Thursday, November 13, 2008

IB second period: "Joining the Conversation" about Oedipus and Tragedy

OEDIPUS: a tragic hero? tragically flawed? or just tragic?

You MUST REFER to specific parts of Aristotle's DEFINITION BELOW when you "JOIN THE CONVERSATION" (that's a hint) and SUPPORT YOUR OWN ARGUMENT.

Extra credit for the strongest argument.
Aristotle (the philosopher who wrote about the beauty of art) believed that Oedipus the King was the prototypical example of a "tragic hero." Read each part of his definition below. Then, decide to what extent you agree with Aristotle's idea that Oedipus is the perfect representative of a tragic hero.

From Aristotle's Poetics:

1. The tragic hero is a character of noble stature and has greatness. The character must occupy a "high" status position but must ALSO embody nobility and virtue as part of his/her innate character.

2. Though the tragic hero is pre-eminently great, he/she is not perfect. Otherwise, the rest of us--mere mortals--would be unable to identify with the tragic hero. We should see in him or her someone who is essentially like us, although perhaps elevated to a higher position in society.

3. The hero's downfall, therefore, is partially her/his own fault, the result of free choice, not of accident or villainy or some overriding, malignant fate. In fact, the tragedy is usually triggered by some error of judgment or some character flaw that contributes to the hero's lack of perfection noted above. This error of judgment or character flaw is known as hamartia and is usually translated as "tragic flaw" (although some scholars argue that this is a mistranslation). Often the character's hamartia involves hubris (which is defined as a sort of arrogant pride or over-confidence). True for Oedipus? Make your claim.

4. The hero's misfortunate is not wholly deserved. The punishment exceeds the crime. True for Oedipus? Make your claim.

5. The fall is not pure loss. There is some increase in awareness, some gain in self-knowledge, some discovery on the part of the tragic hero. True for Oedipus? Make your claim.

6. Though it arouses solemn emotion, tragedy does not leave its audience in a state of depression. Aristotle argues that one function of tragedy is to arouse the "unhealthy" emotions of pity and fear and through a catharsis (which comes from watching the tragic hero's terrible fate) cleanse us of those emotions.True for "Oedipus"? Make your claim.

For extra credit, read all of the following claims about the play "Oedipus." They all connect to one another. Then, "join the conversation."

For Oedipus, there exists his temper, his unrelenting pursuit of the truth, and his suspicion. His temper is exhibited in the argument between Teiresias and himself, where Teiresias states the truth and Oedipus replies, “Do you think you can say such things with impunity?”(p.36) and later calls Teiresias a “shameless and brainless, sightless, senseless sot!” (p.36). His suspicion was also shown in this exchange where he says, “Creon! Was this trick his, then, if not yours?”(p.36). Lastly, his unrelenting pursuit of the truth is demonstrated when he finally believes he is the murderer and Polybus was not his father, and yet he still continues with his search, saying, “I must pursue this trail to the end”(p.55). These characteristics were only fuel to the fire and added to the pride created a blaze that consumed him.Oedipus' tragic flaw (his hamartia) was pride; the Greeks called it hubris. He thought too highly of himself, believed himself to be invincible, and he had the arrogance to keep asking questions when he knew he should have stopped.
--IB paper posted online

Somehow, "hubris" (ungodly pride, arrogance, and so forth) has come to be identified as the usual tragic fault of Oedipus. I cannot understand why. But whenever something bad happens to a basically good person in a tragedy, students are invited to see "hubris." Why can't we just accept that in Sophocles ' world, bad things happen for no reason? Is it because teachers are afraid to let their students in on a dirty little secret: if there are gods, they are capricious and malicious.
--Ed Friedlander, doctor and literary critic


"The flaw, or crack in the character [of Oedipus], is really nothing -- and need be nothing -- but his inherent unwillingness to remain passive in the face of what he conceives to be a challenge to his dignity, his image of his rightful status. Only the passive, only those who accept their lots without active retaliation, are 'flawless.' Most of us are in that category. The terror and the fear that is classically associated with tragedy comes, ultimately, from questioning the unquestioned.
--Arthur Miller, author of "Death of a Salesman"



28 comments:

gina said...

