Oedipus: A Puppet in the Hands of Gods - Research Paper Example

? Oedipus: A Puppet in the Hands of Gods Sophocles' great play ‘Oedipus the King’ shows how intense is the power of fate in one’s life. It is true that Oedipus’ actions to a great extent influence the course of his life. But despite the very extensive efforts taken by Oedipus to escape fate, unfortunate events take upper hand beyond his free will. Oedipus unlike some other characters of the play is terribly unaware of the tragic events already happened in his past. It is his quest for truth that unfolds the fate, doomed by the gods, in a spiteful situation when not even a single solution is left. It is an irony that Oedipus who is good at solving riddles becomes a riddle himself. Although he feels a sense of control over his life for a while, the ‘identity ambiguity’ still prevails so as to bring about the preordained catastrophe in his life. Oedipus makes genuine efforts to trace his identity knowing that there is still a piece of puzzle unsettled with him, but all in vain. Hence, referring to the life of Oedipus Rex, it can be argued that ‘man has no free will but is a puppet in the hands of the gods’. To begin with, unlike the cases of other tragic heroes, Oedipus’ fall cannot be attributed to his own character flaws or actions; instead, gods are playing with the life of Oedipus simply leaving him to be a victim of fate. Throughout the play, there are oracles regarding the adversities he will have to undergo. For instance, his father proposes to kill him at an early infant stage, because there is prophesy that Oedipus would murder his father. But the fate allows Oedipus not to be killed and he is taken to Corinth where as an adult he is to solve the riddle of his own identity for the first time. He comes to know the terrifying prophetic destiny and leaves Corinth for ever so that he would not kill Polypus who he believes is his father. However, on his way, he happens to kill his real father Laius unknowingly. Again, Teiresias (the prophet) tells Oedipus that the killer of his father will be blind and will have unmerited relationship with his mother. It comes true when Oedipus gauges his eyes out as he realizes his misdeed. In the same way, Oedipus’ future exile also is foretold as the killer would “set off for a foreign country, groping the ground before him with a stick”. It seems that Oedipus is the only one who does not know the reality. There are many who are aware of his flaws and his likeliness to flaw again. But none of them wants to help him though they pretend doing so. Although oracles give indications to the awaiting misfortunes, Oedipus fails to comprehend what they really mean only because of the esoteric language they use. Most of the time he is in a position to recall prophesies when the events have already taken place. This awareness is of little use once there is no scope for correction. These are the most relevant facts to point out that Oedipus is a puppet in the hands of gods. Another argument is that Oedipus could have been killed in his very infant stage if he was not the victim of fate. His mother, and later the mother’s servant leave him alive into the cruel hands of destiny. In order to make prophesy true, gods have assigned some people to bring him up safely until he is put into great peril. He is not harmed by any wild animals in the dense forest and safely reaches the palace of King Polybus in Corinth. It seems that the safety granted to Oedipus is not to comfort him but to increase the intensity of the awaiting anguish. He is extra ordinarily intelligent and there is no chance to flaw. But he does not have any control over the events. They come one by one as the faithful servants of the gods to perform their duty within the stipulated time. The gods have several options to relieve him of his pain since his birth. However, they are simply observing the way things develop and how he moves to his destiny. They give indications of the awaiting offense but with intolerable ambiguity only to add to his strife. No such indications can be counted as warning that may help him avoid crime; they only deepen his mental stress. There is no reason for the gods to be angry with him. Oedipus is simply to walk along the paths drawn by the gods and to surrender himself to the stranglehold of fate. Sophocles depicts him as a man having several good qualities. For instance, in the views of people, Oedipus is a noble man and a savior who saves Thebes from the Sphinx. As Rudnytsky terms it, Oedipus is ‘the tragedy of self-knowledge’ which Sophocles tells from the point of view of a son looking for his origins (256. qtd in Carel 99 ). Another notable thing is that there is no indication about a mistake of his own for which Oedipus is to undergo a cursed life since his very young age. Prophesy is given to Laius that his son would kill him and would marry his own mother. If this is a punishment given to Laius how the tribulations of Oedipus could be justifiable? If the son is accountable for the