Lacanian Mirror Stage: Oedipus the King
The essence of this paper is to determine whether or not Jocasta played a more important role in the rise and fall of the title character. The paper will examine the play Oedipus Tyrannus through the eyes of the French theorist Jacques Lacan. Specifically the paper will focus on the mirror stage of Lacan's theories.
As to the criteria that the paper will use, there are some "truths" that need to be established about the Lacanian division of thinking. In Lacan's way of thought, we all have repressed desires, and these desires can never be fulfilled. In language, there are similar"eternal desires" that cannot be satiated. Lacan carries this further in identifying the patriarchal society with which we live in as being founded on men's words. Therefore, women have no voice in this world and cannot be satisfied in their life times.
For one to better understand Jocasta's character, one must have a knowledge of Lacanian theory, on which it is based. Lacan's mirror stage, originally espoused by Freud, and its relationship to the conscious and un- consciousness. Freud believed that when a baby looked at an image of him/herself in a mirror, they would at a certain point in their development "realize" that the reflection was him/herself they were seeing. It is at this moment in a child's life that the "ego" is formed, or the formation of a "self-awareness". This ego is present in all people; it serves as a reminder of who we are and where we came from.
However, Freud reasoned that to be a fully developed human, we must move on from the simple realization that we are ourselves. We must know or come to know that we aren't the only ones in the mirror. The "child," our selves and our egos, must also realize that our "mother" is there in the reflection with us. In doing so we begin to understand that we are not the only ones in the image, and therefore, not the center of being. Moreover, we "turn" to our mothers and look at them, breaking the egotistic stare. It is the ability to break the primary concern of viewing ourselves that allows us to move into society. We must be able to break that self concerned stare and focus it on our "Mothers" or society as it were. Thus constitutes the mirror stage of Freud's theory.
The basis of all the conflicts in the entire novel stem from the differences in family life, which are brought on by the discrepancies of religious beliefs. Rueven, who is an Orthodox Jew, goes to a parochial school where Hebrew is taught instead of Yiddish (which would be considered the first Jewish language). Rueven's school is also very integrated with many English-speaking classes. But on the other hand, Danny, who attends a yeshiva (also a Jewish school), considers himself a true Jew because he (unlike Rueven) wears the traditional side curls and is educated in Yiddish. At first the two boys cannot stand each other, many times Danny refers to Rueven as "apikorsim," (32) which basically translates to... someone who is not true to their religion. These differences between the two soon become obsolete with one unfortunate accident, and make them realize they could use each other to get through some hard times. "Silence is all we dread. There's ransom in a voice--But Silence is infinity."-Emily Dickinson
Even though they did not get along at first, their difference brought them together and bonded them. They were able to help each other through a majority of the most difficult times in life. Their differences taught them more about themselves and what they wanted out of life. Danny’s struggle to get away from a religious future confused Reuven at first, but it gave him a new perspective on his choice to become a Rabbi. Reuven’s refusal to follow his father’s plan for the future helped inspire Danny to choose a different career path and continue on to graduate school at Columbia. This type of relationships also teaches tolerance patience with other people 's points of views, which make us more are of our own. The fact that they did not follow their father 's wishes for them in a career shows that they are stronger and more well rounded having experienced each others point of views in
In “Why Literature Matters” the author, Dana Gioia, argues that literature is very important in today’s society. He talks about the decline of reading over the years and the effects it has on different companies and communities. Gioia uses many persuasive techniques, such as evidence, jingoism, and diction, to try and persuade the reader that literature is important.
I admire Roland Goubert (The Goober) the most of all the characters within this book because he is honest, loving, and a loyal friend to Jerry. In the book when Jerry was refusing to sell the chocolates, Goober felt many feelings that Jerry was feeling. For example the guilt, fear, anger, tension, and most of all the horror of living another day just waiting for the coming of the next homeroom period to once again refuse the chocolates from Brother Leon. That was a sure sign of a bond between the two of them. When Goober waited for Jerry one day at the school’s entrance and pulled him aside to ask, “ Jeez, Jerry, what did you do it for? ” after the assignment was over with and Jerry still refused to sell the chocolates. That showed that Goober cared about Jerry and wanted to warn him of Brother Leon and how Brother Leon could control Ferry’s fate. For example when Jerry stated, “ It’s not the end of the world. Four hundred kids in this school are going to sell chocolates. What does it matter ...
Oedipus began Oedipus Rex as a king, only to end the tale as a blinded beggar. Oedipus' fall from his kingly status was not by accident or because of some other person. Oedipus is the only one that can be blamed for his misfortune. Oedipus' character traits are shown most clearly during his spiraling downfall, thinking he is "a simple man, who knows nothing", yet knowing more than he realizes by the end of the story.
