Oedipus The King Research Paper
Liu 1
Jacqueline Liu
Professor Grosshans
Engl 120-03 Spring
26 April 2012
Oedipus: The King of Guilt
It’s amazing how guilt, a simple human emotion, can be the driving force of all human conflict. But what is even more impressive is how far we will go to protect ourselves from the pain associated with that guilt. The number one defense mechanism in this kind of situation is denial and by denying responsibility for our actions we in turn rid ourselves of guilt. We don’t like to feel as though we have done something wrong because we fear the consequences. We don’t like to admit our guilt either because when we feel guilty we somehow find a way to be punished for it either consciously or subconsciously. Our self assigned moral responsibility …show more content…
is what causes this, it is our innate reaction to warrant a response for a morally significant action whether it be good or bad. It is this same sense of moral responsibility that sets Sophocles’
Oedipus the King into motion, ultimately leading up to Oedipus’ self punishment and undeniable guilt.
In the article “
The Guilt of Oedipus
”, author P. H. Vellacott successfully uses examples from the play to support his explanation of Oedipus’ guilt in a complex yet coherent way.
Vellacott begins with a summary of the story, as it was, before the writing of the play, starting with the Delphic oracle given to Laius and up until the death of Jocasta and the blinding of
Liu 2
Oedipus. Moving on to the actual writing of the play, Vellacott mentions that Sophocles must have searched for some kind of sin or fault in Oedipus’ character that would justify the cruelty of the Gods or of Fate, reminding the audience that there is no true tragedy without sin. He proposes that Sophocles may have used hybris to condone his downfall, but at the same time he believes that this explanation is beneath Sophocles and instead offers a logical, albeit more unorthodox, answer. His own explanation is that Sophocles wrote the play based on the popular version of the story, portraying the innocent Oedipus as a tragedy of Fate, while simultaneously weaving in key components that would portray his own deeper understanding of the story and Oedipus’ guilt.
Vellacott singles out the event at the banquet, in which the drunkard tells Oedipus that Polybus is not his father, as an example that if rationally examined would hint at the true story of Oedipus the King. After this point, Vellacott’s article is simply to support his claim about the guilt of Oedipus. Vellacott believes that the question of Oedipus’ parentage and prophecy are so closely and obviously connected that he does not believe that
Sophocles could even harbor the idea that Oedipus would fail to connect the two together.
Vellacott also logically explains that upon leaving the Delphic oracle Oedipus would have made himself two unbreakable rules. The first, to never kill an older man and the second, to never marry an older woman, both of which he ultimately ignores when he murdered Lauis and married Jocasta. Vellacott introduces his last main point when Oedipus enters Thebes. He points out that within an hour of arriving Oedipus would have realized that he had killed Laius because Greeks talk about everything. Vellacott’s article clearly highlights several key events that contribute to the forthcoming guilt of Oedipus.
Looking at the evidence provided in Vellacott’s work as well as my own reflections …show more content…
I
Liu 3
believe that Oedipus is irrefutably guilty, not because of the heinous crimes of patricide and incest he committed, but because of his fulfilling of a prophecy that could have been stopped if not for his own unconscious denial of reality.
This rejection of reality is seen in almost all of the major points brought up in Vellacott’s article. This is what leads me to believe that Oedipus’ mind was aware of what was happening and in an attempt to protect himself from the guilt, wraps itself up in a cloak of oblivion to drown out the truth.
The major beginning of this oblivion is introduced when Oedipus first mentions the prophecy he received from the oracle of Delphi to Jocasta. As he tells his tale we can see that logically his actions make no sense. When the prophecy says that he will kill his father and lay with his mother he tells Jocasta that he “fled to somewhere where I should not see fulfilled the infamies told in that dreadful oracle”(796-798). Out of context this reaction is quite reasonable, but we must remember that the reason Oedipus goes to Delphi in the first place is because he is led to doubt that that Polybus is his father. So when the oracle warns him of the prophecy his reaction is not a logical one because he does not truly know who his father is. It is this doubt of his parentage that escapes the mind of Oedipus and causes him to react in an
illogical manner that leads him to the crossroads.
The scene at the crossroads is where the guilt of Oedipus really begins to formulate. This is not because Oedipus murdered Laius but it is because he outwardly ignores the divine warning therefore creating a sin. Even after Oedipus thinks that he was the one who killed Laius he is still ignorant of the fact that he is the son of Laius. But the most astounding part of this incident is the fact that he had told no one of his travels before that moment. This omission of the crossroads leads me to believe that Oedipus had a feeling of guilt and denied that the event
Liu 4
even happened. By looking at the evidence, the single survivor and the exact time and place of the attack, we can see the obvious connection between Oedipus and Laius’ death.
