More handpicked essays just for you.
Similarities and differences in gilgamesh and oedipus rex
Similarities and differences in gilgamesh and oedipus rex
Comparison between oedipus and gilgamesh
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
With most pieces of literature that has a king involved, there tends to be two kinds of kings – ones that care about the well being of their people and their city, and ones that show their dominance over his people every chance they get. The two primary examples kings that will be contrasting each other, one being compassionate and the other being reckless, are Oedipus from “Oedipus the King”, and Gilgamesh from “The Epic of Gilgamesh.” Oedipus and Gilgamesh contrast each other by the way they treat their people, with Oedipus being more empathetic and Gilgamesh being more ruthless.
The first king to show compassion towards his people is Oedipus. In the beginning of the play, “Oedipus the King,” there is a plague that is ravaging the city of Thebes, and Oedipus hears the priest say to him “put us firmly back on our feet, so Thebes will never fall again” (60-61). The citizens of Thebes believe that Oedipus can help them again because before he was king, he saved the town of Thebes from a Sphinx that was devouring people that could not solve the Sphinx’s riddle correctly by solving the...
Many great rulers have been tempted by the authority of absolute power. In Antigone, by Sophocles, Creon, the Theban king, will do anything in order to earn this absolute power. Creon’s prideful attitude, disregard of the authority of the gods, and failure to listen cause him to fail as a statesman, demonstrating the nature of kingship in Sophocles’s Antigone.
As Oedipus becomes king, his selfishness only grows, as does his denial. As the king, he gained the burden of Thebes whenever a problem arose. To find a way to rid his city of the plague, he sent Kreon so that he would have some answers and be able to place the blame on something or someone.
Giligamesh and Oedipus don’t look the same or think the same, but the two of them are very similar in many ways. Both heroes can be seen as brave individuals, but as I read both passages my opinion is that Giligamesh was a braver and more heroic character. Giligamesh always seemed to push himself to the extreme and always could be found in a dangerous situation. Unfortunately both of these characters are extremely cocky and self righteous. In the began of the epic poem the reader may notice that Giligamesh is a very authoritative and overbearing ruler, he looks highly on himself and is seen as an unfair King. However the reader may see the opposite happen in Oedipus Rex, it is very noticeable that Oedipus goes from starting off as a good person who’s intentions are well change to a tyrannical leader who lets his hubris attitude take over. Another similarity found in both passages is the fact that both have tragic outcomes. Oedipus’s outcome is way more worse, then Giligamesh’s outcome, since Oedipus ends up having children with his mother and he kills his own father. Although both works share many similarities, they have just as many differences. The main difference is that an epic hero, like Giligamesh, makes the journey and success throughout the story, where in a tragic hero, like Oedipus, doesn’t success and tries to run from his problems. Another difference is that Giligamesh didnt have a tragic flaw were Oedipus did. Also one writing was about a person who was a victim of there own fate were the other writing was about a person enteral responsibility for his own sake and
Oedipus becomes a more admirable character by the end of the play then during the prologue of the play. This is because his history is reveled and his fate seems to be less of his fault and more of something that was doomed to happen to him, also by his drive to help the city of Thebes shows that he cares for the city and his ability to accept his fate but to try and help others from suffering.
'No two men are alike in the way they act, the way they think, or the way they look. However, every man has a little something from the other. Although Oedipus and Gilgamesh are entirely different people, they are still very similar. Each one, in their own way, is exceptionally brave, heroically tragic, and both encompass diverse strengths and weaknesses. One is strictly a victim of fate and the other is entirely responsible for his own plight.
Oedipus the King: Reason and Passion In the play, Oedipus the King, there are dual parts of reason and passion. Oedipus primarily acts with both reason and passion at different stages in the play. There are several points in the play where Oedipus acts with reason. The first such point occurs when he is asked by his followers to help save Thebes. He acts with reason when he immediately decides to heed to their demands and find help for them.
In the classic poem and plays Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, Oedipus the King by Sophocles, and The Odyssey by Homer, the main characters are leaders with differing successes. Julius Caesar gets killed by his own "friends", Oedipus gouges out his eyes, and Odysseus faced many setbacks, but managed to get home. All of these classical heroes had one thing in common. This was that they tried to lead by dominance. In Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, Oedipus the King by Sophocles, and The Odyssey by Homer, all of
The idea of fate has baffled mankind for centuries. Can humans control what happens to them, or is everyone placed in a predestined world designed by a higher power? The Epic of Gilgamesh and Oedipus The King highlight on the notion that no matter what, people cannot control what is destined to occur. Interestingly enough, many other distantly connected cultures had, and have similar gods or goddesses who play a role in the fate of individuals. Oedipus, King of Thebes, was told by the Oracle at Delphi that he would one day kill his father and marry his mother. Determined not to let this prophecy verify his fears, Oedipus does all in his power to prevent this from happening, yet fails. Similarly, Gilgamesh, king of Uruk, attempts to obtain immortality, but fails as well. Gilgamesh's and Oedipus's intense fear and ignorance cause them to try to interfere with their fates, leading to their failures and realization of the futility of trying to control destiny.
