 12).
Greek theater at the time of Sophocles was markedly different from today. It was a religious occasion, a dramatic departure from today’s performances which are pastimes and occasions for entertainment. To attend the theatre was a way of worshipping and revering the Greek gods who were highly revered in the Greek society. Dionysius was the Greek deity who took centre stage during these theatre festivals.
This particular deity was said to live in the bush. The theater festivals were punctuated by much celebration and other excesses. Theater also celebrated culture. Theaters would be filled to maximum capacity and the plays were performed during the spring period. The plays were marked by their beautiful language, punctuated by songs and dances that awed the audiences with their impressive and dazzling displays (Knox 88).
Another convention t this time was the competitive nature of the performances. A panel of judges would decide winning plays from an array of playwrights who presented their works before the audience.
The presentation of the plays followed a particular pattern. A total of twelve plays would be presented for adjudication with three playwrights presenting four plays each. Three of the plays would be tragedies and one would either be a comedy or a satirical piece. Men were the main actors in these plays and they performed against a temporary backdrop.
Oedipus Rex has undergone a number of adaptations. The adaptations are in keeping with an emerging trend where modern playwrights are turning to ancient plays and merging them with the reality of the present circumstances. One of these adaptations was the 1967 film by Pier Paolo Pasolini which has its second part reflecting the Greek myth.
Although Pasolini’s play begins with scenes from the Italian fascist era the playwright goes ahead to use the characters in Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex to create a relationship with his own life story. He relates the episodes in Oedipus Rex in a dramatic twist that fits beautifully in the story of his birth. In a way, the adaptation is autobiographical and it draws its strength from the design and picturesque landscape of the setting.
The adaptation is set in Morocco with the film maker employing beautiful scenery in the Moroccan landscape to bring to life his adaptation. He himself acts the role of the High priest of Thebes. There are many other adaptations of Oedipus Rex, but an outstanding element among most of them is the way they have emphasized on the aspects of sex and psychology evident in the Sophocles’ original work.
For example, in some of the adaptations, Jocasta has been portrayed as an intelligent, independent sexually liberated figure. In the film, Darker Face of the Earth, Jocasta’s figure comes to life in this perspective (Leefmans 134).
In writing the play, the author had various intents that he hoped to fulfill. Sophocles hoped to fill the gap that existed in Greek literature, and more so on the myths and legends that defined the Theben society. Although some of the writers of the time such as Aeschylus had explored these aspects of Theben society, their writings were not comprehensive.
Aeschylus for example did not exhaustively explore the finer details of the horror of the curse visited on Oedipus. The author was also enthralled by dynamism of the themes that his story permitted. For example on the issue of one’s responsibility after committing transgressions and people’s knowledge of their own history and lineage (MacCollom, 56).
The work was produced during the author’s time in 425 BCE. Considering the popularity of plays in the Greek society, the reception of Oedipus Rex was overwhelming. It is also important to note that the author was known for his competiveness and this resulted in the urge to emulate other Greek writers whose plays had received wide acclaim and positive receptions from the Greek audiences.
The popularity of the play has not changed overtime, considering the relevance of most of the themes to the modern world. The theme of ‘hubris’ which refers to human pride is a phenomenon which is applicable to all societies. Oedipus for example had the wrong perception that he had the cure for the afflictions of Thebes.
This pride is what we see in the world today. A case in point is in the world financial crisis where experts believe that they have the panaceas for the financial crisis but fail to realize that they too form part of the wider crisis. The author wanted to pint out the imperfections that reside in every human being.
The tone of the play is set by the fact that the myth of Oedipus was evident even before it was presented by Sophocles. The audience anticipated the tragic events that would come at the end of the play even at the beginning.
This awareness greatly affects the tone f the play. The drive by Oedipus to solve the afflictions of Thebes therefore has an ironic touch to it as the audience already knows that his actions are in vain. The play is devoid of a narrator. The chorus which forms the commentary of the play shows great understanding and expresses sympathy for the fate of the play’s characters. The commentary is also anticipatory of the upcoming events of the play.
The senses of foreboding in the face of tragedy are important factors in setting the tone of the play. The mood of the play is set at the beginning with an opening that reflects the tragedy that has befallen the people. They are in a situation of grief following the death of the king. The play opens with a sense of mourning and grief following the death of the king.
Knox, Bernard M.W. “The Oedipus Legend” Readings On Sophocles 56.2 (Sep. 2008).
Leefmans, Bert M.-P. Modern Tragedy: Five Adaptations of Oresteia and Oedipus the King. , 1974. Print.
MacCollom, William G. Tragedy. New York: Macmillan, 1957. Print.
Sophocles and E H. Plumptre. Oedipus Rex: (oedipus the King). Stilwell, KS: Digireads.com Publishing, 2005. Print.
Oedipus Tyrannus Essay
Oedipus Tyrannus is one of Sophocles’ masterpieces. This play brings into action different historical issues that are pertinent in contemporary world. Written between 428 and 425 B.C, Oedipus Tyrannus remains all time favorite play. Sophocles explores “how it is to be a human and live in a world that does not bend itself to support humanity” (Meineck & Woodruff 10). Sophocles addresses historical issues like oracles and divination and Greek religion among others.
These plays were part of Greek religion; actually, it was a form of worship where they worshiped, Dionysus, a seditious revelry god who lived in the wilderness. According to Meineck and Woodruff, amongst Greek people, divination and oracles served as the only form of revelation, no priesthood, sacred books, theology, or founders, only seers and oracles (13).
