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"