sins of his father, no one can blame Oedipus for his flaws, because the so called mistakes by themselves are punishment given already, not to him but to his father. If this is not the reason, he could at least hear from his guardians, Polybus and Merope that they are not his biological parents. He hears the rumor that he is not the real son of Polybus and Merope, and makes very sincere effort to verify it. Polybus and Merope deny it and try to make him believe that he is their true son. He leaves them for genuine reason but on the way kills his true father by mistake. If Polybus and Merope admitted the reality and told him the truth, there could be some changes in the course of his life. Once he believes Polybus as his father, he is sure that he will not murder him. In order to avoid even the least possibility of committing mistake he leaves his father. On the other hand, if Polybus and Merope disclosed the fact, Oedipus could continue his search for identity. Evidently, this is not possible because the predetermined events have to take place. Oedipus has every reason to leave Corinth though that journey causes him commit the severe crime. To illustrate, before leaving Corinth, he asks the Delphic Oracle who his parents really are. But instead of answering his question, the Oracle tells him that he would kill his father and mate with his own mother. Oedipus never wants these things come true and hence leaves his known parents forever. On his way he fights with his father and kills him. As Stee opines, Oedipus acted quite nobly throughout his life despite his weakness (19). This is nothing other than the game played by the gods, for Oedipus is only a puppet in their hands, and his reasoning has little value in decision making. Since everything is known by a higher power how can one say that the right or wrong depends on the choices one makes? If one believes in god, one has to admit that god knows everything since the beginning to the end. On the other hand, if one believes in free will one has to accept the events as the outcomes of one’s choices. It is indeed confusing how to believe in god’s plans and free will simultaneously. In the case of Oedipus, he makes his own decisions but plunges into great adversity. If this is the result of wrong choices, what interpretations can be given about the role of prophesies in his life. Evidently, Oedipus is not affected by the choices he makes. As Smith points out, it is by seeking to avoid fate that Oedipus brings it about (86). Furthermore, Oedipus could avoid killing his father, if any of them (father or son) identified the other one. King Laius could be vigilant before getting into fight with a youth, because he already has the warning regarding his death. If he attempted to know who the person was there might be some chances to identify each other. However, this is not possible, for it is the fate of Laius to be killed by his own son. Both Laius and Oedipus have already made their own efforts to change their destiny but failed. The fate of two individuals converges at this point. Even if Oedipus could change his destiny, the oracle about the other one persists. This shows that not only Oedipus but the entire mankind according to Sophocles is the puppet in the hands of the gods. In this context, it is relevant to consider one essential refutation. Some critics argue that free will and oracle are not mutually very exclusive. For instance, Dodds argue that oracles do not force events. The example he points out is the Peter’s denial of Jesus in the Bible. Dodds says that it is absurd if readers think that Jesus’ prophesy forced Peter to deny Jesus; instead, Jesus warned Peter of his acts as he could foresee the likelihood of Peter’s flaw. According to the critic, same is the case with Oedipus, because the choices he makes have no relation to the oracles (70-71). According to the proponents of this view, Oedipus fails to understand the oracles well, and takes wrong decisions including going to Thebes, sending Creon to the Oracle, making his own investigation into Laius’s murder, and many more. In fact, he hears from Delphi that the man he kills one day will turn to be his father and the woman he then marries will be his own mother. Oedipus fails to comprehend this and goes on with his impulsive decisions. He could have remembered this oracle before killing someone, or at least he could have thought twice before taking the hands of a woman. However, these arguments do not adequately answer many other questions. If the whole adversity is the result of Oedipus’ wrong choices or misunderstanding, why did his father and mother also failed to understand the oracles right way? Why should the oracles be so ambiguous that the parties concerned are unable to comprehend them? Why none of the oracles failed despite the personal choices made by Laius, Jocasta, and Oedipus vehemently? Why should a man’s actions be announced even before his birth? Oedipus’ inability to control fate is clear from the words of Teiresias. He tells Oedipus; “there