Role of Shame and Guilt on Achilles and Oedipus - Essay Example

Role of Shame and Guilt on Achilles and Oedipus With respect to Homer’s Iliad and Sophocles’ Oedipus the King, it is admissible that emotive forces of shame and guilt played a significant role in influencing the fate of the two main characters; Achilles and Oedipus. Technically, the two stories exemplify the role of personal emotions in determining an individual’s fate. In Sophocles’ Oedipus the King, Oedipus mistakenly killed his father out of boastful pride. Eventually, the emotive forces of shame and guilt for killing his father would later initiate Oedipus’ downfall from his kingship position (Green 130). On the other hand, Achilles was overcame by the guilt and shame of letting his dear friend Patroclus killed by Hector. After refusing to cooperatively fight against the Trojans, Patroclus wore Achilles armor and led the offensive against the enemy, leading to his tragic end. In response, Achilles’ self-centeredness and egotism would later turn into guilt and shame after his impersonating friend was killed, thus the emotions of shame and guilt steered Achilles towards his fateful demise (Zanier 29). In this context, it is arguable that the role of guilt and shame played a similar role for both Achilles and Oedipus in their respective stories. Guilt vs. Shame Prior to illustrating the role of the emotive forces on the two main characters, it is worth appreciating the actual meanings of shame and guilt, particularly from a theoretical perspective. Mistakenly, the emotional concepts of guilt and shame are often used interchangeably. However, shame and guilt are two distinct emotional concepts. Psychologically, guilt is the regret and remorse arising from having done something morally wrong (Lindsay and Rivera 92). Guilt manifest in form of a bothered conscience coupled with a desire to avoid repeating a wrongful deed in future. In this case, guilt is a feeling of culpability or responsibility for real or imagined offenses; hence proves instrumental in measuring standards of rights and wrongs in the society. Contrarily, shame is an intense feeling of guilt. Rather than being attributable to regretful or remorseful feelings arising from offensive conduct, shame is attributable to painful feelings arising from morally dishonorable conduct (Lindsay and Rivera 94). Shame results from an inherent awareness of guilt and personal shortcomings. In this case, shameful persons are inherently discontented with themselves because they feel unworthy or embarrassed for their basic nature. Instead of acting as a source of moral standards, shame can trigger aggression and retaliatory behaviors, thus guilt can be constructive while shame is basically destructive. Achilles’ Shame and Guilt Whatever the emotion, guilt and shame present influential impacts to an individual’s perceptions, feelings and behaviors towards other people in the society, especially during situations of conflict. In the Homer’s Iliad, Achilles is first affected by guilt after his friend Patroclus is killed by the Trojan fighter Hector. After Patroclus died, Achilles said, “All this weighs on my mind, I would die of shame only if I would shrink from battle now” (Zanier 38) Basically, Achilles and Patroclus were close friends with a mutually respectful bond extending beyond the battlefield. As the best fighter in the Achaean Army, Achilles understood offensive strategies unlike any other warrior; hence he had forbidden the commander Patroclus against engaging in an offensive attack without his permission and assistance (Zanier 32). Out of anger attributable to Achilles’ undermining proposition, Patroclus impersonated his tactful friend without seeking permission and assistance. After Achilles learned of Patroclus death, he felt personally responsible for his friend’s fateful efforts. Besides feeling directly responsible for Patroclus’ death, Achilles also felt painfully angry for being self-centered in the war against Trojans. In this context, Achilles was not only guilty for his friend’s death, but was also shameful for being inherently rebellious and dissonant with the cultural norms of the Achaean army. Technically, all members of the Achaean army observed society’s condoned norms, especially the norm of obedience to military authority. Unfortunately, Achilles disapproved of obedience to military authority and decided to withdraw himself from the main Achaean army. In this context, Achilles’ pride and self-centeredness undermined the role of social harmony and cooperation in battlefields. After Patroclus died, Achilles was not only feeling culpable for his friend’s death, but was also discontented with his self-centeredness (Zanier 47). Undeniably, the feelings of guilt and shame stirred the thoughts and desires for vengeance inside Achilles. As a