Oedipus the King

The ancient Greek thinker Aristotle once identified the crucial components of the disasters that his culture is so famous for. These active ingredients include a character with a deadly defect, the awareness of the fault for a particular problem and the final unexpected turnaround of fortune. For many catastrophes, the fatal flaw is shown as extreme pride, which normally works as the driving force of the play’s action.

It prevails, even advantageous, to have pride in oneself, however when it becomes expressed as conceit or in defiance of one’s fate, it is considered excessive and typically leads guys to engage in activities that will cause their downfall. Aristotle (1998) mentioned “the awful hero falls into bad fortune because of some flaw in his character of the kind discovered in men of high track record and good luck such as Oedipus.” This mindset, frequently found in guys of high station is not specifically determined as pride in the case of Oedipus and, undoubtedly, various readings can place Oedipus’ great defect in a number of areas.

It seems as if Sophocles planned to stress the more typical analysis of Oedipus’ defect being extreme pride, however other analyses, such as Pier Paolo Pasolini’s 1967 film Oedipus Rex, present other possibilities as the main character is brought through the 3 main aspects of catastrophe. In both the play and the film, Oedipus is quickly demonstrated to have a fatal defect. In the play, the action opens as Oedipus is approached by plague-stricken masses asking assistance from him as king.

He responds to their appeals saying, “What indicates this reek of incense everywhere,/ From others, and am hither come, myself,/ I Oedipus, your world-renowned king” (4-8). In this statement, Oedipus’ pride in his social position is clear. In the film, however, he is viewed as rather insecure, even as a child when he cheats at a game, and then as a haunted guy with a burning secret burning his dreams, both showing him to be a guy of deep passions. Throughout the rest of the action in the play, Oedipus’ character clearly shows excessive pride in his capability to require things his way.

When Oedipus found out of the forecast that he was destined eliminate his daddy and wed his mom, he had plenty of self-pride to defy the fates and leave Corinth. The movie illustrates this as a heart-wrenching choice to never go near his moms and dads again in order to save them followed by a time of desperate roaming through barren wastelands. While both variations indicate extreme passion involved in the killing of Laius and the claiming of Jocasta, the Oedipus in the play welcomes his topics with practically concealed disdain and the Oedipus of the film greets them with sorrow and deeply shared issue.

While Sophocles sets his character as much as fight pride, Pasolini prepares him to come face to face with the repercussions of enthusiasm. It is simple to see the paradox in both play and movie that if Oedipus had actually not been so determined to leave and prevent the prediction, he would have not unsuspectingly satisfied it. This is foreshadowed by Creon in the play right before the reality of the story is recognized. Creon informs Oedipus, “You are obstinate–/ undoubtedly dissatisfied to yield,/ and when you lose your mood, you go too far. However guys like that discover it most difficult/ to tolerate themselves” (814-819). In this one brief statement, Jocasta’s bro summarize the entire catastrophe. He indicates Oedipus’ stubbornness and pride in hesitating to think about the possibility that he may be the killer he seeks. As an outcome of his own impatience and driving desire to bring honor and more pride to his name, Oedipus becomes excessive in his proclamations regarding intentions and penalties to be handed down and after that all of a sudden recognizes that he can not escape the horror of his crimes.

This horror is shown in the movie to terrific result as the baffled Oedipus gradually ends up being overwhelmed with the possibilities, lastly screaming out his confession in a now-customary burst of enthusiasm. By the end of the story, Oedipus has come to recognize that everything he has done has actually just served to bring him closer to his evil fate. In the procedure of trying to prevent fate, he has devoted a few of the greatest sins imaginable to him– defiled his mom’s bed, killed his father and spawned monstrous children born of incest.

Rather than deal with the fact and not able to take the serious wound to his pride, Oedipus stabbed out his eyes with broaches and ignored Thebes forever, therefore sealing his doom through further prideful actions. The sudden turnaround of fortune has Oedipus leaving Thebes a blind, homeless beggar rather than the reputable king he ought to have been based upon his more honorable qualities. While this is a surprise, it is nevertheless a rational possible conclusion to the occasions that have occurred.

This principle is brought out to greater degree in the film through the modification in setting. Pasolini starts and ends the movie in a contemporary setting to when the movie was made. While the play recommends that Oedipus went wandering into the desert a self-blinded beggar guy, the movie indicates that he has been roaming a tortured person for a lot longer than a regular life-span. Thus, the elements of traditional tragedy are brought throughout both play and movie to a little different analyses.

In both, a deadly defect within the character of Oedipus drives his actions that eventually seal his own doom. Viewed as it is throughout the numerous aspects of the traditional tragedian format of very first showing a worthy particular to awful percentages, then ending up being conscious of it and after that suffering as an outcome of it, it can not be missed out on that Sophocles was trying to show to his audience the risks of an absence of humbleness and good sense when he highlighted Oedipus’ extreme pride.

Pasolini appears to have been more thinking about cautioning his audiences about the sins of excessive enthusiasm. This is, in some sense, what Aristotle was attempting to interact regarding the function of catastrophe, which he describes as “an imitation of an action that is major, complete, and of a certain magnitude; in language decorated with each kind of creative accessory, the a number of kinds being found in different parts of the play … through pity and fear effecting the appropriate purgation of these emotions” (Aristotle pointed out in Friedlander, 2005).

By highlighting the numerous things that can go wrong when one believes they have no flaws, Sophocles and Pasolini intended to motivate a more detailed connection with reality as a method of preventing Oedipus’ fate. Works Cited “Aristotle.” Critica Hyperlinks. (1998 ). The University of Hawaii. May 21, 2007 Pasolini, Pier Paolo (Dir. ). Edipo Re. Perf. Silvana Mangano, Franco Citti, Carmelo Bene, Julian Beck & & Ninetto Davoli. Arco Films, 1967. Sophocles. Antigone, Oedipus the King, Electra. Oxford World’s Classics. Ed. Edith Hall. Oxford University Press, 1998.

You Might Also Like