I agree with Aristotle that Oedipus is the perfect example of a tragic hero. The first definition describes Oedipus exactly. The definition says that the character is of high status position, and Oedipus is the king of Thebes. The character has to as well have virtue and nobility. Oedipus shows this in many instances. In the beginning he is trying to save his people from their suffering. He is willing to do anything to help them. He shows that he really cares about them and is not a selfish person. Also, he tries to escape his fate by leaving his mother and father. Oedipus didn't want to leave Corinth but he did it anyway in order to protect them. I also agree with number 3. Oedipus hamartia was that he believed that he could escape his fate. That led to his downfall because by trying to escape his fate he got closer to it. Oedipus was over confident that he had left that horrible fate behind. If he wasn't so confident that he had left his fate behind he would have been careful not to kill anyone. He was at fault for his downfall also because Oedipus went on to search for the truth of his past despite the fact that Jocasta begged him to stop. Oedipus also agrees with number 5. He became aware that his fate was his own fault. It says on pg. 57 " I have condemned myself to this my fate." Therefor, Oedipus gained some self knowledge.

Blanca said...

This is Blanca Hernandez.

1,2,& 3.Aristotle has suggested that Oedipus was sort of arrogant and overconfident (Hubris). I agree with the claim that Oedipus was arrogant at times by being super confident about being able to find the killer of King Laius. Oedipus keeps repeating that he will avenge Laius's death over and over. "Whoever killed King Laius might be the death of me..." (Page 14). "I will hunt the killer down" (Page 17).
This confidence led to his demise when he found out that he was the killer.

4. Aristotle believed that Oedipus's punishment was too harsh. Indeed, I agree with this because Oedipus was simply a victim of his own fate. The prophecy was set before he could even think for himself.

5.Aristotle's way of thinking about the fate of Oedipus is that in the end, he did gain some awareness. Oedipus did learn something from his turmoil. He realized that he was unfair to Creon. "Why should he trust me? I have treated him like a bitter enemy." (Page 58).

nando said...

I have to agree with aristotle and gine when they say that oedipus was a good example of a tragic hero. In both parts of oedipus he is seen as the self sacrificing hero that comes to save the day no matter what the price.This is where i have to disagree with both aristotle and gine when they say that the agree with #3. Oedipus hamartia was shortsightedness but in a very sincere search for the truth.I see very little evidence of oedipus exhibiting hubris. Besides him being a king he does not brag or abuse his powers, butinstead he uses them for good and tries to help the village.It is for that reason that i agreee with #4 because oedipus did not deserve to have his eyes removed and become an outcast.Although in the end the entire ordeal does give him a deeper understanding of his life and his role in the world.

nansi25 said...

This is Nancy Catalan.
& I diagree with gina and fernando with oedpidus (pronounced opedius[haha. Just kidding!]) being portrayed as a tragic hero. I believe he is just a tragic.