result, the retaliatory urges attributable to the emotions of shame and guilt activated Achilles’ wrath against the Trojans. In response, Achilles returned to the war. Shame and guilt became a means through which Achilles gained motivation to fight with the Trojans. While lost within the destructive forces of shame and guilt, Achilles became vulnerable in the battlefield, thus leading to his death inside the Trojans’ perimeter. In this regard, it is agreeable that the emotions of guilt and shame elicited destructive reactions from Achilles. Oedipus’ Shame and Guilt Oedipus, the King of Thebes, became a hero after defeating the kingdom’s enemies and freeing enslaved daughters and sons of Athens. In the midst of performing his kingly duties, Oedipus unknowingly murdered his biological father, fulfilling a childhood prophesy that he would kill his own father. At first, Oedipus tried to ignore the potential truth that he had murdered his own father. While conversing with Jocasta, Oedipus willingly ignores every circumstantial detail that would unearth the truth behind his father’s murder. At a certain point in the play, Oedipus realized that the truth had finally caught up to him. In expressing his discontent with himself, Oedipus said, “There is nothing, no pain, no private shame, no public disgrace, nothing I haven’t seen in my grief” (Green 131). In an effort to escape the ill-fated prophesy, Oedipus had actually facilitated its fulfillment when he moved to Thebes and not only killed his father, but also married his mother (Green 127). Oedipus tragic accident is attributable to the King’s willing blindness to the truth. Despite being regarded as an intelligent and quick sighted leader, Oedipus is inherently aware of his blindness to the truth. Towards the end of the second play, Oedipus is driven by guilt for his wrongful deeds and shame for his willing blindness to the truth. As a result of immense feelings of guilt and shame, Oedipus lashed out defensive actions that escalated the violence in Thebes, leading to his death. Technically, Oedipus fateful demise proves that hiding from the truth is not an effective way to overcome negative emotions. At first, Oedipus comforted himself by selectively withdrawing his thoughts on the possibilities of having murdered his biological father. Admittedly, the selective thought withdrawal sustained Oedipus self-image at a healthy level. After inevitably falling into the pit of truth regarding his parents’ fate, Oedipus became threatened by the humiliating revelations (Konstanz 71). The pain of having unknowingly killed his father and married his mother intensified the painful feelings of shame and guilt inside the king; hence triggering impossibly toxic reactions of rage. After the humiliating truth came out, Oedipus could no longer feel at ease with the world. Oedipus could no longer tolerate the idea of being perceived with derision and scorn by members of Thebes’s societies. Technically, shame and guilt boiled inside of Oedipus, thus he could no longer bear having being perceived by the public as a pawn of fate. In an effort to dispel the cloud of shame and guilt hovering above his conscience, Oedipus acted defensively by engaging in aggressive behaviors. In the midst of the shame-fueled aggression, Oedipus lost his life. Conclusion In essence, Oedipus and Achilles shared a similar fate. In the respective stories of Homer’s Iliad and Sophocles’ Oedipus the King, both the main characters’ downfall was initiated by irrepressible feelings of guilt and shame. Actually, Oedipus was not overwhelmed by the guilt of murdering his father as he was overwhelmed by the shame of being inherently ignorant and blinded to the truth. On the other hand, Achilles did not succumbed to the guilt of letting his friend impersonate him in the fateful offensive as he did to the shame of being self-centered and boastfully disrespectful to norms of the Athenian society. In this regard, both Achilles and Oedipus were affected in a similar manner by the emotions of guilt and shame. Therefore, the fateful endings of both characters were primarily initiated by the feelings of shame and guilt attributable to their actions, perceptions and behaviors towards others. Works Cited Green, Davies. Oedipus the King: A Contextually Translated Analysis. Pittsburg: John Wiley & Sons, 2012. Print. Konstanz, David. Emotions of the Ancient Greeks: Studies in Aristotle and Classical literature. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006. Print. Lindsay, Hart and Rivera, Marcelo. Differentiating guilt and shame: Their effects on motivation. American Journal of Behavioral Research and Therapy 34.8 (2007): 92-105. Zanier, Graham. The Heart of Achilles: Characterization and Personal Ethics in the Iliad. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print. Read More