Criticism Of Oedipus The King

Throughout the centuries, the play entitled Oedipus the King written by the Poet Sophocles has been thematically understood as a tragedy with the title character prophesied as a pitiful victim of fate or a pawn of the gods, with little or no control over his life. However, some scholarly reviews of this play contend that Oedipus was stereotypical of the individual that chose to pursue the truth to its conclusion with the full knowledge that their choices could either bring great joy or great heartbreak. This analysis will support the idea that Oedipus was such a man; one that had been warned of the repercussions of his actions, but freely sought truth even when the consequences were destined to destroy him. He displayed the same imperfections

He was a man like any other man in the sense that he was bound by his own strengths and weaknesses. However, he demonstrated the significance of his humanity and the impact of his character by not relying upon the faults and failures of others to justify his actions. Oedipus did not passively submit to the anguish and grief normally expected from such circumstances, but rather chose to exhibit an uncommon depth of splendor and fortitude. Oedipus The King dealt with predetermined situations, yet chose to portray exceptional human characteristics only found in those willing to take chances in the face of overwhelming odds. Oedipus took this chance and was thrust into disastrous situations that would have made any lesser man resort to accusing and condemning others. He acted to defend himself when he fought with King Laius and his men, not knowing the true identity of King Laius as his father. Although these circumstances make the ignorance of his birth an alibi for this killing, he was genuinely not guilty of murder when King Laius was slain. However, his integrity to willingly pursue the truth, no matter the personal costs, and his acceptance to endure the responsibility for all of his actions made Oedipus an innocent man of great