1,2,& 3 support my opinion in the fact that it states that the tragic hero is someone of "noble and has greatness" Oedipus isn't someone noble nor great. When teiresias came to tell him that he was the killer he did not want to accept his words and then accused creon in trying to take away his powers. Here oedipus isn't being noble to his friendship with creon. He worries about his powers first rather then a good friendship. In reality, oedipus does not have greatness. It seems that he has greatness because he is the king and all, but in reality that greatness was planted on him by the higher power of the gods. Also, it states that the downfall could not have been caused by "malignant fate", meaning that his failure was caused by his own choices, which is completely faulse here coming from the fact that the prophecy told himn his future and what he was going to to witness and do while he lives. And after this happens, the prophecy states that whoever killed Laius, they should pay for the crime.
Number 4 states that the "punishment exceeds the crime", but regradless, he did kill a person and therefore he should be punished like any other person would if they committed the crime. In the book the gods are the higher power and they rule over everything. It also believed by the people in society, including oedipus, that their word should be follwed. Number 5 states that its not pure loss, but it really is. Because of his crime that he committed, he caused the death of his mother/wife and he was taken away from his children. the people don't exactly learn anything from this. They just see as if they won since they were all saved but they don't see the tragic thats behind this. Last but not least #6 says "Aristotle argues that one function of tragedy is to arouse the "unhealthy" emotions of pity and fear and through a catharsis (which comes from watching the tragic hero's terrible fate) cleanse us of those emotions", but they dont get cleasned. For example the first time they are in fear, but oedipus comes and saves them from a diseases that is spreading. Yet when the situation comes back, they go back to being in fear. If they were really cleansed, they would know better that good will come along.

Alexandra R. Castro said...

Alexandra Castro
I agree with Aristotle's and Fernando's claim that Oedipus is and example of a tragic hero. Aristotle theory about Oedipus being a tragic hero is supported by his characters and actions throughtout the play.
1. Oedipus was of a higher power as he was king of Thebes.
2. Oedipus showed some signs of imperfection as it is earlier revealed that he killed a man and his suspicion lead him to accuse Creon of treachery.
3.Oedipus does exhibit the characteristic of hamartia because his choice in killing Laius is what lead him to his downfall.He lack faith in a higher power, therefore he felt he could control his future.
4. Although Oedipus does commit a crime his punishment he showed grief and guilt for his actions. So much of it that he decided to inflict the greatest pain by poking his eyes out. He didn't deserve such explict pain because his sincerity and guilt was enought to show that he was sorry for his actions.
5. Oedipus did gain some self awareness
6. However the audience it left with not hope in the end of the play.

Alexandra R. Castro said...

because their is no given solution to Oedipus's downfall.

Benjamin Barajas said...

Benjamin Barajas:
I agree with Aristotle's claim that Oedipus is the perfect example of a tragic hero. 1. He occupies a high stature in the story, and in the beggining he does embody virtue and nobility. 2.He is great yet Oedipus is in no way perfect. This human die to Oedipus lets us as "mere mortals" connect with this character that is centuries old. 3. The most horrible thing that happpend to Oedipus was caused by his downfall. He killed his father in a fit of rage.(unknowingly killed his father but,netherless took a life) Also he searches unrelentlessly for the truth even when many tell him to stop looking for it. His need to know will not let him be. 4. The punishment does not exceed the crime here. Oedipus did unknowingly complete his fate, but he had choices in life to make like any other human being. He decided to kill that man on the road, and he also decided to leave his quiet home becasue of the story of his fate. Although what he doesnt want in his life to happen, happens he is hold responsible for his moral actions of taking a life. 5. This is the only rule that isn't appliable to Oedipus, he doesnt have some understanding at the end. He ends up miserable and spreading fear and deppresion to his children. He doesn't tell his children to be careful of their actions, he condems them to misery and pain and tell them "try, try to be more blessed than I". Essentially that's his last word to his children. He also wants to be exiled even without consulting the gods, he takes his exile in his own hands by saying the gods curse him. 6. The audience is left in solemn at the end of this play. However this play arouses more than anything else fear and pity. Pity for Oedipus fate and fear that we too can end up so misfortunate.

Franco said...

