Day: September 28, 2023

Introduction to Phaedra’s Speech

Phaedra, a masterpiece character by Racine, creates multidimensional emotions among her readers which include pity as well as fear, love and sympathy, pardon as well as the element of remorse and horror due to Phaedra’s speech.  In every scene, she changes herself very quickly. She transforms from a mother who hates to a mother who extremely loves. Then suddenly, she is transformed into a queen who feels remorseful. Such great changes really put the readers in an amazing situation as and when they observe her changing character. Both kinds of feelings such as sympathy and horror are attached to Phaedra of Racine as are found in Seneca. Her final speech, to a great extent, atones for her evil acts; it also does not lessen the intensity of the crime she has carried out. It has lowered the graph of hatred which rose higher due to her crime in the different parts of the drama. She knows about her acts and hence feels regret. She also thinks that perhaps she may have been cursed for that and it could be an important thing in anyone’s character and role. Racine’s intention is to demonstrate through Phaedra’s speech that man is no longer a greate figure and that he is very much successful.

Phaedra’s Speech and Its Purpose

In fact, there is a possibility that Racine might have thought well before giving this speech, however, it happened to be the king himself who instigated her or Racine might have herself thought of atoning for his character in order for the tragedy to become so touching and poignant. In the last scene, the king looks at his son’s ruins “ But he is dead; accept your victim; / Rightly or wrongly slain, let your heart leap: / For joy” (Phaedra, Act V Scene VII Lines 3-5).  It inspires her to say what was real and hence she says before him, “ Theseus, I cannot hear you and keep silence: / I must repair the wrong that he has suffer’d— / Your son was innocent.” (Act V Scene VII Lines 24-26). Phaedra’s speech shows her open admission that she was not able to win the confidence of the lord king who thought her to be trustworthy and disapproved his son instead. He said about him himself, “ And it was on your word that I condemn’d him! “ (Act V Scene VII line 28).

Impact of Phaedra’s Speech on Her Persona

 Her character increases its attraction among the readers when Phaedra’s speech exposes her. She controls her feelings all the time.  When Oenone comes with a plan, she does not at once go for executing it, Phaedra often does not do that, rather she gets ready to do that.  In the last speech, it is clear what she wants to say “Moments to me are precious; hear me, Theseus “ (Act V Scene VII line 30) proving that she wants herself to be heard about her true nature. If we compare emotions, it shows Hippolytus’ character as well as inner self via self-confession because she says, “ Twas I who cast an eye of lawless passion” (Act V Scene VII line 31)  compared to “chaste and dutiful Hippolytus” (Act V Scene VII line 32) explicates her complete understanding about what she is doing. This admission of crimes shows that her conversation does not create wrong perception among the readers as were shown in the previous acts. Basically, this makes her morally good as she is about to die but tries to withstand the enticement and temptations which she had to confront. There are some other powers which also work to bring about her destruction “ Heav’n in my bosom kindled baleful fire” (Act V Scene VII line 32) In fact she means to say that she has not done that but the fate has done that and the gods have brought about her condemnation.  In the words of Lear, she is to a greater extent “sinned against the sinner”. She, in other words looks to be gods’, destiny’s and genetics’ curse. The first outside force is “heaven” while the second is “my weakness” (Act V Scene VII line 37) that inspired Oenone, her government to exploit and manipulate her, and this was very late when she came to know because she blamed Oenone that “ She took, and hasten’d to accuse him first” (Act V Scene VII line 39). She does not lack courage to disclose her intention of committing suicide before taking action on it and approached him to let him know the reason of the things which occured and how far his son proved to be someone different quite different in from his preconceived picture. Her words show how courageous she is:

 “I resolved to die

In a more lingering way, confessing first      

My penitence to you.” (Act V Scene VII lines 43-45)

There is the third power working behind the scene. It is the force of her defiled legacy and she seems to be condemned to function in a way which displays her character a bit whimsical which is more money oriented but she controls herself when she comes to know about her conduct. The reality is that her attendant provokes her to do what she may not do while being alone. She even leveled a charge against Oenone who quickly accepted death to get rid of death which she talked about in her speech and also her grace and grandeur which caused several heroes and heroine to ruins.

