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