Oedipus the King, written by Sophocles, is a tragic drama that portrays a great deal of irony. Oedipus, the protagonist, suffers serious misfortune that is significant in that the “misfortune is logically connected with the hero’s actions” (AbleMedia LLC). When the reader learns about the background of Greek culture and the life of Sophocles, this tragic drama is able to become more alive and valuable. It is important to familiarize oneself with the author because it allows for a greater connection to the dialogue presented. Through the character development of Oedipus, one can see how ironic circumstances can turn a prideful king into a tragic figure.
At the outset of Oedipus Rex no female characters are present; the reader sees a king who comes to the door full of curiosity: “Explain your mood and purport. Is it dread /Of ill that moves you or a boon ye crave?” When the priest has responded that the people are despairing from the effects of the plague, the king shows sympathy for his subjects: “Ye sicken all, well wot I, yet my pain, /How great soever yours, outtops it all.” Thomas Van Nortwick in Oedipus: The Meaning of a Masculine Life : “We see already the supreme self-confidence and ease of command in Oedipus. . . . exudes a godlike mastery in the eyes of his subjects. . . .”(21-22); such “godlike mastery” will be his undoing. The critic Ehrenberg warns that it “may lead to ‘hubris’” (74-75). Throughout the drama Sophocles draws out an ongoing contrast between the “godlike mastery” of the king and the softer, more balanced and selfless characteristics of Jocasta, his wife. She is a foil to Oedipus. Shortly thereafter Creon, Jocasta’s brother, is returning from the Delphic oracle with the fateful words of the god’s command: “...
The play Oedipus the King by Sophocles has often been described as the story of a “tragic hero.” This story is indeed tragic; however, Oedipus is not the only character stricken by tragedy. Equally stricken may be the character of Jocasta. She, as well as Oedipus, suffers many tragedies throughout the story. Shifting the story to a different perspective quite possibly may increase how we view it. The point is not to denounce Oedipus’ role as a tragic hero, but to denounce his role as the only tragic character.
The two writers in tragedy showed what many writers couldn’t throughout the Greek tragedian era. Sophocles, who wrote “Oedipus Rex”, portrayed Jocasta as a caring mother who soon turned into a wife of her own son, while Shakespeare, who wrote “Hamlet”, used the same Greek tragedian tools and portrayed Gertrude as a naïve mother who made one decision that separated her son, Hamlet, from her. Gertrude was similar to Jocasta in that both were naïve but protective of their own sons. However Jocasta was more aware of the actions she took, even after the prophecy was told.
Here is a story where Oedipus the King, who has accomplished great things in his life, discovers that the gods were only playing with him. He has everything a man of that time could want; he is king of Thebes, he has a wonderful wife and children, and great fame through out the lands. He has lived a good life, but in the end everything is taken from him.
The film soon reverts back to the films current narrative/equillibrium and is focused on Danny, who is now following the same path as his brother, after he submits an essay based on Adolph Hitler, which is politically incorrect, referring him as being a "great civil rights leader"; is currently on the urge of getting expelled from school.
The role of Jocasta in Oedipus the King is crucial. Jocasta sees the reality of the situation before Oedipus and the chorus do. The prophecies made themselves known long ago, and Jocasta believed that they would come true. Jocasta did have faith in the oracles, but only enough faith to suit her own purpose. She worked to suppress much of the faith Oedipus had in them, in the interest of keeping the city, herself, and Oedipus in a powerful yet strong position. Jocasta's role in the story influenced Oedipus to think back to Laius' death and begin to try to solve the Sphinx's riddle.
“Oedipus the King” by Sophocles is a tragedy of a man who unknowingly kills his father and marries his mother. Aristotles’ ideas of tragedy are tragic hero, hamartia, peripeteia, anagnorisis, and catharsis these ideas well demonstrated throughout Sophocles tragic drama of “Oedipus the King”.
Oedipus the King is an excellent example of Aristotle's theory of tragedy. The play has the perfect Aristotelian tragic plot consisting of paripeteia, anagnorisis and catastrophe; it has the perfect tragic character that suffers from happiness to misery due to hamartia (tragic flaw) and the play evokes pity and fear that produces the tragic effect, catharsis (a purging of emotion).
Important concepts in psychoanalysis are the id, superego, and ego. The id is an entirely unconscious and instinctual layer of an individual and operates on what is known as the “pleasure principle”, meaning it is constantly seeking immediate satisfaction. The ego is the component of the self that deals with reality and operates on the reality principle, which tries to satisfy the id’s needs in a much more socially and morally acceptable way. The superego is the last part to develop and this is what individuals learn from their surroundings, like society and the people ...