The most unbelievable situation of Oedipus’ story in my opinion is that of Oedipus’ arrival at Thebes. Like Vellacott, I too understand the highly improbable outcome in which
Oedipus would not have heard about Laius within an hour of being in Thebes. Upon entering
Thebes how could Oedipus not realize that he was Laius’ killer? And logically wouldn’t there be a possibility that Laius was in fact Oedipus’ father and the older queen his mother? Yet after all of these “coincidences” Oedipus still does not realize the undeniable connection between all of them. It is even more suspect because Oedipus is a solver of riddles and yet this one evades him for years.
The coincidences that are seen in the play are too immense to ignore. Looking at the scene with Teiresias is one of the best examples of how delusional Oedipus has become. In perhaps one of Teiresias’ most revealing passages he taunts Oedipus for his blindness:
I tell, you, king, this man, this murderer
(whom you have long declared you are in search of, indicting him in threatening proclamation as murderer of Laius) -- he is here...
He shall be proved father and brother both to his own children in his house; to her
Liu 5
that gave him birth, a son and husband both; a fellow sower in his father’s bed with that same father that he murdered.
Go within, reckon that out, and if you find me mistaken, say I have no skill in prophecy.
(30)
This is a perfect instance in which the coincidences are all being listed out in speech, by a prophet no less, and still Oedipus is unaware of the implication it has towards himself.
The last and most substantial piece of evidence that is overlooked again and again is that of Oedipus’ name and ankles. It’s hard to believe that no one would have noticed the similarities in age and physical appearance in Oedipus. His name meaning “swollen-foot”, would have given itself away. On top of that his ankles bore the same physical mark as that of
Jocastas son. It is instances like these that make me wonder whether or not Oedipus was deliberately trying to self sabotage himself.
The guilt of Oedipus is hidden behind layers of denial and oblivion. I believe that
Oedipus’ moral responsibility to find Laius’ killer directly correlates to the human need to be punished when in a state of guilt. This is proved again and again when Oedipus does not connect the obvious.
Oedipus the King is not a tragic story of fate, it is a journey into the mind of a guilty subconscious in its search for punishment. And to think, if only he had stayed in
Corinth.
Liu 6
Works Cited
Oedipus The King
. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press, 2010.
Vellacott, P. H.. "The Guilt of Oedipus."
JSTOR
. Cambridge University Press,
1964. Web. 26 Apr 2012. <
http://www.jstor.org/stable/642236>.
Jacqueline Liu
Professor Grosshans
Engl 120-03 Spring
26 April 2012
Oedipus: The King of Guilt
It’s amazing how guilt, a simple human emotion, can be the driving force of all human conflict. But what is even more impressive is how far we will go to protect ourselves from the pain associated with that guilt. The number one defense mechanism in this kind of situation is denial and by denying responsibility for our actions we in turn rid ourselves of guilt. We don’t like to feel as though we have done something wrong because we fear the consequences. We don’t like to admit our guilt either because when we feel guilty we somehow find a way to be punished for it either consciously or subconsciously. Our self assigned moral responsibility …show more content…
is what causes this, it is our innate reaction to warrant a response for a morally significant action whether it be good or bad. It is this same sense of moral responsibility that sets Sophocles’
Oedipus the King into motion, ultimately leading up to Oedipus’ self punishment and undeniable guilt.
In the article “
The Guilt of Oedipus
”, author P. H. Vellacott successfully uses examples from the play to support his explanation of Oedipus’ guilt in a complex yet coherent way.
Vellacott begins with a summary of the story, as it was, before the writing of the play, starting with the Delphic oracle given to Laius and up until the death of Jocasta and the blinding of
Liu 2
Oedipus. Moving on to the actual writing of the play, Vellacott mentions that Sophocles must have searched for some kind of sin or fault in Oedipus’ character that would justify the cruelty of the Gods or of Fate, reminding the audience that there is no true tragedy without sin. He proposes that Sophocles may have used hybris to condone his downfall, but at the same time he believes that this explanation is beneath Sophocles and instead offers a logical, albeit more unorthodox, answer. His own explanation is that Sophocles wrote the play based on the popular version of the story, portraying the innocent Oedipus as a tragedy of Fate, while simultaneously weaving in key components that would portray his own deeper understanding of the story and Oedipus’ guilt.
Vellacott singles out the event at the banquet, in which the drunkard tells Oedipus that Polybus is not his father, as an example that if rationally examined would hint at the true story of Oedipus the King. After this point, Vellacott’s article is simply to support his claim about the guilt of Oedipus. Vellacott believes that the question of Oedipus’ parentage and prophecy are so closely and obviously connected that he does not believe that
Sophocles could even harbor the idea that Oedipus would fail to connect the two together.
