Oedipus The Tragic Hero
Oedipus, Sophocles’ most well-known tragic heroes in the history of playwright set the standard for writing Greek tragedies. According to Aristotle, who defined tragedy as a story that begins with the protagonist being someone who is extraordinary compared to the typical heroes that audience are used to or a great hero’s reversal of fortune. The character’s personality leads to his or her own downfall at the end resulting in a more terrifying ending. Aristotle admired Sophocles because of his work on Oedipus the King, which represents Aristotle’s visual manifestation of a Greek tragedy as well as a tragic hero, even with his flaws, he was able to stand firm on his virtue. According to the Aristotelian theory of tragedy …show more content…
Since birth he was royalty and his life was supposedly easy. Until his father, King Laius left him to die, despite this he was saved by a shepherd and raised by King Polybus and Queen Merope. Adding to his already incredible character, he presented himself as a champion to the land of Thebes to remove and answer the sphinx’s riddle. Successfully defeating the sphinx and as a reward for his heroic actions, he was able to marry the queen. He can be regarded as someone with an intellect that could rival the gods. His fate begins when he killed his father because of an argument at a crossroad. Unbeknownst to him at that time that he was his father. In the end, he pushes forward to find the truth about his father’s death. Ultimately marrying his mother and because of this, his mother committed suicide. Not able to bear the fate that he had just undergone, he exiles himself and removes both of his eyes. All the fame and glory that he had then suddenly his pride, which is his flaw, took over and “the terrible fate that befalls him is alleged to be the consequence of a flaw in his character and here appeal is made to Aristotle and tragic flaw” (Bain …show more content…
First off, most can agree that some of the characters had flaws in them as well. King Laius placing indirectly murdering his own son because of the oracle’s prophecy of him being murdered by his own son. Oedipus somehow gives the audience a sense of justice by killing King Laius, somewhat in an indirect way. Jocasta, not being able to bear everything, kills herself instead of having the same pride as Oedipus to keep him from harm’s way. As a mother she should have helped her son all the way despite the tragic event that happened in her life. Generally, the audience would have agreed to the storyline and how it ended. But viewing it in a modern life would not suffice since the ancient times had a very inhuman way of solving problems. Violence of course is one of them. War being a great factor in everyday decision. As an audience we can’t really put our own shoes into Oedipus. But in some ways we are able to look into one’s character and put in the traditional roles of society into
Oedipus, Sophocles’ most well-known tragic heroes in the history of playwright set the standard for writing Greek tragedies. According to Aristotle, who defined tragedy as a story that begins with the protagonist being someone who is extraordinary compared to the typical heroes that audience are used to or a great hero’s reversal of fortune. The character’s personality leads to his or her own downfall at the end resulting in a more terrifying ending. Aristotle admired Sophocles because of his work on Oedipus the King, which represents Aristotle’s visual manifestation of a Greek tragedy as well as a tragic hero, even with his flaws, he was able to stand firm on his virtue. According to the Aristotelian theory of tragedy …show more content…
Since birth he was royalty and his life was supposedly easy. Until his father, King Laius left him to die, despite this he was saved by a shepherd and raised by King Polybus and Queen Merope. Adding to his already incredible character, he presented himself as a champion to the land of Thebes to remove and answer the sphinx’s riddle. Successfully defeating the sphinx and as a reward for his heroic actions, he was able to marry the queen. He can be regarded as someone with an intellect that could rival the gods. His fate begins when he killed his father because of an argument at a crossroad. Unbeknownst to him at that time that he was his father. In the end, he pushes forward to find the truth about his father’s death. Ultimately marrying his mother and because of this, his mother committed suicide. Not able to bear the fate that he had just undergone, he exiles himself and removes both of his eyes. All the fame and glory that he had then suddenly his pride, which is his flaw, took over and “the terrible fate that befalls him is alleged to be the consequence of a flaw in his character and here appeal is made to Aristotle and tragic flaw” (Bain …show more content…
First off, most can agree that some of the characters had flaws in them as well. King Laius placing indirectly murdering his own son because of the oracle’s prophecy of him being murdered by his own son. Oedipus somehow gives the audience a sense of justice by killing King Laius, somewhat in an indirect way. Jocasta, not being able to bear everything, kills herself instead of having the same pride as Oedipus to keep him from harm’s way. As a mother she should have helped her son all the way despite the tragic event that happened in her life. Generally, the audience would have agreed to the storyline and how it ended. But viewing it in a modern life would not suffice since the ancient times had a very inhuman way of solving problems. Violence of course is one of them. War being a great factor in everyday decision. As an audience we can’t really put our own shoes into Oedipus. But in some ways we are able to look into one’s character and put in the traditional roles of society into