Delphi; being the most sanctimonious place in Greece, gave the final word on every matter and all people had to respect its oracle. Oedipus Tyrannus expounds on these works in a colorful event dealing with society issues like murder, rape, marriage, family, leadership, and divinity among others.
Importance of the Story
Though written many years ago, Oedipus Tyrannus addresses important issues that affected people during those times. Interestingly, the same issues appear to be affecting people in the contemporary world. This fact solidifies the common adage that, ‘the more things change, the more they remain the same.’
It is amazing that the issues that rocked the newly civilized society are still pertinent in a fast moving world where civilization has hit climax. The main character here, Oedipus, is acting like most of our leaders in modern times, confident, heroic, saying one thing and doing the other coupled with deliberate denial of the truth even when all evidence is available. This play is important because it handles issues that are happening in our society today.
Oedipus appears as a hero especially at the beginning of the play where he solves the Sphinx’s enigma. It takes a lot of confidence to engage in a dangerous activity that Oedipus engages in.
He offers to give Sphinx an answer although he knows a wrong answer would lead to death. After this incidence of freeing people from the wrath of Sphinx, Oedipus becomes popular and garners massive following due to his intelligence and bravery. This phenomenon is common in modern world where a single act of boldness and bravery will lift someone to stardom.
The first person to hail Oedipus is a temple priest who says, “You freed us from the Sphinx, you came to Thebes and cut us loose from the bloody tribute we had paid that harsh, brutal singer. We taught you nothing, no skill, no extra knowledge, still you triumphed” (Sophocles 44-47). According to the people of this city, nothing short of god’s gift would deliver them from the hands of Sphinx. This blessing came through Oedipus.
Unfortunately, once the Thebans start to idolize Oedipus, he assumes powers that are not his. It is interesting how people are hungry for power and recognition, and the things they will do once they gain all that they have been wanting all along. Oedipus assumes powers of gods.
Instead of people praying to their gods, he offers to answer their prayers. He says, “You pray to the gods? Let me grant your prayers” (Sophocles 245). This is ridiculous. Maybe out of gullibility and hypnotization, people start offering their prayers to Oedipus. This is because their gods does not seem to answer their prayers anymore.
It is easy for people to be lured away from what they believe and what they have cherished for long. As aforementioned, though written in many years ago, this play is of great significance in the contemporary world. Day after the other, people are becoming followers of new sects that they do not really understand. Not because they did not have beliefs and religions hitherto, they are simply hypnotized.
Nevertheless, Oedipus’ popularity begins to take a nosedive as the reality of Laius’ death starts to set in. At this point, the vehement denial of truth sets in. leadership without honesty cannot stand. Oedipus becomes a tyrant for he cannot swallow the truth that he killed Laius.
As Locasta recounts the events that preceded her husband’s murder, it becomes clear to Oedipus that he is the subject in this case. Suspicion plunges him and absentmindedly says, “Strange, hearing you just now . my mind wandered, my thoughts racing back and forth” (Sophocles 800-02). People cannot just accept the truth; however, they will always look for scapegoats and point fingers to others. What happened to owning up mistakes and taking responsibility?
Oedipus is not different, despite the mounting pressure he continues to carry out investigations to what he already know. In a typical way of people in modern world, Oedipus goes on to question the credibility of the Oracle. Just like people nowadays, they want to challenge every ruling to satiate their selfish ambitions.
After Tiresias implicates Oedipus in the murder of Laius, Oedipus becomes offensive and he actually infers that Tiresias is the murderer. He says, “You helped hatch the plot; you did the work, yes, short of killing him with your own hands .” (Sophocles 394-96). Dying of suppressed guilt, he extends the blame to Creon and accuses him of treason and conspiracy.
He says, “I see it all, the marauding thief himself scheming to steal my crown and power!” (Sophocles 597-98). Talk of assassinating the messenger with a complete disregard of the message. Man is known to deny the facts. This paper aforementioned that, interestingly, the things that were pertinent in society many years ago, they remain the same even to date.
Citizens and leaders alike do not want to come out and accept the truth. Selfish ambitions are the rule of the day and no one is ready to take responsibility of his or her actions. It appears that Oedipus set the pace, and we have followed his footsteps so faithfully.
At this point Oedipus cannot be contained. He acts with complete disregard of divinity, by spiting a prophet and even igniting the ire of gods. This wrath is inevitable as we find out in the chorus that, “But if any man comes striding, high and mighty, in all he says and does, no fear of justice, no reverence for the temples of the gods-let a rough doom tear him down, repay his pride, breakneck, ruinous pride!” (Sophocles 972-77).
This tyrant behavior is typical in modern society. People choose leaders to be a blessing to them only to be a curse. Our leaders go to the people, beg for votes, and get that highest seat in the land, and turn out to be tyrants once seated in the throne of powers.
Think of Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe. The only thing the people of Thebes could show after Oedipus reign is wrath from their gods. Similarly, the only thing the people of Zimbabwe can show after many years of poor governance by one of their elected leaders is a wretched economy.
Lastly comes the payday. Oedipus has to pay for all his sins and face humiliation in front of the very people he ignored with contempt. He admits his mistakes by saying, “I stand revealed at last-cursed in my birth, cursed in marriage, cursed in the lives I cut down with these hands!” (Sophocles 1309-11).
On top of this, he gouges out his eyes but moves quickly to justify his actions, “What good were eyes to me? Nothing I could see could bring me joy” (Sophocles 1473-74). Truth has a way of finding ‘her’ way home. No matter how hard we try to cover the truth, nature has a way of bringing our deeds to light. This is a fact that Oedipus came to learn, unfortunately, it was a belated bitter lesson.