Vellacott also logically explains that upon leaving the Delphic oracle Oedipus would have made himself two unbreakable rules. The first, to never kill an older man and the second, to never marry an older woman, both of which he ultimately ignores when he murdered Lauis and married Jocasta. Vellacott introduces his last main point when Oedipus enters Thebes. He points out that within an hour of arriving Oedipus would have realized that he had killed Laius because Greeks talk about everything. Vellacott’s article clearly highlights several key events that contribute to the forthcoming guilt of Oedipus.
Looking at the evidence provided in Vellacott’s work as well as my own reflections …show more content…
I
Liu 3
believe that Oedipus is irrefutably guilty, not because of the heinous crimes of patricide and incest he committed, but because of his fulfilling of a prophecy that could have been stopped if not for his own unconscious denial of reality.
This rejection of reality is seen in almost all of the major points brought up in Vellacott’s article. This is what leads me to believe that Oedipus’ mind was aware of what was happening and in an attempt to protect himself from the guilt, wraps itself up in a cloak of oblivion to drown out the truth.
The major beginning of this oblivion is introduced when Oedipus first mentions the prophecy he received from the oracle of Delphi to Jocasta. As he tells his tale we can see that logically his actions make no sense. When the prophecy says that he will kill his father and lay with his mother he tells Jocasta that he “fled to somewhere where I should not see fulfilled the infamies told in that dreadful oracle”(796-798). Out of context this reaction is quite reasonable, but we must remember that the reason Oedipus goes to Delphi in the first place is because he is led to doubt that that Polybus is his father. So when the oracle warns him of the prophecy his reaction is not a logical one because he does not truly know who his father is. It is this doubt of his parentage that escapes the mind of Oedipus and causes him to react in an
illogical manner that leads him to the crossroads.
The scene at the crossroads is where the guilt of Oedipus really begins to formulate. This is not because Oedipus murdered Laius but it is because he outwardly ignores the divine warning therefore creating a sin. Even after Oedipus thinks that he was the one who killed Laius he is still ignorant of the fact that he is the son of Laius. But the most astounding part of this incident is the fact that he had told no one of his travels before that moment. This omission of the crossroads leads me to believe that Oedipus had a feeling of guilt and denied that the event
Liu 4
even happened. By looking at the evidence, the single survivor and the exact time and place of the attack, we can see the obvious connection between Oedipus and Laius’ death.
The most unbelievable situation of Oedipus’ story in my opinion is that of Oedipus’ arrival at Thebes. Like Vellacott, I too understand the highly improbable outcome in which
Oedipus would not have heard about Laius within an hour of being in Thebes. Upon entering
Thebes how could Oedipus not realize that he was Laius’ killer? And logically wouldn’t there be a possibility that Laius was in fact Oedipus’ father and the older queen his mother? Yet after all of these “coincidences” Oedipus still does not realize the undeniable connection between all of them. It is even more suspect because Oedipus is a solver of riddles and yet this one evades him for years.
The coincidences that are seen in the play are too immense to ignore. Looking at the scene with Teiresias is one of the best examples of how delusional Oedipus has become. In perhaps one of Teiresias’ most revealing passages he taunts Oedipus for his blindness:
I tell, you, king, this man, this murderer
(whom you have long declared you are in search of, indicting him in threatening proclamation as murderer of Laius) -- he is here...
He shall be proved father and brother both to his own children in his house; to her
Liu 5
that gave him birth, a son and husband both; a fellow sower in his father’s bed with that same father that he murdered.
Go within, reckon that out, and if you find me mistaken, say I have no skill in prophecy.
(30)
This is a perfect instance in which the coincidences are all being listed out in speech, by a prophet no less, and still Oedipus is unaware of the implication it has towards himself.
The last and most substantial piece of evidence that is overlooked again and again is that of Oedipus’ name and ankles. It’s hard to believe that no one would have noticed the similarities in age and physical appearance in Oedipus. His name meaning “swollen-foot”, would have given itself away. On top of that his ankles bore the same physical mark as that of
Jocastas son. It is instances like these that make me wonder whether or not Oedipus was deliberately trying to self sabotage himself.
The guilt of Oedipus is hidden behind layers of denial and oblivion. I believe that
Oedipus’ moral responsibility to find Laius’ killer directly correlates to the human need to be punished when in a state of guilt. This is proved again and again when Oedipus does not connect the obvious.
Oedipus the King is not a tragic story of fate, it is a journey into the mind of a guilty subconscious in its search for punishment. And to think, if only he had stayed in
Corinth.
Liu 6
Works Cited
Oedipus The King
. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press, 2010.
Vellacott, P. H.. "The Guilt of Oedipus."
JSTOR
. Cambridge University Press,
1964. Web. 26 Apr 2012. <
http://www.jstor.org/stable/642236>.