Magaly Franco =]

Aristotle, Gina, and Fernando have all suggested that Oedipus is a tragic hero. After reading Aristotle’s definition and Gina’s argument, I also agree with their suggestion. I agree with all of Gina’s points in attempt to link them to Aristotle’s definition, but I must disagree with her explanation of the #3. I believe it was Oedipus’ arrogance, one of the flaws Aristotle lists, that became his downfall, which was why Oedipus believed he had escaped his fate. Oedipus became over-confident when he left his home and saved Thebes because it led him to feel that he could overcome anything and therefore believed his horrible fate couldn’t come true anymore. However, as stated in #2, Oedipus isn’t perfect which makes it easier for the reader to connect with him, which is what a tragic hero should be. As for point #4 in Aristotle’s definition, Oedipus did not deserve his punishment because it was the fate that was predicted for him and no matter how hard he tried to avoid it, it was impossible. Sure it was wrong for him to kill his father and marry his mother, but he did it unintentionally because he didn’t know who those people were. He also only killed his father because he thought he was another man and Laius had provoked it in the first place. So although he should be punished for killing a man, he should not be punished for committing a crime that he was unaware of. I also agree that Oedipus fits #5 of Aristotle’s definition. Oedipus gains knowledge through which he discovers what his life really is. He learns who his real parents are which is a benefit because he can now stop committing the crime of being married to his own mother and not father any more children with her. However, he doesn’t take it that way. After reading “Oedipus the King,” I wasn’t left feeling depressed at all or even scared, but I did pity Oedipus greatly because I don’t feel he deserved his fate.

gina said...

I think Nancy is mistaken for many reasons. The first point Nancy made about Oedipus not being noble is incorrect. He did do noble thing as I already described in my first answer. Nancy's reason for believing that Oedipus is not noble are examples of number 2 and 3 on what is a tragic hero. Oedipus is not perfect and we see his flaws when he accuses Creon of trying to take his power. The fact that he is to blind to see what teiresia is telling him is the truth and instead he blames Creon shows his arrogance and pride. Oedipus can't expect the fact that he could ever do such a thing. Also "It seems that he has greatness because he is the king and all, but in reality that greatness was planted on him by the higher power of the gods" is wrong because Oedipus earned his place as king by solving the riddle and saving the people from Thebes. The gods did not give him power he earned it. As for what Nancy said for number 4, I also disagree with this. How could you not feel sympathy for Oedipus? If he would have known that it was his father and mother he would have never done what he did. He was oblivious to what he was doing. The punishment did not fit the crime. "The fall is not pure loss." This statement is talking about how the tragedy is not a pure loss for the main character. Nancy begins to speak about it being a loss for other characters which is not what I think Aristotle is talking about. I think he says it is not a pure loss because the main character gains an "some increase in awareness, some gain in self-knowledge, some discovery on the part of the tragic hero." This is the case for Oedipus.

Miri said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Miriam Meza said...

This is Miriam Meza.
I agree with Aristotle's view that Oedipus the King was the prototypical example of a "tragic hero because his definitions of a tragic hero is a brief way to describe "Oedipus the King." However, I agree with 1-4 more. Aristotle describes he typical tragic hero as a character with the highest power which in case is true. From the beginning of the story Oedipus is potrayed as a prestigous person with great power. For example: "Oedipus, great king of Thebes!"......"You rule this land.No man disputes your power" (pg.9+10.) As Aristotle continues with his definition, #2 explains how the hero is however imperfect, which leads the audience to feel that Oedipus is human as well.This is potrayed in the story by Oedipus asking for Teiresias."We turn to you-our one defense-ou shield."(pg18.)This helps us relate to Oedipus since just like us, Oedipus is uncapable to manage everything by himself therefore asks for help.As #3 says, Aristotle's definition of a tragic hero has to experience a downfall, which is partially his own fault, the result of free choice, not of accident or villainy or some overriding, malignant fate. Just like in the story, Oedipus' downfall was because of his fate not necessarily him provoking his downfall. In the same way, I agree with #4 since Oedipus was not responsible for his fate which makes his punishment unfair.
However, I do not agree with Aristotles' 5th definition. This is because Oedipus does not gain any knowledge or awarness. The only thing that is benefited by this is the fact the city was saved, but Oedipus himself did not gain anything.
I partially agree with aristotle's 6th definition to a certain extent. I do believe that the tragic hero does not leave the audience in dipression but in pity. However, I do not agree with his definition about leaving the audience in fear. At the end of the novel after Oedipus is exiled from the city and stabs himself in the eye, does creat pity since he did not deserve the sufferage. However, it does not create fear.

nancy said...

