Ancient literature is extremely valuable to modern people, because it depicts certain aspects of earlier society, including its strong and weak points. In this sense, Sophocles’s “Oedipus The King” is useful as a reading for modern students, because the literary work provides a unique account of the history and thus might develop readers’ interest in this science. In addition, the play elucidates such important aspects of contemporary society as political violence and facilitates a clear understanding of the contemporary mores in high political echelons.
Sophocles, as an ancient dramatist, gives an account of history: “You residents of Thebes, our native land,/ look on this man, this Oedipus, the one/ who understood that celebrated riddle. /He was the most powerful of men./All citizens who witnessed this man’s wealth/ were envious” (Sophocles, at bartleby.com, 1810). Generating the conclusion of his dramatic writing, the ancient thinker, therefore, addresses the primary value of history; it allows eternalizing and glorifying those whose deeds deserve to be mentioned in historical manuscripts. Furthermore, Sophocles clearly explains the methodology, or the set of theoretical tools each historian should use: poetic and dramatic description, regarded as much stronger and more influential than listing events and the hero’s acts in chronological order, as it allows more monolithic idealization of the certain character- for instance in “Oedipus the King” the author reveals mythological experiences through depicting the protagonist’s personality as well as through secondary agents, whose natures and psychological contexts are reinforced by a traditional Greek chorus, which to great extent determines all waxes and wanes.
In addition, in “Oedipus The King”, violence appears the most usable measure that allows achieving obedience and power. Oedipus as a ruler is supposed to solve a problem of the disaster that fell upon his state and thus invites a blind prophet, Tiresias, expecting to clarify the causes of the plague. Forcing the old man, to tell the truth, Oedipus uses his authority to intimidate and curse the old man, thus using psychological violence: “This can be borne no longer! Out with thee! A curse light on thee! Wilt thou not depart? Wilt thou not turn and wend thy backward way?” (Sophocles, at bartleby.com, 2001, l. 454-456). Similarly, after the shepherd he is interrogating refuses to answer his questions, Oedipus threatens the old man with tortures and death: “Oh, by the Gods, my master, ask no more! – Thou diest if I question this again” (Sophocles, at bartleby.com, 2001, l. 1201-1202). As one can understand, violence in these cases appears the final argument, it is not merely a tool of achieving the goals, set by Oedipus for himself, but are also the proof of his powerlessness. The issue of social class is also an influential factor in these two scenes: notably, Oedipus begins to manipulate his authority and treat both seniors with undue familiarity after he realizes they are his last chance to learn the truth, which means, all his means and resources have already exhausted. Thus, he decides he decides to use his king’s privilege of power over ordinary citizens and unfortunately does not meet appropriate respect for his nobility. In this sense, another incentive to reach his goal is added: beyond his basic desire to receive the vital information, Oedipus seeks to reassert his power over the others and thus uses his “terror policy” to defend his social image and re-establish control over the residents of his state.
Furthermore, it is important to recollect the way Oedipus gained political influence. Distracting from the issues of kinship, it is possible to say that he accidentally killed the king of Thebes in a street skirmish and, using the disorder caused by the sudden death of the national leader, he seized the throne and forced Laius’ widow to marry him. In the present case, the issue of gender plays its role: being aware of Jocasta’s helplessness, which resulted from her spouse’s death, he decided to strengthen his unstable political position through the marriage. Jocasta, in her turn, often demonstrates victimization, especially through her efforts to console him to avoid her husband’s rage and avoid psychological attacks. Thus, she simply accepted her fate as a king’s trophy and took quite a permissive approach to the violence and pressure. In the given play, the woman is treated like a king’s spouse by everyone including the king, so the problem of her victimization lies in her outlook, which included identifying herself as an integral part of her husband rather than a separate individuality. She is always obedient to and consistent with her spouse and seems to avoid developing her views on the issues that emerge as the plot develops.
The final episode of violence from “Oedipus The King” is self-maiming or violence directed to one’s self: “That sight shall see, nor citadel, nor tower, Nor sacred shrines of Gods whence I, who stood Most honored one in Thebes, myself have banished, Commanding all to thrust the godless forth, Him whom the Gods do show accursed, the stock of Laius old” (Sophocles, at bartleby, 2001, l. 1424-1429). As one can assume, Oedipus blinds himself, driven by self-pity and the feeling of guilt for his transgressions. The violence against the self therefore can be categorized as “moral”, as the psychological suffering and repentance appear much stronger, more fearful, and painful than the physical. Thus, to safeguard his soul from the long agony, Oedipus decides to remove a physical part of himself, so that the truth is covered from him again after he stabs out his eyes. Oedipus reveals his weakness again, as he deliberately deprives himself of the ability to see the truth, because of the fear of facing the adverse reality.
Works cited
Sophocles. Oedipus the King. 2006. Web.