When people reach this point of life where they realize everything is vanity, they become remorseful. Oedipus did not miss in this common arena and he concludes by saying, “Oh no, what can I say to him? How can I ever hope to win his trust? I wronged him so, just now, in every way.
You must see that-I was so wrong, so wrong” (Sophocles 1554-57). He regrets how contemptuous he acted towards Creon. This is a typical ending of many people in our times. People have risen to stardom only to come down crumpling as we watch.
Apart from the significance of this play in contemporary world, it plays a crucial role in Greece’s history. This play reflects greatly the character of Athenians rulers; who were diligent, brave, and daring on one side, while arrogant and contemptuous on the other side (Silverman para. 6).
These leaders defended their territories but they could not defend themselves as individuals, just like Oedipus. Moreover, Athenians struggled with religious issues and this play highlights all these. Lastly, this play expounds on human suffering that, sometimes people get what they deserve while at other times they endure the most of fate.
Sophocles knew exactly what he was writing when he compiled the play Oedipus Tyrannus. This play is a true reflection of what people go through. Oedipus is an epitome of modern day leaders who start their leadership reigns in style only to turn tyrannies and come to humbling ends.
The place of this play in today’s society is important and it is amazing how humanity has not changed after many years of civilization. Issues to do with divinity were critical in Greece during the times of Oedipus and they still weigh heavily on society today.
There has been a deliberate shying away from and denial of the truth; a fact highlighted strongly in this play. People have continually neglected the truth, choosing to pursue what seems right in their own eyes regardless of criticism that may be surrounding them.
Finally, this play emphasizes on historical issues in Greece’s history like nature of leaders, religion, and human suffering. Oedipus Tyrannus is an educative and entertaining masterpiece that cannot afford to take a backseat in today’s literature.
Meineck, Peter, & Woodruff, Peter. “Oedipus Tyrannus.” Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Company, Inc. 2000.
Silverman, David. “Sophocles’ Oedipus Tyrannus.” 1995. Web.
Sophocles. “The Oedipus Tyrannus with English Notes.” Crosby, Howard. Ed. New York: D. Appleton & Company. 1857
Gregor’s Relationship with His Father in “Matamorphosis” Essay
In his literary works, Kafka amalgamates almost all literary components and crowns them with new ideas and purposes. In ‘The Metamorphosis’ Kafka uses metaphor and pushes it through its highest points. He successfully used metaphor to demonstrate human relationships (Mitchell 1).
The play ‘Oedipus the King’ is full of tragedy and sorrow that results into greater pain just as the story progresses. This only serves to advance to popularity of the story (Stewart par. 1). By examining the two stories, one notices various ways that father-son relationship permeated and influenced the lives of both Gregor and Oedipus (Mitchell 1). This paper seeks to explore the father and son relationships in Metamorphosis and Oedipus the King and offers a comparison for the two.
In the ‘Metamorphosis’, the author clearly talks about poor communication among the members of a low family class. To clearly depict this poor relationship, the writer converts Gregor Samsa, the main character, into a gigantic bug (Kafka 1). The writer uses this character to represent himself, meaning that Franz Kafka and Gregor are analogous to one another. By analyzing the two, readers get an insight of the father –son relationship as illustrated in the story.
The author uses his life relationship with his biological father and the effects of his father’s dominance and dictatorships to depict their relationship (Wyllie par.1-3). In his translation, David Wyllie describes the bug as a horrible vermin that has pitiful thin legs (Rohl 280-391).
In real life scenario, a bug is imagined as weak, insignificant and does not attract much attention. In this context Kafka depicts his own low self image by using the metaphor of the bug. In Metamorphosis, the inferiority problems that Kafka encountered in his childhood are depicted by the traits of the bug (Kafka 1).
Even with the challenge of interpreting Metamorphosis, nonetheless, it is still possible to provide a plausible explanation of the works of Kafka. As the metamorphosis unfolds, we see Gregor Samsa waking up and to his utter amazement he realized that he has undergone a transformation into a beetle.
With the unfolding of this story, it becomes apparent that Gregor is slowly coming into terms with the transformation (Fitzgerald 1). However, this does not deter him from pondering on how exactly such a transformation might have occurred in reality. Already, a keen reader will almost certainly ponder on the peculiarity of a lack of questioning by Gregor about the transformation.
The expectation would be that for an individual to have turned into a beetle in the space of one night there is every reason to ask oneself how such a dramatic transformation could have possibly occurred. As such, the reader is left wondering if at all Gregor underwent any physical change.
Even as the presentation of the story is such that mutation appears more of a fact, nevertheless, one could as well infer that the story is more of a metaphor seeking to depict the household of Samsa and its state. Before Gregor underwent the transformation process, his life was rather boring.
Coincidently, this boring life bears a close correlation with that led by such an insect as a beetle. Gregor was fully occupied with his work and was determined to ensure that remained a god provider of his family. Gregor neither had a hobby, nor did he have close friends. Even within the family, the only person that he had a close relationship with was her sister.
As such, Gregor may be seen as a complete departure from what one would expect of a normal human being. Once he becomes aware of his responsibility at the household level and upon a realization of his p current plight, this is the time that the actual metamorphosis takes place.
In his early childhood, Kafka failed to figure out his father’s motives and reasons for the frequent punishments he received. For a long time, Kafka had assumed that his father’s punishments were naturally harbored by his sinful actions. However, this idea is in contrast to classical sentiments which consider children as entirely innocent (Rohl 280-391).
