Oedipus Crux Kurt Fosso Analysis

Oedipus Crux, the article I read was deceptively simple. On the exterior, the article posed a simple question, did Oedipus actually murder his father. It used this question to weave a counter the dominant narrative that the majority of people believe. Kurt Fosso talks about the process of teaching his kids in class, and through his teaching of contrasting perspective about the play Oedipus Rex, the kids, “ initially viewed this task perverse or just plain impossible”[Fosso 2]. He diagnoses the solution to the problem citing dominant narratives of knowledge as the problem. People use their preconceived notions to interpret their beliefs. Therefore, it was difficult to introduce counter-narratives to their very static notions of how the world works. He compares this to the type of fate that is introduced in Sophocles 's play, and how the students are bound to their …show more content…
Many scholars think that Sophocles wrote his play to serve as a warning against the dangers of fate, in a heavily fate centered world. Fosso turns this interpretation on its head. He believes that the play is doubly ironic. Fosso believes that Sophocles’s play demonstrates why believing so heavily in fate can lead to a circumstance like Oedipus got himself into. The power of words or semiotics, shape the interpretations of the world. I would agree that the latter part of Fosso’s thesis statement. I think it is true that disrupting the dominant narratives through turning a hub of culture on its head would be beneficial. I think that looking at common and dominant perspectives through a contrary lens can be very beneficial because it is able to teach people something that didn’t know before.Disrupting these dominant types narrative provides potential for change and growth. These self-convicting narratives have the power to shape reality and confuse the nature of