Phaedra’s Speech and Her Psychological State

The present speech discusses her psychological state which may indicate her delicate and fragile nature, though we see an element of fate working behind as well. In the newspapers, we often find such stories where the real characters are helpless before their passions. As far as she is concerned her case is different. She makes a confession and makes an effort to check herself. This control and confession in fact ultimately indicates her ill psychological condition. She prepares to follow the scheme given by Oenone with a little hesitation. It could have averted the tragedy while the tragedy would have become more touching if everyone taking part in the tragedy had died in front of the king.

Conclusion

At the end, it seems that a kind of mental infliction is there in which she suffers. The reason perhaps is that she grows in her bosom a love that is not allowed but considered a sin. Nevertheless, her last speech does show that she hesitated and was reluctant in carrying out this act to the end and even she was hesitant in making this thing public. It was Oenone, her confidant who asked her to do what she should have avoided. Therefore, we see that her feeble mind was influenced by the outer forces and therefore she brought about her own destruction and the destruction of her family. The story, though, has a mythological perspective, the purpose of Racine through Phaedra’s speech seems to present her as a woman icon who has a humane nature and a kind heart and at the same time having frailty as is attributed by Shakespeare discussed in Hamlet, a masterpiece in which Hamlet calls women as frail creatures.

Works Cited

1. Racine, Jean. Phædra. Translated by Robert Bruce Boswell. Vol. XXVI, Part 3. The Harvard Classics. New York: P.F. Collier & Son, 1909–14; Bartleby.com, 2001. www.bartleby.com/26/3/.

Relevant Questions about Phaedra’s Speech in Phaedra by Recine

1. How does Phaedra’s confession speech advance the plot and reveal her inner turmoil in the play “Phaedra”?
2. What internal conflicts and moral dilemmas does Phaedra’s speech highlight, and how do they shape her character’s development?
3. What literary techniques and rhetorical devices are employed in Phaedra’s speech to convey her emotions and add depth to the narrative in “Phaedra” by Euripides?

You may read more on Short Essays below:

• Racism in Othello by Shakespeare
• Ruth and the Hijackers by Bapsi Sidhwa: Postcoloniality
• Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream: Disguise and Deception
• Sibling Relations in Frankenstein

Introduction to Iago’s Motivation

While uncovering Iago’s motivation to plot against Othello and Cassio, it is pertinent to mention “motiveless malignity” of A. C. Bradley that Iago simply hates for the sake of hatred and does not tolerate any good, loving “evil purely for itself” (139). But at the same time, he is also a human being who has hatred against Othello that springs from various motives such as stopping his money-making drive from Roderigo in the name of Desdemona. Roderigo says that Iago “hast had my purse” (Shakespeare 1.1.3). The second reason could be the superseding of his post that Othello awards to Cassio who is not superior to him in skills but only in loyalty to the Moor. There could be other reasons for his diabolical machinations but they all mostly spring from the hatred that has emerged from the reason that Othello is becoming a threat to his money he gets from Roderigo. Although he is considered an innocent and good person by all other characters to whom he causes serious harm by involving in one or the other plot, he has harbored the single aim of destroying Othello and all others who are coming his way, but at the same time Bradley’s views seem to have some support, for he is against everything that seems good. The formal analysis reveals that Iago’s motivation is money from Roderigo, and his jealousy against Othello for causing him bad repute and promoting Cassio while jealousy and hatred against Cassio stems from his undue promotion and his loyalty to the Moor.

Money as Iago’s Motivation

As far as money is concerned, it seems Iago’s motivation of this is clearly involved in manipulating the infatuation of Roderigo for Desdemona. Roderigo is madly in love with Desdemona and has met failure in wooing her. To top it all, he finds that she has already eloped with the Moor, whom he hates for his battlefield experience. When he talks to Iago about it, Iago reveals in the very first lines that Iago is taking from him money as if it is all his, and the last line that he “shouldst know of this” (1.3) seems a sort of warning for Iago that it would stop, if he does not succeed. This Iago does not verify, as he alludes Roderigo into making him believe that he truly despises the Moor the reason that he is collaborating with Roderigo. It also seems that he is informing Roderigo about other motivation that seems to make Roderigo believe that Iago is with him and that he will woo back Desdemona for him or plot something against the Moor. This shows that Iago hates Othello but he is also jealous of him due to his having many “war epithets” to his name (1.1. 14). Here it becomes a double hatred, but it seems a jealousy of the position of Othello, too.