This unusual view of himself was fostered by the nonsensical treatment from his father. In his letter to his father, Kafka says that he was skinny, weakly whereas his father was strong, tall and huge. In this regard, Kaka viewed himself as a bug; something that could be easily grabbed and manipulated. Just as Kafka suffered in the name of punishments from his father, in ‘Metamorphosis’ Gregor too suffers the same treatment under his father’s heavy boots as bug (Wyllie par.3-7).
Kafka shows that his father was superior in almost all aspects; physical strength, ability to command, and also in the innate power over the world that Kafka also thought he had. This influenced the writer in many ways. In metamorphosis, Kafka depicts Gregor as a woman’s portrait framed by hand and dressed in fur.
This is an illustration of the jealousy that Kafka felt for his father’s stable and strong marriage. The picture frame of how Gregor holds on to the things that appeal to him loudly echoes to the reader the inadequacy that Kafka felt due to his relationship with his father (Mitchell 1-3).
The play ‘Oedipus the King’ explains about the fall of king Oedipus from his domineering position because of his pride. At the opening of the play, Oedipus has excellent qualities that enable him, as a ruler, to determine the needs of his subjects.
His fame and powers came as a result of resolving the Sphinx riddle. After the terrible plague befalls his kingdom, Creon, the brother to the Queen comes from Thebe oracles and warns that the person who murdered the old king, Laius has to be revealed first before the plague could be lifted.
Due to his dedication to protect his people, the king is determined to reveal the root of the problem (Stewart par. 1-3). This shows some kind of responsibility in a parent; however his swiftness turns out dangerous when he kills the ‘traveler’ who tried to traffic him off. The writer shows that Oedipus has the potential of acting harshly (Stewart par. 1-4).
As demonstrated in Metamorphosis, the tragedy of the son is an illustration of punishment that has no fault. Oedipus was abandoned by his parents whereas Gregor, who represents Kafka, was brought up by his parents. Oedipus was acting out of unknown urge to kill his father, a situation that resulted in total destruction within the family.
After his birth, Oedipus was to kill his father and later marry his mother, as it had been foretold. In this regard, his father orders that his son be dumped in the wilderness. Oedipus was adopted by another royal family who do not reveal to him about his background.
When he had about the prophecy, he ran away to avoid the predicament. But on the way, he met his true father who overtakes him in traffic. After a heated argument, Oedipus kills the man without knowing it was his father. Later on he becomes the king and unknowingly marries his mother and they both have children. When the mother discovers, he kills herself while Oedipus goes into exile (Stewart par. 2-5). In the metamorphosis, Kakfa was fighting with the alienation that he felt by not being a Czech or a German.
More so he was the only son in a family of three siblings. This increased the pressure that he encountered from his family who expected him to behave in certain ways (Rohl 280-391). This same case applied to Gregor in The Metaphor story where Gregor is shown as the eldest child and the only son. His father made him provide for his family yet the members were capable of finding food for themselves as it is seen as the story progresses. This is a form of punishment without any fault (Mitchell 9)
More so, like in Metamorphosis, the tragedy that befell Oedipus depicts a strange and contrasting father –son relationship. In this story, although every father needs a successor, in this play, the father wants to kill his child at birth. This is a fate that is unchangeable by human. The sorrow and pain as depicted in the story changes the usual mood into a tragedy creating a horrible scenario (Stewart par. 6-9).
Oedipus unknowingly confronted his father by killing him. The father and son relation in this play is depicted as one with so many problems. This is seen when Oedipus’ father commands that his son be abandoned in the wilderness to die so that he does not overthrow him.
However, Oedipus unknowingly kills him. This came as a result of a confrontation. Although the writer says that Oedipus killed his father and then married his mother, he successfully uses pity and sorrow to show both sides of father –son relationship in the story (Stewart par. 1-3). In the Metamorphosis it is clear that although Kafka could not physically confront his father for all the pains he had caused him, he had however equipped him to bravely confront him by other (indirect) means (Kafka 2-13).
Despite his hard work, Gregor still faced difficulties with his father and could not comprehend why he suffered so much anxiety and difficulties while dealing with his father. His astonishing state had so little effects and was much bothered about his work. The contrast with Gregors father worked for his good at the confrontation time.
Although his father saw him as weak and minute, he knew that his outside condition were as a result of others interpretations just as Kafka had compared his ability to his father’s (Rohl 280-391). Despite Gregor’s problem, in a conversation with the manager, his mother said, “he is not well, believe me, Mr. Manager. Otherwise how would Gregor miss a train! The young man has nothing in his head except business.
I’m almost angry that he never goes out at night. Right now he’s been in the city eight days, but he’s been at home every evening. ….” (Kafka 15). This shows that Gregor could have been wrongly treated by his father for no reasons and that Kafka’s father could be punishing him for no faults (Mitchell 9). This is in contrast to most peoples’ expectation of parents providing guidance to their children as they grow up (Wyllie par. 7-10).
As depicted in the two different literary works, the two ignorantly make decisions that directly affect the lives of their sons without measuring their impacts. These deliberate moves directly or indirectly affect their children. Oedipus is seen to be in constant move, possibly calming down his fateful life.
He is confident and swift when interrogating Creon who later brings in Tiresias so that they could lift the plague. However in a superseding play, Creon takes Oedipus’ children without him acting and getting them back would force him to wholly depend on Theseus (Stewart par. 4-7). This is a situation that has its basis on the poor relationship with his father (Rohl 280-391). More so, the impact of his father’s decisions was felt among his family lineage (Mitchell 6-9).