I'm going to have to agree with Aristotle when he says that Oedipus is an example of a tragic hero. Oedipus is characterized as one in the play as seen from the fact that he fits many of the characteristics of a tragic hero. For instance, Oedipus is a person of higher position as seen from the fact that he is "Oedipus, Great king of Thebes!" (pg. 9)Not only was he the king Thebes but before that he was also a prince in some other kingdom. Also Oedipus is characterized as being imperfect as seen from the fact that he was destined to commit two immorals acts; kill his father and marry his mother. In addition, to this Oedipus can be seen as a tragic hero because of the fact that it can be said that part of his doom was caused by himself. This is true, since he chose to kill that man that he happened to meet on the road and that suddenly happened to be his father. He had the choice not to kill anyone especially not out of anger and yet he chose to kill off a man that he happened to pass by. If he hadn't done so his father would still be alive. Also Oedipus could have gone on not knowing that he had fulfilled his prophecy but instead he chose to seek revenge for the killer of Laius. He chose to seek out Tiresiaus and in doing so he found out that he had fulfilled his prophecy. Even though all of this is true, in the story Oedipus is still portrayed as not having deserved his punishment. According to him what he experiences are "the worst horrors that mankind can ever know!" (pg. 58) His punishment is seen as being too much because of the fact that it leads to his total destruction. It leads to him taking his own sight and demanding that he be put in exile even though in a way he couldn' control what was occurring. Oedipus becomes so overcome with grief and at the end is left alone to suffer in darkness. His pain is so unbereable to the point where he would rather die or be banished from everything rather than continue on living or leading the life that he is. The text portrays him as not deserving his punishment because of the fact that is portrayed as a kind person. This is seen from the fact that he tries to help out the people in need since he tells them "Tell me. Never doubt that I will help you in every way I can. I am moved and touched to find oyou suppliant here." He is portrayed as kind and undeserving of his fate. I would say that he does gain some self awareness however I agree with Alex when she says that the play does not leave us with any hope. I would say this because it's about an innocent and compassionate person being severely punished . The play ends with a man who has gone mad, made himself blind therefore in darkness, wants to die and is sent to exile ripped away from everything he knew.

hinderedxpresion said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
angelica91 said...

This is Angelica Alcaraz

Gina has suggested that, from Aristotle's claims, Oedipus is the perfect example of a tragic hero, and I agree with her. Aristotle's number 1 and 2 claims are the definition of Oedipus being a tragic hero.

1. In his first claim, Aristotle said that a "tragic hero is a character of noble stature and has greatness." Oedipus is a noble king because he cares about his people like he referred to someone as "poor man"(43). He cares about his people. Aristotle also said "character must occupy a "high" status position but must ALSO embody nobility and virtue." Well, Oedipus is a king, and technically, he is superior than the people. However, Oedipus still shows his nobility when he stated,"for i suffer for them more than for myself." Oedipus is a king, but he still cares about his people, and he still shows his nobility and virtue.

2)Aristotle also claims that "We should see in him or her someone who is essentially like us, although perhaps elevated to a higher position in society." Oedipus is elevated in a higher level in society, but the people still saw him like them because they made king to this complete stranger who saved them from the curse that was upon them. Also, it claims "tragic hero is pre-eminently great, he/she is not perfect." Oedipus is not perfect because he made a huge mistake of killing his father and marrying his mother. However, he didn't know he was doing it.

Oedipus is defined to be a tragic hero from Aristotle's claims.

DadaisGalletas said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Miri said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Miri said...