Jealousy of Iago’s Motivation

The situation becomes even more frustrating for Iago though none other character speaks about Othello’s illicit relations with his wife except himself as he reveals in his soliloquy that the people are talking about Othello that he has “that ‘twixt sheets / He has done my office” (1.3.388). This clearly alludes to the cause of jealousy as Iago’s motivation which could be a point that he is constantly plotting against Othello and everything that is connected with him in some or the other way. Although there is nothing mentioned about this second affair, it could be a machination of Iago’s mind to convince himself that he should turn his attention to plotting against the Moor who has made the string of his purse tight in an indirect way. The laughing matter over this motivation is that even Iago himself says that ” I know not if’t be true” (1.3.389). He, on the other hand, makes it sure that he would consider it confirmed. This points to the very first sentence where he has stated that he hates the Moor. After this, he has contrived reasons. Once he has made up his mind that he starts making plans to make Othello pay for it, and it is surely the creation of the previous motive of stopping his money as well as causing him to have low self-esteem by having a good reputation of a warring general. Although overall, due to his own confession, this is another Iago’s motivation, the prime hatred due to the promotion of Cassio seems genuine.

Promotion of Cassio as Iago’s Motivation

In fact, Cassio’s promotion is more due to Cassio’s fidelity and closeness with the Moor rather than due to his ability of knowing battle tactics or the art of warfare. Iago clearly says that Cassio has “never set a squadron in the field / Nor the divisions of the battle knows” (1.1.21-22). On the other hand, Cassio also has motive of jealousy for Iago that is a “fair wife” (1.1.21). It could be that Emilia, his own wife is not fair, but it is a motive of jealousy here that his wife is already in a relationship with the Moor, while both the Moor as well as Cassio have good and beautiful wives. This is, perhaps, linked to the jealousy he is feeling from Cassio’s promotion but it has transformed into hatred against the Moor and jealousy against Cassio. It has also become hatred against Cassio too, for if he harms the Moor and leaves Cassio, it indirectly means to give Cassio a chance to get another promotion leaving him far behind. He expresses his misgivings about Cassio when in the Second Act, they all arrive in Cyprus and Cassio greets his wife Emilia. He says, “I fear Cassion with my night-cap, too” (2.1.307). This somewhat raises the suspicion that he suspects his wife for having relations with Cassio, too which another sub-motive within the broad range of motives, but it could be otherwise too. However, one thing is pertinent to mention here that he again suspects his wife of having slept with the Moor at this point which clarifies his earlier lie and seems that he is convincing himself again. This seems another Iago’s motivation.

Levels of Iago’s Motivation

His motive of ensnaring Cassio goes on two levels. The first is that Cassio is promoted over him un-deservingly and unjustly and second is that his wife is fair, as it has already been stated. The third motive is also stated that is fear. However, what is not stated is that it is also jealousy due to his own handsome features. And second is that Cassio has been a cause of his misery, the reason that he sets Roderigo to kill Cassio or vice versa, thinking that “Every way makes my gain” (5.1.12). This means he is merely jealous of Cassio more than the Moor, for he also thinks that Cassio “has daily beauty in his life” (5.1.19). This is an indication that he contrasts himself with his beautiful nature as well as his handsome features and thinks that he cannot come close to Cassio. This also points to his bad nature that in this way he cannot come close to goodness, the reason that goodness must be destroyed in every way, so that he could replace the Moor.

