How Sophocles Oedipus Exemplifies or Refutes Aristotles Definition of a Tragic Hero - Research Paper Example

? SOPHOCLES’ OEDIPUS Explaining How Sophocles’ Oedipus Exemplifies or Refutes Aristotle’s Definition of a Tragic Hero Sophocles’ Oedipus Thesis ment: Despite Oedipus’ predicament and flaws, his ability to preserve his virtue and wisdom makes him the embodiment of Aristotle’s conception of a tragic hero. Outline: Introduction I. Sophocles’ Oedipus: A Tragic Hero II. Tragedy III. Plot IV. Virtue and Morality Conclusion References Sophocles’ Oedipus 2 Sophocles’ Oedipus Introduction Sophocles’ Oedipus is one of the most well-known tragic heroes in the history of drama. Indeed, his unusual fate leads him to a very uncharacteristic and tragic downfall that leaves both the audience and readers emotionally affected. His troublesome story qualifies him as a tragic hero according to the definition of the Greek philosopher, Aristotle. Thus, despite Oedipus’ predicament and flaws, his ability to preserve his virtue and wisdom makes him the embodiment of Aristotle’s conception of a tragic hero. Based on an error of judgment, the Aristotelian view of a tragic hero does not expose the lack of morality or even the wickedness of the protagonist. Besides, the Aristotelian concepts of tragedy and drama also perfectly fit the character of Oedipus. Sophocles’ Oedipus: A Tragic Hero First of all, let us consider Aristotle’s definition of a tragic hero: “There remains then the man who occupies the mean between saintliness and depravity. He is not extra-ordinary in virtue and righteousness and yet does not fall into bad fortune because of evil and wickedness but because of some hamartia of a kind found in men of high reputation and good fortune such as Oedipus and Thyestes and famous men of similar families” (As cited in Adade-Yeboah, Ahenkora,& Amankwa, 2012). Aristotle’s definition of a tragic hero fully fits the character of Oedipus because of the various traits he displays and the origin of his fall. Even though Oedipus is not a saint, his extraordinary ability to outsmart the Sphinx and solve the riddle gives him much reverence. Moreover, his consecration as a King , which comes as a reward for saving the Sophocles’ Oedipus 3 people in Thebes grants him more power as he becomes the sacred leader of the city. Addressing Oedipus, the priest says: “Oh Oedipus, king of the land, our greatest power” (Oedipus the King, 2011). However, this near saintliness has been dangerously stained through his incestuous relationship with his mother, Jocasta, even though he did not know she was his mother. Besides, following Aristotle’s concept, Oedipus’s downfall does not stem from his wickedness, but from a combination of factors among which his anger against Tiresias that reflects his frailty. He lost his temper when the blind prophet tried to warn him: “Enough! Such filth from him? Insufferable” (Oedipus). This loss of temper represents the error of judgment Aristotle refers to in his definition. Aristotle places the responsibility of the tragedy on that weakness that reveals that some wrong has been done but refuses to blame the hero whose virtue and goodness he still believes in. Unlike other writers who foreground the lack of morality as the main cause of tragedy, Aristotle targets human error. In fact, despite the incest and the flaws in Oedipus’ character, his virtue is not questionable because the readers realize the shared guilt and responsibility. Even his anger is redeemed at the end of the play when after he becomes blind and doomed to exile, he displays much wisdom: “It’s wrong to name what’s wrong to do” (Oedipus). This strength validates Aristotle’s point about the tragic hero’s goodness and confirms that he is not evil but just makes a mistake. Tragedy According to Aristotle “Tragedy is, then, an enactment of a deed that is important and complete, and of magnitude, by means of language enriched, each used separately in the different parts: it is enacted, not recited, and through pity and fear it effects relief to such Sophocles’ Oedipus 4 emotions” (Poetics, VI 1446b). This detailed definition shows the conception Aristotle has about this genre that requires much work. Aristotle emphasizes the importance, the completeness and the magnitude of the deed to indicate that tragedy needs to be taken seriously. He also focuses on language that is not just a simple language but a very meaningful language reflected throughout the whole play. Talking about language, this author informs: “Aristotle believes that the language must be sweet in tragedy. The level of language used by different characters should differ to depict the social stands of the characters” (Adade-Yeboah, Ahenkora,& Amankwa, 2012). This diversity of the languages enriches the play and makes it suitable to different people. Aristotle draws a specific attention to the performance that requires dynamism, vitality and professionalism. However, he exposes a very complex relationship between tragedy and emotions. For him, tragedy is expressed through pity and fear but at the same time tragedy helps relieve these feelings. Konstan (1999) argues: “The idea that the object of pity does not deserve his fate is present in the definition Aristotle offers in the Rhetoric; in the Poetics, however, Aristotle exploits the concept of similarity in order to explain the terror that tragedy induces. If the characters on stage are enough like ourselves-the context indicates that the sense is morally similar-then we will experience their fear as our own.” Indeed, the audience reacts to what happens in the play; therefore, it is normal for them to have some emotions. For instance, the audience may feel pity for Oedipus about his fate and the predicament he has to go through, especially when he gets blind. They may also have some fear through the actions in the play, precisely when Oedipus takes the pin and injures his eyes. This act may not only be fearful for the audience but also painful because of the impact it may have on them. Depending on the Sophocles’ Oedipus 5 situation, the audience may feel some sympathy or empathy for the protagonist as they connect to the action of the play. Plot Aristotle strongly believes in a good arrangement of the different sequences of the play; he severely criticizes a random or chaotic unfolding of the story which brings disorder more than