Dramatic Irony in Sophocle's Oedipus Rex - Essay Example

The Dramatic Irony in Sophocles’s Oedipus Rex Introduction Oedipus Rex thrives in irony. The defeat of Oedipus, primarily, will encourage him to persistently determine the truth so as to unearth the very source of the problems of Thebes. Dramatic irony, in particular, was employed in the story as a fundamental instrument to build the tempo of the play. In a dramatic irony, audiences are engaged in the progress of the story, in which the actors are unaware of it (Winnington-Ingram 1980). In this way spectators are placed in a prime position, as they are more knowledgeable of the plot than the characters themselves. Sophocles’s dramatic irony is shown in Oedipus’s emotions, building up tension and prefiguring the play’s climax. This paper discusses the use of irony in this play and determines exactly what types of irony he employs and the purpose and effect of his usage. Sophocles’s Dramatic Irony The dramatic irony in Oedipus Rex usually exists in lengthy dialogues. Oedipus always witnesses and views occurrences wrongly, and usually refutes that he has, actually, murdered his own father so that he can be wedded to his mother. This issue is initially evident when he staged the murder of the person who took the life of Laios. He paradoxically labels that person a malevolent killer. According to Bloom (2007), as Oedipus became a Thebes’s citizen following the assassination, he thinks that even though he actually murdered someone, he is excluded as a possible accomplice to Laios’s murder. Thinking that his audience is knowledgeable of the play’s climax, Sophocles uses that forethought to build different scenarios where in dramatic, as well as verbal, irony serves major purposes. Nevertheless, mentioning each and every irony in the play would be quite tedious, yet exciting. However, due to the vast abundance of irony in the play this paper only discusses the most noticeable among these ironies. Sophocles, by means of irony, successfully evades the humdrum method of narration; hence, even though the spectators are aware of the outcome of the play they are still excited to know its ironies. When Oedipus, for instance, declares his fury over the killer of King Laius in the play’s preface (Hobson 1993, 725): So will I fight on the gods’ side, And on the side of the slain man! But my curse be on the one who did this, whether he is alone Or conceals his share in it with others. Let him be free of no misery if he share my house Or sit at my hearth and I have knowledge of it. On myself may it fall, as I have called it down! When the king declares these angry words he has unknowingly proclaimed his own sins, and to the elation of the people presaged future occurrences. This declaration is a typical illustration of verbal irony. In the above passage, Oedipus is actually denouncing himself, not some murderer as the speech is obviously referring to. Another case in point is his address when he responds to the crowd: “… Because of all these things I will fight for him as I would my own murdered father (Bloom 2007, 23).” The irony rests in this simple declaration, for Oedipus’s father is the assassinated King Laius himself. Sophocles does not limit the type of irony to the verbal form; he broadens the type of irony in a dramatic form as well (Hobson 1993). As stated by Bentley (1970), the whole story may be assumed to be an illustration of this since Oedipus is oblivious of his destiny, although the spectators are highly cognizant that the King will eventually become a pauper. The King is actually aware of the predictions but he is not aware that these prophecies are already happening. As proclaimed by Oedipus, he has effectively showed that the predictions are incorrect, yet the spectators are aware that this is not true. The predictions have become a major element of Oedipus’s existence but he remains unaware of it. In his address to the Thebes’s public he avows that he will begin anew and will improve the standard of their living. This creates excitement in the audience as they speculate the outcome of Oedipus’s actions: “For whoever killed Laius might decide to raise his hands against me so acting on behalf of Liaus I benefit myself too” (Bentley 1970, 84). This statement builds up excitement because the audiences are aware that Oedipus will meet his sudden demise because he is the true murderer. This allows the spectator to speculate, according to Bloom (2007), as to what would be the outcome if the king realizes that the true murderer of Liaus is he. To disclose the assassination in this portion of the story is a major technique of building excitement among the audiences. Another feature of dramatic irony employed for the buildup of the story is the spectators having some sense of sympathy or pity for Oedipus. The spectators are aware of the star-crossed life of Oedipus and how to a certain extent he is responsible for his own