Conclusion

Concluding the essay, it could be stated that though Iago is an evil-incarnate, he is still a human being, but the problem with him is that he is caught in the net of hatred, jealousy, money-making drive and so many things that he is set to hate or feel jealous. His only option is to hate and then plot likewise. Therefore, Iago’s motivation is, at first, just hatred which leads to second, and then so on. The web spreads into jealousy against the black Moor for winning Desdemona which moves forward into having suspicion of the Moor and his own wife for illicit relations, then jealousy of promoting the inferior Cassio ignoring him. All these motives amalgamate into one another, leading him to convince himself more and weaving more plots to kill all whoever comes his way until all the people are at each other’s throats and Iago himself is wiped out in these machinations. This also proves that he has hatred against the Moor for his success not only in war but also in love which sets him to move plots against him. Moreover, Iago is also a greedy person who has set eyes on Roderigo, which is a sort of corruption and this corruption sets him on the course to other motives. All in all, whatever the motive is, they all become secondary to the prime motive of money-making and then feeling hatred against the Moor, leading to planning against all whoever is associated with him.

Works Cited

1. Bradley, A. C. “1904 “Othello” from Shakespearean Tragedy. ” Bloom’s Shakespeare Through the Ages: Othello edited by Harold Bloom. New York: Infobase Publishing, 2008.
2. Shakespeare, William. Othello.” Minnesota: Paradigm Publishing, 2005.

Relevant Questions about Iago’s Motivation for Plotting Against Othello and Cassio

1. What are the underlying reasons and personal motivations that drive Iago’s motivation to plot against Othello and Cassio, and how do these motivations evolve throughout the play?
2. How does Iago’s manipulation of other characters, such as Roderigo and Emilia, serve to further his agenda and advance his motives against Othello and Cassio?
3. What psychological factors or character traits contribute to Iago’s willingness to orchestrate a complex and destructive plot against individuals he interacts with on a daily basis, and what does this reveal about his nature as a villain in the play?

Introduction to Dumpster Driving

            On Dumpster Diving is simply a small piece of Lars Eighner’s memorial called Travels with Lizbeth: Three Years on the Road and on the Streets. Published in 1993, On Dumpster Diving is based on Eighner’s own personal experiences of being homeless and surviving out of a dumpster. The first few lines of the essay itself are enough to capture the interest of the reader since majority of the people have remotely heard of the word ‘dumpster diving’ or ‘scavenging’ before. In this essay, Eighner gives the reader a detailed overview of how to survive simply on a dumpster. As one reads through the essay, he or she is forced to ask themselves whether teaching us these survival rules was the only objective of this essay. However, as the essay as well as the story progresses, one realizes the actual message and concept behind Eighner’s essay. Eighner’s essay explains and elaborates the wasteful and the selfish nature of the vast population living in America. Through this essay, Eighner tries to deliver a very important message to his readers – the immorality and the selfishness involved in throwing out food that can be used by the wealthy and the rich when thousands of people living in America are suffering from poverty and starvation. According to Eighner, this selfish nature found within the American Society is based upon three different aspects – materialistic values, ignorance and the inability to understand.

Materialism and On Dumpster Diving

            Everyone has met materialistic people at some point in their life. Materialistic individuals always want the best of the best – whether it is the latest car or the most expensive phone. However, even when their demands are met, these individuals are seldom happy. These individuals tend to focus on all those things that they do not own and forget about the latest gadgets that they do possess. According to Eighner, materialistic people are lost, unsure and uncertain of what they actually want in life. In some way or the other, Eighner has tried to deliver a message to his readers that in order to be happy and content, one needs to know exactly what he or she wants from life. Materialistic people are often confused with those who are clever and intelligent and think in a very sentimental way. It is only natural to be smart enough to realize what the things that provide personal benefit are and the others must be left for the benefits of others. There were times when Eighner only collected those things that added value to his life and left the others for the use of the other individuals. Studies and researches have shown that materialistic individuals tend to be more sad and depressed than others. It is true that the twenty first century has brought with itself huge technological advancements. However, such advancements and modernism has made people in secure and now everyone wishes to get the latest product launched in the market – it does not take long for the most valuable asset to become valueless. Eighner has also mentioned the very same point in his essay On Dumpster Diving and states “Almost everything I have now has already been cast at least once, proving that what I own is valueless to someone” (Eighner).

