Thursday, September 13, 2012
Blog #4: Feet in the Oedipus the King
In Oedipus the King, Sophocles uses feet to represent how Oedipus’ fate has been set from his birth. When Laius found out about the prophecy, he abandoned Oedipus on a mountain, and “fastened his [Oedipus] ankles” (792). This decision left a permanent scar on his ankle which parallels Oedipus having a permanent destiny from the prophecy. Even the name Oedipus is derived from his injury. When the Messenger is talking to Oedipus about his ankles, Oedipus responds that he has the “dreadful mark” since “the cradle” (1134). He has been marked by the Gods at birth to experience suffering. Feet have the ability to move around freely. His bounded feet at birth, however, metaphorically indicate he is confined to a certain extent of free will: no matter what actions he or other characters took to avoid the prophecy, it will not prevent the fulfillment of the prophecy that Apollo made to Laius. For example, Oedipus attempted to run away from his prophecy by fleeing Corinth. This was an action taken “freely” but this action ultimately caused the death of Laius when Oedipus crossed paths with Laius. The Gods fated that decision to cause Laius' death. The Shepherd tells Oedipus that “If you are the man he says you are, believe me, you were born for pain” (1305). Even he acknowledges that the moment Oedipus was born he was destined for misery. The bounded feet both represents how he is marked at birth and his limited free will.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that Oedipus has limited freedom throughout the play and this is symbolized through his feet, but if you take it a step further this also shows that mortals cannot outmaneuver the gods. Oedipus did have the ability though to know the truth about himself or not discover it, and despite Jocasta's warning he still went through with it. Also it is interesting to think about that Oedipus went on his journey because he felt as though something were not right, but if his adopted parents had just told him the truth, he might have turned back when he received his prophecy.
ReplyDeleteI slightly disagree with the conclusion that Oedipus had any free will because it is all subjective. We can't ever determine if an event like running away from Corinth was an independent choice or just another predetermined point on Oedipus's fated path; it is purely speculation. I think that wondering how Oedipus would have killed his father had he not run away from Corinth is something minor that underlies the more central point that the Gods have a much greater degree of power in this play than we have seen before.
ReplyDeleteI agree and disagree with this post and the comments. I agree that Oedipus' will is "limited" by the gods (to such a degree, perhaps, that his fate is inevitable), and I also agree with Jordan that we can't speculate about what was going on in Oedipus' mind. I don't think that these are the questions we should be asking, though. Instead, I think we should be returning to the *structure* and the *language* of the play to ask a more complex question that doesn't force us into an either/or answer: what is the relationship between fate and free will in this play? In other words, we need to think "synthesis." The thesis is that Oedipus has no free will; the antithesis is that he does. So how do we reconcile these two claims? This is something that we should all spend time thinking about before tomorrow's class.
ReplyDelete