will be no harbor to receive your cries about who you are, and there is no mortal who will be destroyed in a worse way than you” (427-8. Qtd in Ramfos 41). A genuine attempt to answer the above questions with reference to the story of Oedipus will reveal the fact that each and every moment in one’s life is visible to a higher power, and therefore one’s free will is not sufficient to alter the fate. The same above refutation can be evaluated. Jesus foretells the betrayal of Judas as well. He also prays that “The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born" (Mt: 26:24). Jesus himself admits that everything is done ‘as it written’, and the destiny of Judas is not an exemption. Same is the case of Peter when he denies Jesus. It can be argued that in order to save these two disciples from committing the foretold mistakes, Jesus has to avoid his passion and crucifixion. Jesus foretells certain events he himself has to face but does not avoid them as they involve his mission. If then, the betrayal of Judas and the denial of Peter are the unavoidable portions of Jesus’ holy mission. The supporters of ‘free will’ may argue that Jesus could complete his mission without these two events. However, there are clear indications about the betrayal in the Old Testament, scripture written centuries before the birth of Judas. To be specific, if either Peter or Judas did not fulfill his role, Jesus’ suffering would have been limited to a great extent. They ensured the intensity of the pain Jesus suffered, for these are the two most intolerable acts a man can have from his very intimate friends. The words “It would be better for him if he had not been born” clearly shows that Judas was born to perform this role, and the event could not be avoided. Also, only after the third denial, Peter recollects what was foretold by Jesus, and he could do nothing other than crying over the spilt milk. In the same way, as Dilman points out, in Oedipus’ case, what awaited him was fixed before his birth. The author compares it “as the way a congenital weakness or disability fixed by the genes we inherit from our parents” (n.p.). Hence, Dodds’ argument with regard to Oedipus Rex’s free will fails. Events in the lives of Laius, Jocasta, and Oedipus are highly interrelated, and without one the other cannot be complete. It is not a matter of religious concepts or an opinion about the ways god interacts in human life. It is how Sophocles perceived the power and influence of fate on man’s life. The above interpretations on the Bible events might vary from a Christian believer’s view point. However, in order to assert that Oedipus is a puppet in the hands of god and to answer Dodds’s argument, the example seems relevant. According to Swift, the story of Oedipus simply ‘embodies the fact that bad things can happen even to good people’ and it is of little use to scrutinize the cause (n.p.). Evidently, Sophocles wants to make it clear that human race face unjustifiable sufferings, the cause for which are not comprehensible. The story of Oedipus also reminds us that mysteries of the world surpass human knowledge and therefore we must not maintain that we can control the events of life. Oedipus himself seems aware of the dominance of the fate over him. He says to the chorus “You have spoken justly, but no man can compel the gods when they are unwilling” (290). In total, the question if fate or free will determines the course of human life has been a bone of contention for centuries. Although all religions and philosophies intend to answer this riddle their own way, the issue still remains unsolved. Obviously, Sophocles through his great tragedy ‘Oedipus the King’ depicts the very pathetic picture of a man haunted by fate. considering the characteristics of the protagonist and the development of the major events in the play, readers reach the conclusion that Oedipus has nothing to do with his free will other than being a mere puppet in the hands of gods who pulls the strings that make him dance. Works cited Carel, Havi Hannah. “Moral and Epistemic Ambiguity in Oedipus Rex”. Janus Head, 9(1), 97-115. Amherst, NY: Trivium Publications, 2006. Web 31 May 2013 Dodds, Eric R. Ancient Idea of Porogress and Other Essays on Greek Literature and Belief. Oxford University Press, 1973. Print. Dilman, Ilham. Sophocles’ Oedipus: Fate, human destiny, and individual responsibility. Free Will: An Historical and Philosophical Introduction. Routledge, 2013. Print. Ramfos, Stelios. Fate And Ambiguity in Oedipus the King. Somerset Hall Press, 2005. Print. Stee, Ethard W. V. This I Need To Know: The Descent Of The Western Literary Tradition. iUniverse, 2004. Google Books. Smith, Helaine S. Masterpieces of classic Greek drama. Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006. Print. Swift, L. A. The Hidden Chorus:Echoes of Genre in Tragic Lyric. Oxford University Press, 2010. Sophocles. Oedipus Rex: Literary Touchstone Edition. Thomas, J. E and Osbom, Elizabeth.(Eds.). Prestwick House Inc, 2005. Print. Read More