Oedipus the King has remained a contentiously debated literary work for a multitude of reasons. Arguably, the most important debate encompassing this work relates to the relationship between how individuals exercise free-will and how fate, and sometimes the Gods, influence their actions and their lives. In an article of literary criticism, entitled Tampering With the Future: Apollo 's Prophecy in Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex by Christopher Nassaar, Nassaar focuses on how Oedipus fulfilled Apollo 's prophecy by doing everything he could to avoid it. In Nassar 's mind, Oedipus made the mistake of overreacting to Apollo’s prophecy as he “panics and rushes into catastrophe” (Nassaar 148). Oedipus realizes the extent to which his fate is horrendous,
…show more content…
Furthermore, Nassaar points to how Oedipus’ lack of self-containment led to him thinking irrationally. Nassaar argues that “had he (Oedipus) had behaved rationally, he would have asked for more information” (148). Considering the circumstances, that would appear to have been the rational approach to the audience. Although this would not have prevented Oedipus’ fate from being realized, it might have aided him in delaying or softening it. Ultimately, this would be impossible for Oedipus, as the Gods predicted. Oedipus expressed “panic and subsequent hubris,” (148) as he believed that he could evade his fate. Nassaar closes the article stating that anyone can control their destiny if they are willing to act prudently and rationally. However, Oedipus was unable to follow these principles and was punished for his lack …show more content…
For example, if Oedipus did not immediately flee his home in Corinth to go to Thebes, he would have never encountered Laios on the road. Even if he did decide to leave, Oedipus could have done his best to defuse the situation with Laios where three roads met, versus killing him. Even after these events, Oedipus remained focused on trying to evade the prochachy. Once he was established in Thebes, he began to feel almost untouchable and above others. Thus, when he called in Tiresias to shed light on the murderer of Laios and Tiresias exclaims that Oedipus “is the murderer whom you seek”, Oedipus responds with contempt (347). Also, Oedipus continued to assume that he could not have possibly murdered Laios when Kreon eventually came to speak with him. Without adequate proof, Oedipus directed the blame for Laios’ slaying on to both Tiresias and Creon. Throughout the story of Oedipus, it is apparent that Oedipus made rash decisions and ended up paying the price. Although Oedipus could not change his fate, he might have been able to mitigate its impact or delay it. Christopher Nassaar’s article brought up strong arguments that explained why Oedipus was forced to confront his fate and how his own actions ended up costing him his fortune. Nassaar’s point of view is supported by a solid back end
Furthermore, Nassaar points to how Oedipus’ lack of self-containment led to him thinking irrationally. Nassaar argues that “had he (Oedipus) had behaved rationally, he would have asked for more information” (148). Considering the circumstances, that would appear to have been the rational approach to the audience. Although this would not have prevented Oedipus’ fate from being realized, it might have aided him in delaying or softening it. Ultimately, this would be impossible for Oedipus, as the Gods predicted. Oedipus expressed “panic and subsequent hubris,” (148) as he believed that he could evade his fate. Nassaar closes the article stating that anyone can control their destiny if they are willing to act prudently and rationally. However, Oedipus was unable to follow these principles and was punished for his lack …show more content…
For example, if Oedipus did not immediately flee his home in Corinth to go to Thebes, he would have never encountered Laios on the road. Even if he did decide to leave, Oedipus could have done his best to defuse the situation with Laios where three roads met, versus killing him. Even after these events, Oedipus remained focused on trying to evade the prochachy. Once he was established in Thebes, he began to feel almost untouchable and above others. Thus, when he called in Tiresias to shed light on the murderer of Laios and Tiresias exclaims that Oedipus “is the murderer whom you seek”, Oedipus responds with contempt (347). Also, Oedipus continued to assume that he could not have possibly murdered Laios when Kreon eventually came to speak with him. Without adequate proof, Oedipus directed the blame for Laios’ slaying on to both Tiresias and Creon. Throughout the story of Oedipus, it is apparent that Oedipus made rash decisions and ended up paying the price. Although Oedipus could not change his fate, he might have been able to mitigate its impact or delay it. Christopher Nassaar’s article brought up strong arguments that explained why Oedipus was forced to confront his fate and how his own actions ended up costing him his fortune. Nassaar’s point of view is supported by a solid back end