Hi! I'm Miriam Orrego:
I agree with Alex’s and Aristotle’s statements about how Oedipus is being portrayed in the play. Throughout the play I was led to have sympathy for Oedipus. Aristotle has a great way of presenting great statements characterizing this theme of a tragic hero.
Although I agree with Aristotle up to a point, I cannot accept his overall conclusions that Oedipus shows “nobility and virtue” from statement 1. He argues with Teiresias about the truth of the killing of Lauis.(pg’s 20-25) Oedipus, in some points of the play became arrogant and somewhat fearful of what the truth really led to.
I could see a connection between statements 2, 4, & 5. Through these statements I can relate to Oedipus’ life events. He did commit crimes, but he held guilt and desperation. Nobody is perfect; shameful that Oedipus went through many obstacles to go against destiny. “Pity me, pity me! Where upon this earth am I to go in my pain?” (pg. 55) His fear began to show, but only by the end of the play.
3 & 6 show the side of the tragedy and what the author’s portrayal is. The audience, by the events and description of what Oedipus is going through, see that sometimes things do not always come out how we plan and need to learn to accept them the way they are. Thus leaving us with “"unhealthy" emotions of pity and fear” that Aristotle has stated. There are many explanations that could lead to the truth, but only fate is the true explanation to the life of Oedipus not any other person’s words. Jocasta tried to help him, there was only sympathy but that didn’t stop the destiny of Oedipus to be fulfilled. (pg. 34)
Overall, Aristotle’s statements have a great connection with Oedipus’ character. His “tragic hero” portrayal envisions the audience with the knowledge that awareness of one’s flaws can lead to just a victim of fate.

MartinA. said...

I agree with Sophocles when he suggests that Oedipus is a tragic hero. Sophocles first three definitions sum up how Oedipus is led to be a tragic character.

Definition #1: Sophocles writing in the story “We envied him, loved him, and admired him,” shows how Oedipus is seen as a great King who everyone respects (pg 62) Also, Oedipus was determined to solve the problem of the plague in the beginning of the story. Oedipus would also send a messenger to Apollo for help concerning the situation.
Definition #2: During his lifetime, Oedipus would live without knowing the truth behind his fate. Oeidipus would kill his father and sleep with his mother as a result of the prophecy. He made mistakes that were irreversible, which would contribute to his fate as a result of his ignorance.
Definition #3: The tragic flaw that Oedipus had was the constant rejection of coming into contact with the prophecy by trying to escape from it. He would neglect any advice that was given to him by Teiresias and messengers. "Truth lives in other men but not in you. For you, in ear, in mind, in eye, in everything are blind,"(pg. 22) which shows how Oedipus was mistakenly wrong in saying that Teiresias's facts were false as a result of his distorted identity. This led to Oedipus feeling even more guilt after he discovered the truth of his wrongs.

Jessi-poo<3 said...

Aristotle has suggested that Oedipus is the perfect example of a "tragic hero" and I completely agree. The way that Aristotle describes a tragic hero is as if he is personifying Oedipus.

It is quite obvious that numbers 1,2 & 3 directly relate to Oedipus. he rose to greatness by defeating the Sphinx. He embodies nobility and virtue in his quest to find the killer of King Laias in order to lift a plague from Thebes. 2&3 go together because in showing that Oedipus is the killer we see that he is not perfect. We also know from the previous story that Oedipus had free will when coming across the caravan. He had no good reason to kill the men and this, in the end, became his downfall.

We can say that number 4 is true because, although Oedipus did have free will, the events that occured after he found out he was the killer were far more horrendous than his crime. He lost his wife, children, ability to see, and, in addition, he lost his kingship and was banned from Thebes.

Although Oedipus ultimately suffered from the revelation of his secret, he left Thebes with the knowledge that he was leaving as a hero, having lifted the curse off the kingdom as described in number 5.