anything. He praises a magnificent arrangement that will make the play more attractive and efficient and creates more expectations. This article indicates: “The putting together of the separate actions is very crucial. The beauty of the plot therefore lies in the arrangements which must have magnitude and not be a matter of chance. Indeed, the subtle manipulation of the plot which brings suspense also ends in the discovery” (Adade-Yeboah, Ahenkora,& Amankwa, 2012). He thinks that the actions should be reflected through a plausible plot to which the audience can easily relate and identify with for the accomplishment of a true tragedy. This writer argues that Aristotle calls: “for the creation of a full-scale illusion of real-life experience and, as a result, for the audience’s emotional identification with the characters. Only such emotional identification would lead to the proper tragic pleasure that Aristotle seeks” (Finkelberg, 2006). He finds a strong connection between the characters and the audience who may identify with them and experience emotions generated through the enactment of real life experiences. Following Aristotle’s conception of a plot, Oedipus the King has a very special plot that engages the reader and creates much suspense. The sequences do not follow a chronological order but a different arrangement that puts forward the story. For instance, the play starts while Oedipus is Sophocles’ Oedipus 6 already the king of Thebes, and the audience will only learn about his birth and the truth about his biological parents later. Aristotle advocates a different form of play that does not have to follow a single format and principle, and he strongly criticizes what he calls episodic play: “Aristotle refutes the ‘simplistically’ structured tragic plot, which involves a good man coming to misfortune, as completely immoral, and rejects the simple moral plot, in which a bad man succumbs to hardship, as utterly un-tragic” (Casa, 2005). He initiates a new form of plot, not only in the sequences but also in the content. As in Oedipus the King and through the character of Oedipus, he believes that the hero does not have to be morally evil but a virtuous man. The writer adds: “In so far as it disrupts the tight cause-and-effect sequence of events, episodic plot breaks the dramatic illusion, prevents the spectator’s or the reader’s emotional identification with the characters, and thus precludes tragedy from fulfilling its edifying function” (Finkelberg, 2006). For him, the episodic play is harmful to the outburst of the real drama and even compromises the achievement of a real tragedy. Furthermore, this kind of sequence even disrupts the connection between the characters and the audience and prevents them from emotionally relating to them. This article establishes a thorough connection between the action and the plot that are interdependent and fundamental to the play: “Tragedy, by implication, is an ‘action that is serious.’ The action is linked up with the plot because the plot is the imitation of the action. In other words, the plot is the synthesis of the individual acts. The word “serious” means that the action must surround a person of high class, an aristocrat” (Adade-Yeboah, Ahenkora,& Amankwa, 2012). This description matches the character of Oedipus who is not only a nobleman but also a virtuous and good man. Sophocles’ Oedipus 7 Virtue and Morality Virtue and morality are two concepts Aristotle employs in his references to the tragic hero and tragedy, in general. The audience generally identifies to the characters through their virtue and morality and view the action as the reflection of their own lives. This self- identification explains the deep emotions felt throughout the performance or the reading. This author explains: “The context in the Poetics indicates, as we have seen, that the relevant point of similarity in the case of tragedy is moral likeness: it is, generally speaking, in character, rather than age, family, or profession, that we are analogous to the protagonists of a play” (Konstan, 1999). Even though drama is just an illusion of real life it, nonetheless, represents a reflection or an imitation that some characters may identify with. Gillet and Hankey (2005) inform: “The reactions portrayed in Oedipus make vivid not only the idea of character traits but also the role of virtue in moderating what we might do in situations that interact with our characters in potentially disastrous ways.” Even though many people will not identify with Oedipus because of the seriousness of his predicament, the character he displays at the end the play reveals his wisdom and virtue. Conclusion Aristotle’s concepts of a tragic hero, tragedy and drama are overwhelmingly important but different from other definitions. The Aristotelian tragic hero is a character endowed with virtue whose fall mainly stems from an error of judgment but not from wickedness. Besides, Aristotle’s definition of tragedy recognizes an imitation of life experiences but at the same time exposes its fundamental components necessary for real drama. As a tragic hero, Sophocles’ Sophocles’ Oedipus 8 Oedipus fully exemplifies Aristotle’s view because despite his downfall he manages to keep his virtue and wisdom even though his temper has been tested. Sophocles’ Oedipus 9 References Adade-Yeboah, Asuamah, Kwaku Ahenkora & Adwoah S. Amankwah. (2012). The tragic hero of the classical period. English Language and Literature Studies, 2 (3), 10-19. Retrieved from http://www.proquest.com Casa Essay. (2005). Fate and divine working in Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex. Scheepers. Classical Culture 2, University of South Africa. Akroterion, 50, 137-44. Retrieved from http://www.proquest.com Finkelberg, Margalit. (2006). Aristotle and episodic tragedy. The classical Association, 5 (1), 60- 74. Retrieved from http://www.proquest.com Gillett, Grant & Robin Hankey. (2005). Oedipus the King: temperament, character, and virtue. Philosophy and Literature, 29 (2), 269-285. Retrieved from http://www.proquest.com Konstan, David. (1999). The tragic emotions. Comparative Drama,33 (1), 1-21. Retrieved from http://www.proquest.com Sophocles. (2011). Oedipus the King. An Introduction to Literature: Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. Sylvan Barnet, William Burto, and William E. Cain. (Ed.) 910-52. Boston: Longman. Read More