Ignorance and On Dumpster Diving

            Another very selfish and common trait found amongst the American society is ignorance. The reason why people are still dying of poverty and starvation in America is not because the country is not rich enough to support the less fortunate ones, but in fact, the people of the United States are very ignorant. A very common practice shown by the rich people within the American society is that even food that can be used is usually thrown out just because such families have enough money to buy new food. These people do not even stop for a minute to think about the less fortunate ones. They do not put in any effort to change their ignorant attitude to a considerate one. Eighner has also talked about this particular unreasonable and ignorant attitude of the American society. The biggest contributor to this trait are the college students who do not have any sense of responsibility individually as well as when it comes to being a citizen of a country. Eighner’s statement that “Students throw out many good things including food…the item was thrown out of carelessness, ignorance, or wastefulness” is sufficient proof to support the argument that college students in fact contribute the most to make poverty in America even worse. Scavengers like Eighner can get hold of many different and valuable goods in the dumpsters such as “boom boxes, candles, bedding, toilet paper, medicine, books, a typewriter, a virgin male love doll, change sometimes amounting to many dollars” (Eighner). The point that Eighner is trying to make over here is that despite knowing the fact that people are indeed poor and suffering and even dying due to starvation, the wealthy and rich are extremely unreasonable and inhuman.

Work, Responsibility and On Dumpster Diving

The rich claim that they have gathered this amount of wealth through their own hard work and responsibility. However, when people have more than what they need, they are socially responsible to help the less unfortunate ones as well. Unfortunately, more than 60 percent of the American society lacks such sort of understanding. It is not wrong to think about your own family’s future before thinking about the future of other families; however, if you are financially strong enough to help the poor and the needy, then you are socially obliged to do so. If such an understanding is somehow drilled into the minds of the rich and the wealthy, the problem of poverty within America can eventually be solved.

Conclusion

Even though On Dumpster Diving is an individual’s personal story of being homeless and surviving on dumpsters, it does represent thousands of poor and needy people within the American Society. People surviving on dumpsters are similar to the rich and wealthy in one aspect – they both can get whatever they like. However, money does not stand in the way of only one of them. If only the rich and the wealthy can be a little considerate, the problem of poverty within America can be easily solved. Poverty and death toll due to starvation in America has increased over the years because the people of this nation are ignorant, materialistic and do not have the ability to understand their social responsibilities.

Works Cited

1. Eighner, Lars. “On Dumpster Diving.” Readings: An Anthology. Ed. Santi V. Buscemi and Charlotte Smith. 9th ed. Boston: McGraw, 2004. 161-173. Print.

Introduction to Theme of Blindness in Oedipus

The play Oedipus the King opens with the people supplicating before the palace of King Oedipus due to the plague, which was ruining the city, showing the theme of blindness in Oedipus. The story of the search which started with Oedipus to find out the culprit who killed the previous king Laius unraveled several mysteries for him in that he left this and started looking for his own parents which culminated in a circuitous way finding himself as the culprit. His journey for the search of the murdered took a full circle and he came to the place from where he started. In a way, this play is a search for the self that Oedipus finds in himself after having full circle but has been blind to this until he does not start this search. The play, in fact, shows that the blinders are seers while the seers are blind to the realities. Not only Oedipus is blind spiritually and physically, but Chorus is also blind to the realities of life staring in their faces, adding to further to the theme of blindness in Oedipus.

Blindness of Tiresias and Theme of Blindness in Oedipus

 Although Tiresias is a blind old man, he is a seer of what is hidden from others. It means, metaphorically, all others are blind to his prophecies. When Oedipus calls for him to interpret the predictions of Oracle brought by Creon, his brother-in-law, he asks Tiresias to tell him the truth. However, when Tiresias does not say what he wants, he calls him a blind old man who cannot see the truth at which Tiresias states “You blame my temper, / but do not see the one which lives within you” (Sophocles 401-402). He is referring to his blindness in a way that he does not see that he has killed his father and married his mother. He also does not see that he is father of his own sisters and daughters. In this sense, Oedipus is blind. Tiresias tells him that he should not accuse him of blindness as he himself is a blind one.

Real Blindness of Oedipus

Secondly, Oedipus becomes blind at the end when he comes to know that he has committed all from which he was escaping. He not only killed his father but also married his own mother. He came to know when he called for the shepherd of Jocasta who gave him to the shepherd of Corinth. Then he ran to the palace to find that Jocasta has killed herself in desperation. He could not brook this anymore and gouged out his own eyes with the brooches. When Chorus taunts him for blinding himself, he states “Though I am blind, I know that voice so well” (1578).