desolation and misery. This sympathy the spectators eventually feel adds heavily to the character traits of Oedipus. The exploitation of dramatic irony creates hopes and expectations in the audience. When Oedipus proclaims, “I am lost, accursed, and hated by Gods. Beyond all other men, (Fitzgerald 2002, 104)” the spectators becomes pitiful of him. As repeatedly shown, dramatic irony presages the possible end of Oedipus’s life. Predictions are fundamental ingredients for playwrights, and create facet of excitement and mystery that may not appear likely otherwise. When Tireias tells Oedipus, for example, “without knowing it you are the enemy of your own flesh and blood… This doubled aged curse shall one day drive you from this land (MacGregor & Knox 1994, 28).” This informs the audience of the result of the King’s actions and decisions, and how he may be banished from his homeland. The audience, yet again, is aware of these predictions and the doom they carry for Oedipus. He eventually tells Tiresias, “Save yourself and the city, save me, from all the infections caused by the dead man. We are in your hands” (MacGregor & Knox 1994, 19). This statement envisages and builds excitement because the audience does not know what Tiresias will reply to the King’s statement (Bentley 1970). This is apparently dramatic irony since the spectators are aware that Tiresias has no ability to rescue the King from his own doom because it is only Oedipus that has to search for and recognize the truth. Hence, according to Fitzgerald (2002), a speck of suspense emerges as to what Tiresias will say in response to Oedipus and what the king will decide to do when he is informed of the truth. Ultimately, the story of Oedipus is tragic because it portrays the personality and traits of a tragic protagonist and how fate tricks him to believe something that is not. The dramatic irony of Sophocles is a primary contribution to the play’s strength; the entire story is rooted in the premise of dramatic irony. The fate of Oedipus has been predetermined. He turned out to be a sufferer of doom which he himself is unaware of. His fate is fixed. He is a man naturally endowed with an ill fate and a disreputable existence, a man who rescued Thebes’s citizens from the sphinx (Bloom 2007) and improved the life of the people latterly, and a man who removed hope in his own life and finished his existence in misery. The Exact Ironies As seen in the above discussion, dramatic irony is comprehensively employed in the story of Oedipus to highlight the coincidence and ill-fate which hunted the tragic hero. First irony is situational. It is the difference between the real outcome and the predicted result when animated by degenerate vigor (Bloom 2007). The situations in the play are (Fitzgerald 2002): (1) Oedipus left the city because of the predictions; (2) he mistakenly murdered a man who was his own father; (3) encouraged to be wedded with his own mother; and (2) Thebes was hardly hit by an epidemic due to an incestuous affair. Second is tragic irony. This is demonstrated in the decisions and responses of the actor and verbal concretization leading to an absurd result which the audiences are knowledgeable about in advance (Fitzgerald 2002). Because of the predictions Oedipus decided to abandon his real parents and fled to another urban location. He did not discover the truth that he was not a real son. His break out took him to the place where his real mother and father lived. Unwittingly, he murdered his biological father and obstinately declined to confess the transgression. Oedipus was not aware that his wife and the mother of his four offspring was his real mother. And the last irony is verbal. This is shown in the dialogues of the protagonist. This verbal irony is discussed comprehensively in the above discussion. Conclusions Sophocles successfully used the three different types of irony, situational, tragic, and verbal. These ironies highlighted the demise of Oedipus. The audiences view the misery and unhappiness of Oedipus his ill fate without lessening their view of him as a hero. By filling the play with various ironies Sophocles enticed the audience into desiring to witness how the tale of Oedipus will end. References Bentley, E. The great playwrights: twenty-five plays with commentaries by critics and scholars. The University of Michigan: Doubleday, 1970. Bloom, H. Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex. UK: Chelsea House Publications, 2007. Fitzgerald, R. Sophocles, The Oedipus Cycle: Oedipus Rex, Oedipus at Colonus, Antigone. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co., 2002. Hobson, C.Z. “Unbound from Wrath: Orc and Blake’s Crisis of Vision in ‘The Four Zoas’” Studies in English Literature 33.4 (1993): 725+ MacGregor, B. & W. Knox. Oedipus the King. Pocket Books, 1994. Winnington-Ingram, R.P. Sophocles: An Interpretation. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1980. Read More