Looking at the two stories, it is also notable that the decisions that individuals take, shapes the fates and destinies of the people we live with or of those who are around us. More so, both literary works show that father and son relationship in a child’s life plays a significant role in shaping the child’s image and life.
In reading ‘The Metamorphosis’ one would not that knowledge is power (Rohl 280-391). As depicted by Gregor’s actions, Kafka demonstrated that he was empowering himself by the awareness that the effects of his father’s treatment could damage his self image. In the story, Gregor for some quality time was not concerned about his being a bug and different from the rest of the family. Oedipus never had the choice to determine the fate of his life as well as Gregor who turned into a bug in an overnight.
Fitzgerald, Conor. Metamorphosis or realization? April 2007. Web.
Kafka, Franz. The Metamorphosis. Kessinger Publishing: U.S .2004. Print
Mitchell, Christopher. The metamorphosis understood through Kafka’s relation with his father. 2007. Web.
Rohl, Freda K. Kafka’s Background as the Source of His Irony. The modern language review. Vol.53.No.3 (1958): 280-391.
Stewart, Julie. Oedipus the king-review of Oedipus the king. 2010. Web.
Wyllie, David. Metamorphosis. Trans. Project Gutenberg, 2005. Web.
Oedipus the King Response Essay
Over the years, there has been a raging debate on who really caused the downfall and subsequent destruction of King Oedipus. Some scholars believe that Oedipus’ pride and arrogance brought his destruction while on the other hand others claim that Jocasta was responsible for destroying everyone and everything.
Despite the different approaches taken by scholars on the matter, one thing that emerges clearly throughout the play is that Oedipus brought about his own downfall. His arrogance and high headedness clearly emerges as the genesis of all his woes. (Sophocles)
Right from the start, there is rumor that Polybus the Corinthian king is not Oedipus father. When this rumor gets to Oedipus, he confronts his parents who do not appropriately answer his question. Oedipus then decides to approach the Delphic Oracle to seek an answer to his question.
Even the Oracle does not answer Oedipus’ question but instead tells him that he will marry his own mother and cause the death of his father. Instead of heeding the oracle, Oedipus’ pride leads him to think that he can avert this tragic fate. While trying to flee from his destined fate, he ends up killing King Laius who is his own father.
His journey ends in the Thebes Kingdom where Oedipus eliminates the beastly Sphinx and consequently solves the complex riddle of a form that walks on all fours early in the day, on two’s by midday and on threes by sunset.
In recognition of this achievement, the Theban’s appoint him to take over the vacant throne left behind by the demise of King Laius. By accepting this offer, Oedipus agrees to marry the widowed queen who in reality is her mother, Jocasta. It is clear that Jocasta does not play any role in any of these events but in reality, they are Oedipus’ own makings.
Soon after this, a plague rages throughout the Theban land leaving everyone in distress. This causes Oedipus to send his brother-in-law, Creon to seek why the city is experiencing the plague. The Oracle at Delphi reveals that the plague in the land is caused by the unavenged death of King Laius.
Against the people’s wishes to first consult prophet Tiresius, Oedipus goes ahead to pronounce a harsh punishment against the responsible person. Even after Tiresius is consulted, he advises that the matter should be left to rest. However, Oedipus keeps pressurizing him to a point where Tiresius gives an ominous prophecy for Oedipus.
By this time, Oedipus has already declared that Creon is a traitor who has to die. Queen Jocasta intervenes to bring calm between her brother and husband. Upon learning of the feud between them, Jocasta assures Oedipus that he has nothing to worry about since her son was killed in infancy and there is no way he could have been the cause of the Kings death.
At this point, Oedipus learns that the king had indeed been killed at exactly the same spot where years earlier he had killed a man who had blocked his way. As the events unfold and Jocasta senses that Oedipus is indeed her son, she begs him to drop the matter but he decides to have none of this. This leads to the death of Jocasta and subsequent banishment of Oedipus from the kingdom.
From the account of events, it is clear that Oedipus woes began way before Jocasta came on the scene. Most of the things that Oedipus went through were actually caused by his pride and arrogance something that led him to disregard the oracles and the people’s advice. It is therefore only fair to conclude that Jocasta was nothing but a bystander who tried to control things from getting out of hand.
Sophocles. Oedipus the King: The Play in Focus, 2010. Web. <https://www.answers.com/search?q=oedipus-the-king-the-play-in-focus>
Strength of Oedipus Character Essay
Oedipus can be described as a Greek mythical personality in the Greek culture. He is described as a person who came to fulfill a certain prophecy. The prophecy itself involves this third king of Thebes killing his biological father. Later on, he unknowingly marries his biological mother.
All of this began with a prophesized oracle after the birth of Oedipus. Therefore, Laius orders his death to avert this prophesies. Unfortunately, while he was left out there in the wilderness to die, a shepherd picks him up and hands him over to a friend. Through the shepherd’s friend, he ends up in Corinth in the Kings house. The King and Queen take him as their own son. They see him as a blessing as they did not have a child.
Initially, Oedipus was not aware of the fact that the King and Queen were not his true parents. Therefore, when one day a drunk mentioned that he was adopted, it troubled him. He became even more troubled on visiting several oracles.
Even though the oracles told him the truth, it was more troubling because at that time, he could not make sense of it all. One day, while Oedipus was on his way, he had a dispute with the King of Thebes and unknown to him he killed him after having the argument. He did not even know that he was the king of Thebes when he was killing him.