Blindness of Chorus and Blindness of Oedipus

Chorus is also blind though not physically but symbolically. The chorus represents the elders or common people of that time. The commoners were mostly unaware of the state of affairs as the tragedy was mostly concerned with the life of the characters having stature, grandeur, and honor. However, here Chorus does not know anything about what is happening and in a sense is blind to what is before him. Chorus states “I want to ask you many things—there’s much / I wish to learn” (1308)– a hint that Chorus does not know anything about anything and is virtually blind to the realities to be faced by Oedipus. This could be a symbolic blindness in Oedipus.

Conclusion

Concluding the argument, it could be said that there are two types of blindness; one of the general eyesight and the other of the inner eye. Oedipus is blind in both ways when he accuses Tiresias of blindness, who is physically blind but inwardly he could see destiny. Similarly, as a representative of commoners, the Chorus is also blind to the events happening to Oedipus. Therefore, there are three blinds; Chorus, Oedipus, and Tiresias but Oedipus is blind in two days.

Works Cited

Sophocles. “Oedipus The King”. Trans. Ian Johnston. n. d. Web. 15 Sep. 2014. < https://records.viu.ca/~johnstoi/sophocles/oedipustheking.htm>

Relevant Questions

1. How does the physical blindness of Oedipus at the end of the play symbolize the Theme of Blindness in Oedipus the King?
2. How do characters like Tiresias and Jocasta, who exhibit metaphorical blindness, contribute to the exploration of the Theme of Blindness in Oedipus the King?
3. In what ways does the theme of familial blindness, where generations of characters fail to see their roles in their tragic destinies, emphasize the Theme of Blindness in Oedipus the King?

Introduction to Oedipus Controversies

Only one play that won great criticism, admiration, appraisal, and interpretation is none other than Oedipus creating Oedipus controversies. It still is the center point of criticism, attention, and wonder. Greek drama was a regular ritual of the annual Greek festival presented in honor of Dionysus at Delphi. The plays presented over there not only set the stage for enlightenment but also put questions before the audience about morality, the political situation and the role of the political authority, the role of the public, and above all the education of the community in terms of morality and politics. Although by making King Oedipus the model of his critique of the Greek tragedy and setting canons for the tragedy, Aristotle has also questioned its structure. However, leaving aside structure it was the actual presentation of the hero as a great sufferer and educator in terms of presenting himself for punishment, which makes the society and the public at large aware of the role of the authority and the role of the public. The people are getting aware of “because we thought of you as God” (Sophocles 35) that they look upon Oedipus, and he in turn, tries to console them by saying “My spirit groans for city and myself and you at once” which highlights the role of the authority. However, it is interesting that Oedipus controversies are intertwined.

Oedipus Controversies and Aristotle

However, as it was also the foray of Aristotle that Greeks held the passions of pity and fear very high, moralizing, educating, and civilizing, the objective of Oedipus was to teach these passions. Hence, the Sophoclean objective of teaching these passions seems to be fulfilled through Oedipus controversies. In this connection, Alford has stated that it was the strategy of the Greek tragic poets to teach these finer feelings, considering them enlightenment of the society on moral and political fronts as pointed out earlier. He said that the “Poet’s strategy is to unleash pity and compassion as civilizing forces in such a way as to educate these powerful passion, so that they will not be dangerous” (Alford 1993 262). This clearly shows that pity and fear were both central emotions of the Greek tragedies and the objective was to put these emotions in such a perspective before the public that they would learn them. However, on the political front, their objective was to prepare the youth for battles. However, it was more of the poet than that of the philosophers, the reason that Aristotle is not considered as democratic as Sophocles as Alford has also pointed out at another place that they intended to share these sentiments among the general public and so helped in spreading democracy among the general public.