Question: Sir John Sheppard comments that Oedipus behaves normally, commits an error in ignorance and brings suffering upon himself. He declares that "Oedipus suffers not because of his guilt, but in spite of his goodness.” What is your opinion of this comment?
Furthermore, Oedipus the king and Antigone are both noble characters Oedipus is noble because he cares for his people and they respect him and his judgement he made a promise to help stop the cures put on Thebes. Antigone is noble because she is standing up for her brother even though the person she must face is family. Although both are noble characters they too are very different Antigone killed herself with nothing to lose which was very selfish of her because she had people who loved her. Oedipus was exiled after poking his eyes out he could have killed his self like Jocasta but choose to live in plain. The acts of Oedipus
Although it is widely alleged that destiny is by choice, there are a vast number of people who believed that it is by fate. Those who believed it is by choice follow the directions and guidance of their elders. For example, they will try to hold on to the values that their parents instilled in them and use them to guide their entire lives. Others who believed that destiny is by fate, believe that the outcome of their lives is determined by luck, and that no matter what they do or how careful they are, whatever has to happen to them must happen. These proponents that emphasize that destiny is by fate may have gotten their belief from myth such as the story of Oedipus, which is a perfect illustration of how destiny is by fate. Just like most mythical stories, the characters in this story tried unsuccessfully to change fate to suit them. However, as you are about to see, fate cannot change. It can only be redirected, but will still eventually achieve its objective.
Jocasta and Emilia, important minor characters in their plays, both showcase the power of love as well as how destructive it can be. Emilia and Jocasta both unknowingly end their own lives, as well as others, and spread tragedy throughout the towns in which they lived. It is believed that in 425 B.C., Sophocles first produced Oedipus the King (Theater of Sophocles). In the play, Oedipus the King, Jocasta is the main character, Oedipus’, mother and wife. Jocasta’s love for Oedipus ultimately destroys him and results in her death. Sophocles helped shape the heroic ideal that is later embodied in medieval romance, which Shakespeare traditionally uses in Othello (Zerba). William Shakespeare wrote Othello in about 1604 (The Theater of Shakespeare). In the play, Othello, Emilia is a companion to the main character, Othello’s wife Desdemona. Emilia’s love for her husband, Iago, ultimately destroys Othello and results in her own death.
In the Greek play, “King Oedipus” written by Sophocles, certain characteristics, which determine the traits of a tragic hero, reveal themselves as the play unfolds. These traits enable readers to enjoy a more enhanced reading of the play and also serve to evoke a particular response from the reader.
In this class one key point kept coming up in the readings for me, and that was fate. Fate is an idea that nothing you do will change your final out come in life. Are we able to truly have free will in the way we live and die? Or is it fate and our life’s outcome is out of our control? Is the characters desire to go against fate what truly lead them to this path? In the readings I was never able to say either way but I lean in favor of fate. My three examples of this are the charters Loki, Odin and Oedipus. These three are said to have been fated on how they live, die and even kill in a way that is predestined.
To be a leader, to control and guide people in the right direction is what most of the people are aiming to do in life. Being the main person in the group certainly means that the individual has a lot of power over the public and is able to influence people as he wishes. It might seem that once the person achieves his goal of being above others and starts controlling other people, his duty becomes straightforward and undemanding. However, the role of a leader is very strenuous and challenging. The person who has authority has to balance his personal desires with the needs of people for whom he is in charge. Even though he is enforcing the law does not mean that he can manipulate it as he wants. Moreover the leader should obey the law, which was established by him more than any one else, otherwise people would not consider it as a strict principle. The play "Antigone" which was written by Sophocles and later adopted by Anouilh shows the lives of people who were affected by each other's decisions, behaviors and feelings. I would like to concentrate on the lifestyle and actions of the person who had the most authority in that play, straightforwardly the "king" of the dramatic piece. Those two plays were written at different periods of time and the message which the authors were trying to pass to the readers differs. After reading those two plays I realized that the behavior and the attitude of the king towards the other characters of the story was changed by Anouilh in order to show the true model of a ruler where as Sophocles tried to show him as a cruel, heartless emperor. The personality and the behavior of the king in Sophocles' play is unsentimental and stubborn which shows the king's "appearance" but in ...