In the end, Sophocles leaves the audience with the feeling of relief that few lives were lost for the lives of many.

Jessi-poo<3 said...

Jessica Villarreal

loca42009 said...

I am of two minds about Aristotle's belief that Oedipus the King was the prototypical example of a "tragic hero." On the one hand, I agree that part's 1, 2 and 4 do seem reasonable in Oedipus case. On the other hand, I'm not sure if 3 and 5 are true.

1] I agree with this section. As
Gina mentioned, Oedipus occupied a "high" status position as a king in his city.

2] I agree with this section because Oedipus shows humility and care for the people in his city when they came to ask for his hel(p9).

3] I'm uneasy about thia part. Even though Oedipus was very aggressive in killing the people(and the king), how was he suppose to be careful in killing anyone when he thought that his parents were back in the other town? His fate was to kill his father. Since he couldn't escape it, he had no free choice. Every choice he made was part of fate. Which ever path he chose was going to lead him to the same place. It's just like a labyrinth: there's only one way out.

4] I agree with Blanca and Aristotle that Oedipus's punishment was too harsh. Why should he be punished for something he couldn't stop due to this fate.

5] There was some realization and from Oedipus. He knew that he had to be exiled and demanded himself to be in order to set the curse free upon the city.

loca42009 said...

Oh and this is Alicia Garcia

Sternuens said...

This is Diana Arechar
Ben Barajas has suggested that Oedipus is a tragic hero and while I agree with part of his argument, I cannot wholly agree with his conclusion. Aristotle’s claim that Oedipus is of “noble stature and had greatness” is true, as Ben stated, because he has always been a good king and the people praise him for it. Oedipus is also in no way perfect; even the priest says so but his people turn to him because they know he is a good person and will help them. I also agree the part of Oedipus’ downfall had to do with a “malignant fate” because in no way had he wanted things to turn out the way they did. All his actions were done to avoid his fate yet fate led him right back to that road of doom. I also believe that Oedipus did not deserve what happened to him because he was a good enough person to try and avoid that fate and in the end his worst fears came true. He accepted his punishment and further punished himself because he hated what he had done. I agree with Ben in the fact that Oedipus doesn’t come to a higher understanding at the end. Oedipus is left miserable and only learns a destructive truth. Oedipus cannot be considered a tragic hero, by Aristotle’s standards, because the tragedy does leave us in a state of hopelessness. There is no happy ending for Oedipus and we stay with the feeling of pity for the Oedipus’ doom and fear that we also cannot escape destiny. Ultimately, this idea of not being able to escape fate matters to anyone who came to the same conclusion from Oedipus’ situation.

[freebooter]o_0 said...

Although I agree with Aristotle up to a point, I cannot accept his conclusions about the downfall of the character. For the most part, this is what everyone has been arguing so far; What was Oedipus real downfall?

Truth be told, I believe his own actions were out of his reach, meaning a blame fate for his downfall. Everything he did or said had been predertermined. Tiresias further supports my argument by implicitly revealing Oedipus fate beyond the point where Oedipus finds out the truth. He reveals his future blindness and unsurprinsingly enough, Oedipus does in fact turn blind. This proves that even after knowing his destiny, no matter how much he tried to fool fate, everything still came true. Same goes for the previous prophecy of Oedipus killing his father and marrying his mother.Hence, I disagree with Aristotle's third point that its the hero's tagedy is his own fault.

However for the most part, Oedipus does embody the mojority of Aritotle's points or characteristics about the tragic hero. Of course, Oedipus embodies greatness since he's a king, is not perfect since he's a human, and his misfortune is not deserved, for he was cursed at birth when he was literally free from sin. Yet, there's another point in which I disagree with gina and therefore Aristotle, too.
I really DO NOT believe Oedipus gained some knowledge as it said in Aristotles 5th point. He didnt come to a realization, for if he had, he would have accepted the fact that his fate was inevitable and ultimately, wouldnt have stab his eyes. In my opinion, the reasonable thing for him to have done was to just go into exile, or at least let the law decide for him since this is what was accustomed during this time.