Hero and Oedipus Controversies

The tragedy of Oedipus still seems to be relevant in that it still presents the themes of victory and failure of a hero and a king who is more than a democratic person, rational and loving. The theme of the polemics that it raised over the role of religion and gods in the destruction of an individual have been highlighted so much so that they have given birth to an atheistic section (Rocco 1997). Although actually it was the universal appeal that was intended at that time though now it is read for enlightenment not only about that civilization but also about edification and dialectic in this modern age.

Oedipus Controversies: Pity and Fear

Despite presenting the finer feelings of pity and fear, Oedipus Rex raises a debate over whether he was responsible for his own downfall due to some of his tragic flaws, or whether fate acted against him or was it the wrath of Gods that led to his fall. There is still a raging controversy in literary circles among which some are of the opinion that it was his excessive pride in his knowledge and problem-solving approach that led to his downfall when he made a wrong decision about the investigation. The pride was given to Oedipus by the people, who even when they were stricken with pestilence, were saying “Once you have brought us luck with happy omen, be no less now in fortune” (Sophocles 60-61) that he considers as his right that he has resolved that riddle of the Sphinx when he opens up saying “Oedipus whom all men call the Great” (6) that he takes pride over it. However, it is also that he is biologically destined to do so as he has been fated by the Oracle of Delphi that he would kill his father and marry his own mother. However, there is also a question of when he was predicted to do so, he should have tried to find out his biological parents instead of fleeing to Delphi, but again it was his fate that he was destined to do so. However, new studies have questioned this as Havi Hannah Carel has quoted Segal in order to refute the charges that Oedipus has any tragic flaw that Aristotle has deduced as he states that “From an honest and respected leader determined to find the cause of the plague, Oedipus is transformed into a criminal, an incestuous murder, blind to the identity of his mother and father” (Carel). This rather leads to more Oedipus controversies. His opinion is that whatever Aristotle has said about Oedipus, this is totally against modern rationality does not support this. He is of the opinion that even if he was destined to act like this or his forefathers were cursed, it was not his fault. Even if he is accused of taking pride, “there is no causal link between this behavior and his horrific predicament” (Carel) which he is highlighted and interpreted in so many ways.

However, as far as the Aristotelian criterion is concerned, Oedipus controversies meet his requirements of a towering personality who commits wrong against his own family and thus evokes the finer and educating feelings of pity and fear. Hence, he meets his requirements as he outlined in his Poetics and stated by Marjorie in support of Aristotle that it was only Oedipus that have could achieve such a status of arousing pity and fear but “fails to attain happiness, and fails in such a way that his career excites, not blame, but fear and pity in the highest degree” (Barstow).

Oedipus Controversies: Paradox of Blindness and Knowledge

However, as far as the paradox of blindness and knowledge is concerned, it is clear from the tussle that between Oedipus and Tiresias who is seeing the future of Oedipus but does not utter a single word, but Oedipus is not seeing and is speaking a lot. This tension and conflict takes Tiresias to the point where he feels compelled to speak the truth and show the knowledge of what he has told it clearly “blindness for sight and beggary for riches his exchange” (Sophocles 531) when he tells him that he is a blind and nothing else. However, the impact of his role in the making of the play and demonstrating knowledge and ignorance is very important despite having in contradiction with the general public which says “One man may pass another in wisdom, but I would never agree with those that find fault with the king” (583-585) thinking that only the King holds the greatest wisdom. It was because he had already resolved the riddle of Sphinx and Thebans thought only Oedipus could pull them out of this crisis of pestilence and he did but in a very different sense.  However, one thing is quite intriguing Tiresias gets provoked which is quite unusual to his character elsewhere in literature. However, it has not been much debated upon as he only highlights and accentuates ignorance of Oedipus as his character is a “discrepancy between two types of knowledge – knowledge of the world versus knowledge of the self – is usually treated in connection with” (Roisman) the name of Oedipus and other with Tiresias who holds a great place in Sophocles’ Oedipus.