Later on in the town of Thebes, his wits enabled him to answer a riddle and thus saved the people of Thebes. He thus went on to fulfill the prophecy by marrying King Laius’s widow. However, when mother and child came to learn later on their true relation to each other, the mother decided to commit suicide. Oedipus on the other hand decide to blind himself.
Strength of character by Oedipus
Oedipus has an outstanding central strength. This strength is his curiosity or in other words his truth seeking zeal. This strength can be termed as being part of him. This is first witnessed after he gets a tip of his true Identify. Since he wanted to really know the truth behind it all, he is seen visiting various oracles just to find out the truth.
Even though it took quite a while for him to know the truth about his parents, he finally did find out the truth, though a bit late. His truth seeking nature can also be thanked for enabling him to earn the throne of Thebes. This riddle of Sphinx enables him become a ruler and gets a ready wife.
The truth seeking nature of Oedipus can almost be described as being hard-coded in him. This is evident as he ignored all warnings to keep away from the truth. An example is a warning by the prophet who was blind, i.e. Tiresias. Terisias points out to him “You don’t’ want to know the truth” It is in fact disappointing to him when he finally learns the truth. In fact it is the truth itself that brings Oedipus down and not even his defiance of the gods.
The desire to know the truth thus forms the strongest motivating factor in Oedipus. His period of reigning as king comes down to being characterized as a truth seeking mission. It is no wonder that despite the big title that he held, his life had many uncertainties that formed a riddle around him (Simon, 201).
It can be put down that in the whole play; the truth is vividly guarded from Oedipus. When it however finally dawns to him, the same truth shocks him. He however embraces this truth with open arms. Therefore one can say that his ability to move from being in pain and confused about the truth is a strength in character. It actually shows just how Oedipus has finally become wise.
Throughout the play of Sophocles, Oedipus seems extremely careless on his quest for the truth irrespective of the consequences that are ever so painful. Even though one can say that his quest for the truth was accompanied by lots of despair, this same quest is the one that is attributed towards having changed Oedipus.
Due to his many tribulations, Oedipus is forced to come to terms with new responsibilities. These were to affect not only his family and kingdom, but also himself. He is thus seen to have come out stronger. This strength of character also shows that he indeed has become mature.
Come to think of it, there was only one way through which Oedipus could have attained his strength of character. Therefore, Sophocles just puts out a simple fact through this strength of Oedipus. This simple fact is that every single person is always in a quest to find the truth about something. It is not a must for the quest to set you free. The fact however is that the journey on your quest will shape you
Simon, Peter. The Norton Anthology of World Literature. 1(2). USA: W. W. Norton & Company. 2009.
The Oedipus Story Essay
An examination of the story of Oedipus reveals a certain degree of hubris among the characters which I believe is an integral theme within the story that lead to the start and culmination of most of the events that occurred.
What you have to understand is that in most of the Greek stories that I have read, such as Hercules, the story of Troy and the Odyssey, those who exult themselves, place themselves above all others or state that they are on the same level as the Gods often meet tragic and ironic ends. As such, it can almost be expected that characters within a Greek tragedy who exhibit such characteristics often end up in adverse circumstances.
In the case of Oedipus his fate resulted in one of the most tragic ends of all wherein he killed his father and married his mother. The concept of pride is crucial within this story and as I elaborate more on this point it will be immediately apparent as to why Oedipus readily believed the drunk who tells him that Polybus and Merope are not his real parents, but will not believe the famous and reliable prophet Teiresias.
The Growth of Pride
First and foremost, when you examine the story of Oedipus it can be seen in certain parts of the Greek play that Oedipus places such distinctions on himself as “the man who all men call great” or “the greatest man in all men’s eyes”. Such titles of course come as a direct result of his defeat of the Sphinx, his marriage to Jocasta and him being crowned king of Thebes. This method of distinction that Oedipus places upon himself is based on a considerable degree of pride as a direct result of his accomplishments.
As such, when presented with the words of the prophet Teiresias stating that he was the murderer of Laius, Oedipus does not readily believe them since his pride in himself would not allow him to do so. He labels the words of Teiresias as falsehoods and even accuses his friend (who is also unknowingly his uncle) Creon of instigating such lies. This particular behavior is in direct contrast to his earlier attitude involving his adoptive parents, Polybus and Merope.
In this earlier instance, he readily believed the words of a drunk (who stated that Polybus and Merope were not his true parents) as well as believed the words of the Oracle of Delphi who repeated the same prophecy given to Laius and Jocasta. This divergence in the acceptance of what is said to them between the younger and older versions of Oedipus is based on the fact that the older version of Oedipus had developed a considerable degree of pride in himself as a direct result of his accomplishments.
This had manifested itself in events early on within the story where he encountered Laius on the road to Thebes and refused to give way due to his pride in being a prince of Corinth. The end result was the murder of Liaus which was inherently based on the concept of pride and how Oedipus refused to be humble.
His hubris escalated even more as a direct result of his accomplishment in saving the people of Thebes from the Sphinx and being crowned king of the city. The younger version of Oedipus did not have significant accomplishments, was merely a prince and as such did not have as much pride as compared to his older self which as a result left him more open to believing in the words of others rather than himself.
Possible Alternative Explanations
It must be noted though that there are possible alternative explanations as to why Oedipus readily believed the drunk but did not believe Teiresias. One of possibilities is based on the fact that Oedipus may have doubted the origins of his birth given that since he was not the natural son of Polybus and Merope then it would be unlikely that he would look anything like them.
On the other hand, the reason why Oedipus did not want to believe the words of Terisias may be due to the fact that they seemed so farfetched that it would have been hard to believe them in the first place.