One more point I want to make. Correct my if Im wrong, and most likely I will be since this Aristotle we are talkin about, but isn't he contradicting himself? His third point says that it's the characters force and not some MALIGNANT FATE, yet in his 6th point, he is more or less implying that the character does have a terrible fate. So I dont know, I might be be interpreting it wrong.

This is Ana by the way.

Stephy said...

Hi, this is Stephanie Hernandez.

I agree with Aristotle's defenition of Oedipus being a tragic hero. The reason why is because like he says in number one, Oedipus is a noble character. Towards the beginning of the play in page 9 when he says "Tell me. Never doubt that I will help you in every way I can" as a reply to the Priest and the Chorus when they come to ask for his help he shows the good intention he has, because he has a desire to help his people of a curse that has been placed on them. With this, Oedipus shows us his caring character. I also agree with what Aristotle says for number 2 because Oedipus also shows us that he's human, by allowing us to see his flaws. We see one his mistakes when he accuses Teiresias of a liar when Teiresias accuses Oedipus to be the man who has caused the curse. We see why he does this, although he's wrong, because he didn't know that he was truly the man who married and had children with his own mother. In point number three that Aristotle talks about, it was partially Oedipus' fault that he married his mother and had children with her because he was the one who killed the king, and later became king himself. If he was informed that he was going to kill his father in the future, he shouldn't have killed any men at all, in order to prevent the oracle from happening.As Aristotle points out in number 4, I also agree that Oedipus punishment exceeds the crime mostly because it wasn't completly Oedipus' fault. Therefore, we feel sympathy towards Oedipus when he shows his true regret commiting such actions. As it says in number 5 Oedipus does gain self-knowledge, and he does follow his wishes said towards the beginning of the play, for the person who is the cause of the curse to be killed and be put in exile, and he follows his word, even though he was that man. I also agree with number six because Oedipus ends the curse that had everybody depressed, and he puts an end to everybody's suffering. Although the situation in which he puts himself in exile is tragic, in a way cleans up the mess he unknowingly created by leaving everybody and helping his people by doing so, like he promised in the beginning of the play.

anali91 said...

This is Anali Negrete

Although I agree with Aristotle up to a point, I cannot accept his overall conclusion that Oedipus is a tragic hero. I agree with Alicia and Diana that Oedipus has a “high status” and that he’s humble. Oedipus does care for his people; he listens to their needs and tries to help them in any way he can. It is also true that he is not in any way perfect. However, I disagree with Aristotle when he says that a hero’s downfall is their fault to their own choices. He suggests that we have free will; thus if anything goes terribly wrong, then it’s our fault. I agree with Alicia that all of Oedipus’ actions would lead him to the same place. His life was predestined, and there was no way out of it. Fate would hunt him down no matter how much he would try to avoid it. Oedipus was punished for what he had done, yet his punishment was unjust since it was fate that led him to where he is now. He was punished for something he didn’t want to do. Oedipus became aware of this painful truth. He realized that he couldn’t escape it even though he had tried so hard. When he learned the truth, Oedipus knew the consequences and accepted them. I agree with Diana that Oedipus cannot be considered a tragic hero because at the end we are left in a state of hopelessness. The audience is led to feel pity towards Oedipus. If Oedipus couldn’t escape his destiny, then we can’t either. Our life is predestined when we first come to this world; there is no escape from that horrible and painful fate of ours because even if we try to run away from it, it will eventually catch up with us.

Ms. Levine said...

Some very, very strong arguments here! Hard to determine "strongest" arguments when all your writings are in such good company. And some extra credit for Ben and Nancy M. for impassioned arguments with precise words, and for textual evidence.

Ms. Levine said...

And extra credit for Gina, for coming around with second strong argument to complement her first.