Oedipus Controversies: Towering Persona

However, the knowledge that has made a person like Oedipus arrogant, is the ability to resolve and seek things and resolutions where none is seen. Sphinx’s role in making Oedipus an arrogant king is very important. It is because it is the Sphinx that makes him resolve the riddle that it puts before Oedipus. It used to put the same riddle before every Theban and has proved for them an old pestilence that has taken its toll. However, it has made him arrogant, haughty, and knowledgeable as he himself says “When the dark singer, the Sphinx, was in your country, did you speak a word of deliverance to its citizens?”(Sophocles 452-455). This clearly shows that Oedipus is chiding Tiresias to make him things clear that he has a lot of knowledge of things that he has not. He also gets provoked and taunts him saying “You, have your eyes but see not where you are” (485). But it is the whole work of that singer or whatever they call, the Sphinx, and that riddle that it put before Oedipus that made Oedipus disrespect the blind seer and be cursed, leading to Oedipus controversies. Hence, its role gets prominence among the roles of things apart from human beings.

Oedipus Controversies: Religion

However, in the midst of these things and riddles, gods stans tall, because Zeus had has a central place in the Greek religion and this play rather created a hot debate on the role of gods and destiny and gods and fate. It also raised questions whether gods and destiny or gods and fate are the same things or different ones. The entire moral structure or religion gave way in front of controversies that were raised by this play and the issues it raised. The blasphemy committed by Jocasta “So Apollo failed to fulfill his oracle to the son” (824) adding that “So clear in this case were the oracles, so clear and false” (831-832) that even Oedipus has to say to her that “I could run mad” (838). That is why immediately after that Chorus reflects on their blasphemous remarks about gods and their prophesies and it states that destiny should find it pious to not to oppose those divine laws but it is Apollo that works in that direction that Oedipus is to be destroyed through his destiny that he communicates through “oracles which require a human response for their fulfillment and immanently through such external events as the confidence of the Corinthian’s arrival” (Lawrence).

Oedipus Controversies: Modern Interpretations

However, it is quite another thing that the modern period has interpreted Oedipus and his myth quite differently specifically Sigmund Freud who has put it into a psychological perspective calling his unconscious marriage to his mother as Oedipal Complex, though there is some truth behind it too. However, there does not seem to be any trace of this in the play, except that Jocasta urges him for blasphemy against gods and he also takes part in that. However, except this, there is nothing of as Oedipal Complex in the whole play as there is no mention of any genital and explicit sexual terms that Sigmund Freud used in his paper. In a nutshell, there are as many interpretations of this classic as its translations and even translations differ on the translation of several terms and words. Even its criticism in poetics is no less controversial. Therefore, there is nothing definite about what this classical masterpiece has given rise to as it is still being interpreted as a great source of knowledge.

Works Cited

1. Alford, Fred. “Greek Tragedy and Civilization: The Cultivation of Pity.” Political Research Quarterly 46.2 (1993): 262-264.
2. Barstow, Marjorie. “Oedipus Rex as the Ideal Tragic Hero of Aristotle.” Classics Weekly 6 (1912): 3-4.
3. Carel, Havi Hannah. “Moran and Epistemeic Ambiguity in Oedipus Rex.” 2006. 24 November 2014 <http://www.janushead.org/9-1/carel.pdf.>.
4. Lawrence, Stuart. “Appollo and His Purpose in Sophocles’ Oedipus Tyrannus.” n.d. 24 November 2014 <www.ut.ee/klassik/sht/2008/lawrence1.pdf>.
5. Rocco, Christopher. “Sophocles’ Oedipus Tyrannos .” Rocco, Christopher. Tragedy and Enlightenment. Los Angeles: Univeristy of California, 1997. 220.
6. Roisman, Hanna M. “Teiresias, the seer of Oedipus the King: Sophocles’ And Seneca’s Versions.” Leeds International Classic Studies (2003): 1-9.

Relevant Questions Oedipus Controversies: Aristotle and Freud

1. How do Aristotle’s and Freud’s interpretations of the Oedipus controversies differ, and what insights do their respective theories offer into the complex dynamics of human behavior and family relationships?
2. In the context of modern psychology and literature, how have contemporary scholars and theorists reexamined the Oedipus controversies, and what new perspectives and interpretations have emerged regarding Oedipus complex and its relevance in understanding human psyche and literature?
3. Can the Oedipus controversies be seen as a timeless theme that transcends historical and cultural boundaries, and how do modern adaptations and interpretations of the Oedipus narrative shed light on evolving societal norms and taboos related to familial and sexual relationships?