While these alternative explanations do have a considerable degree of merit, they lack a sufficient enough connection to the concept of hubris that pervades various aspects of the story. An explanation behind one of the focal points of the story that led to Oedipus killing his father and marrying his mother should be based on the concept of pride since this is the main theme of the story and all explanations of events that emerge from the story of Oedipus should be based on this particular perspective.
As it can be seen from the various arguments presented within this paper, the concept of pride played a significant role in having Oedipus believe the words of the drunk yet not believe the words of the prophet Teiresias. As the pride of Oedipus increased the more likely he was to believe in his own words and thoughts rather than those coming from other people. In the end, like so many Greek tragedies in the past, the prideful are humbled and in the case of Oedipus he was humbled to an extreme degree.
Interpreting the Playwrights’ Messages in the Oresteia Trilogy, Oedipus the King, and the Bacchae Essay
The Greek tragedies are, first of all, focused on reflection of the social and political influences that were imposed on the authors. In this respect, Aeschylus’s The Oresteia introduces the attitude to revenge and constant fight for the power and throne. It also diminishes the significance of family bonds with an emphasis placed on the natural law and justice.
In Sophocles’s Oedipus the King, the playwright chronicles the narration about the king of Thebes and his eventual fall due to the conflict between the state and the individual values. Finally, Euripides’ the Bacchae also reflects on themes of power of self-control, as well as the role of divine rule in political life. Therefore, all three plays refer to the denial of identity for the sake of gaining dominance over the others.
The importance of Aeschylus’s The Oresteia is important because the tragedy presents the main aspects of Greek tragedy. Presenting the trilogy, deals with the themes of the inheritance of evil and retribution of crime.
Both the style and nobility of the presented ideas contribute to representation of such problems as justice and social progress, as well internal struggle with the self. Such themes are also literally interpreted in Orestes killing his mother and Aegusthus’s participation in murdering his cousin Agamemnon, who is also to blame in slaying his daughter.
The murder is also associated with vengeance, which was a socially accepted form of justice during those times. In the book, Aeschylus emphasizes this idea through chorus’s constant repetitions: “Thou biddest; I will speak my soul’s thought out, Revering as a shrine thy father’s grave…Pray in set terms, Who shall the slayer slay”. The author’s message, therefore, shapes his political outlook on the social organization, as well as eternal struggles between leaders.
In Sophocles’s Oedipus the King, the main hero faces a difficult decision concerning his role as the ruler that confronts his role as a rebel. By rejecting other claims than his own, Oedipus represents as classical personality portrayed in Greek tragedies. The protagonist is reluctant to listen to other people’s opinion because of his aspiration to resist to greater forces. In the play, the author emphasizes, “Do not seek to be master in everything for the thing you mastered did not follow you throughout your life”.
As it can be seen, the main hero fails to identity his actual purposes, as well as to reconcile with his origins. Euripides’s The Bacchae once again emphasizes the impact of power on distortion of self-identity. Hence, the king Pentheus strives to compensate his sorrows through gaining more powers. Similar assumptions are connected to the Dionysus’s denial of his mortal roots and aspiration to reach a new status.
In conclusion, it should be stressed that all three authors introduce the political and social contexts in the play to emphasize the hero’s attempts and purposes in life. In particular, the main mythological narrations are strongly associated with family rivalries and revenge for the sake of greater divine purposes.
All the stories also represent the characters’ eternal fight with their origins and identities for achieving grater goals their lives. Finally, the authors introduce a religious aspect as the most typical one in Greek culture because it had a potent impact on power and control. The confrontation between state and the personality is also an important theme illustrating the political situation at those times.
Aeschylus. The Oresteia: Agamemnon, the Libation-bearers, and the Eumenides. US: Digireads.com Publishing, 2005.
Euripdus. The Bacchae. US: Richer Resources Publications. 2008.
Sophocles. Oedipus the King. US: University of Chicago Press, 2010.
- Aeschylus. The Oresteia: Agamemnon, the Libation-bearers, and the Eumenides. US: (Digireads.com Publishing, 2005) 2.
- Sophocles. Oedipus the King. (US: University of Chicago Press, 2010) 75.
- Euripdus. The Bacchae. (US: Richer Resources Publications. 2008).
Oedipus the King Essay
This is an Athenian tragedy by Sophocles. The main character Oedipus is the King of Thebes. Oedipus’ own fault brings him down and in an embarrassing way. The literature work presents a perfect example of tragedy. King Oedipus is the protagonist in the play. His tragic error is linked to a natural curse on his biological father.
Analysis of the tragic error
The chronology of events begins when a young man learns about a rumor that King Polybus and Queen Merope are not his biological parents.
Innocently, Oedipus sets out on a journey with the intention of permanently moving away to thwart the Oracle, which is unknown to him. Oedipus feels that if he is far away then he may not harm his foster parents whom he now believes are his biological parents. The first part of his tragic error occurs during this journey. Oedipus meets a stranger, who unknown to him is his biological father, Laius.
A quarrel ensues which eventually leads to a fight. By the end of the war, Oedipus kills everybody except one person in the stranger’s entourage (Storr, 2008)). The cause of disagreement was a very simple argument between them over who had the right-of-way. All This takes place while the two, King Laius and his Son Oedipus are unaware of their identities. Oedipus did not even know that the stranger he was fighting was a King.
The second part of King Oedipus tragic error, ironically occurs after Oedipus uses his wisdom to free the Kingdom of Thebes. It is interesting to see how wisdom and the wish to rescue Thebes drive Oedipus into a classic tragedy. Oedipus answers the riddle from Sphinx to deliver the Kingdom of Thebes from a curse.”
What is the creature that walks on four in the morning walks on two at noon and walks on three in the evening?” The Sphinx asked, ´ Man,” Oedipus responded. The reward for this work was for Oedipus to be made the King of Thebes. He was then given the Queen of Thebes, Jocasta, to marry. The Queen incidentally was his biological mother. This opens both ends of the tragic error. The Oracle he ran away from was then fulfilled.
Oedipus is a victim of fate, killing his father and his mother. The order of events is guided by his brilliance in which Oedipus attempt to unravel the truth. This is in addition to control his destiny .This however, climaxes into the tragedy that leads to his embarrassing downfall.
When he discovers that he has a curse following him, just like ant other human being and King for that matter, sends Creon his brother-in-law to seek advice from Apollo. “King Apollo! May his joyous looks be presage of the joyous news he brings!” He says. The news from Apollo seems to bring the expected joy and hope. Creon, “Good news, for even intolerable ills. Finding right issue, tend to naught but good.”
Creon explains that evasion will only come after the murderer of Laius; the former King is found and prosecuted. With determination to avert his curse, Oedipus commits himself to apprehend the murderer and make sure justice is done. Ironically, Oedipus is the killer himself.
Further complications arise when Jocasta disapproves the blind prophet’s prophesy that King Oedipus killed the former King Laius. The news from the prophet is in fact true but a mystery to understand. Jocasta advises Oedipus not to be bothered by looking for the murderer. She says who the man is. Let it be. Twere wastes of thought to weigh such idle words.” However, Oedipus is not convinced and insists to pursue the matter.
However, an obscurity in itself regenerates in Oedipus memory regarding a babyhood story of him being an adopted youngster. Jocasta’s flow of the story looked very similar to the one the old man told him in his childhood. Members of his Kingdom through the song continue to persuade him further but he resists (Storr, 2008) He continues his probe to know the murderer of Laius, the former King.
The fatal chronology of events fulfills the prophesy of the tragic error when Jocasta discovers that her second husband is actually her son and a child whom together her first husband King Laius dumped in the forest to avert a curse. To her surprise the child was a live, a King and worst of all her husband whom they had four children together. With glaring in her face and because the situation then was an abomination, Queen Jocasta kills herself by committing suicide.
This happens shortly before King Oedipus also discovers the truth. Oedipus realizes that he in deed killed King Laius, his biological father that he was married to his biological mother, and together they have four children (Grene, 2010). The events of the situation become unbearable. Oedipus, in accepting his mistake requests for punishment. He ends up being a beggar who wanders all over.
The moral lessons
Athenians learnt a lot from the tragic error by their King, Oedipus. Among the lessons, the Athenians learnt that destiny could never be thwarted. Oedipus in quest to know the truth and his wish to control his destiny ended disastrously. His father, Laius and his mother Jocasta conspired to kill their son in an attempt to evade destiny.
This never worked as Oedipus was eventually rescued and he lived to fulfill what fate dictated. The curse that turned to be fate for the generations was brought by Laius’ moral decadence. In his youth, he raped a young woman he was teaching. Rape is a vice that is not condoned by the society. This was the source of the curse. The two Kings, Laius, and Oedipus, tried to thwart it but never succeeded.
The Athenians learnt that destiny has its mechanisms of ensuring that it is never avoided. Their King had sort advice from Apollo in trying to avoid a terrible curse that had befallen him. The response circumvented things back to King without his knowledge. Oedipus, then on following up the matter destroyed himself (Berg, 2011). It was clear to them that if something were predestined to happen, it will happen no matter what takes place.
Athenians believed in the fulfillment of prophesy. The tragic events of their King, Oedipus simply reinforced their belief. Their two Kings should have believed in fate. To the Athenians it would never have come in such a torturous way. King Laius and Queen Jocasta would not have conspired to kill their son.
This means that King Polybus and Queen Merope would never have brought up Oedipus. This would have reorganized the way fate would have happened. Most important being that Oedipus would never have bothered to unravel the mystery of his birth.
When the Athenians analyzed the order of events through the tragic error by King Oedipus, it was clear that the cause was an immoral behavior. Laius had been offered an opportunity to tutor a young woman. Laius forgot the good reception he had been given, he instead of concentrating on his job became immoral.
The society and especially in Athena upheld morals. The whole tragedy would have been avoided at the tiptop. It would be easy for Laius to uphold simple but important ethics than letting the entire generation go through pain and embarrassment.
In comparison with the modern world, there is great difference in the beliefs and a change between that generation and the current one. In the modern world, leadership is learnt and the leaders do not run their countries alone. Decisions are never unilateral, to am extent that even the foreign nations influence internal affairs of other countries. Forms of leadership have also changed. Analysis of those seeking leadership including their history are done.
Religion also plays a great role in the difference. Though religion existed in the Athena, the difference is in the faith. The judicial system takes the opportunity to rehabilitate those with moral decadence. Laius would have been jailed for rape. He would never have had a chance to rule since his behavior would never allow him. In the modern society, Hitler, the former Chancellor of Germany represents a leader with a tragic error. He started the Second World War and died a painful and embarrassing death.
Berg, S. (2011). Oedipus the King. New York: Oxford University press.
Grene, D. (2010). Oedipus the King by Sophocles. Chicago: University of Chicago press.
Storr, S (2008). Oedipus the King: Original play. New York: Internet classic commentary.