Recent orders

Oedipus the King Critical Paper

Oedipus the King: Critical Paper

Sophocles is able to accomplish to achieve several objectives in his play, Oedipus the King. Sophocles magnificently retells a classic Greek tale while also describing the characters and their motives in great detail. Of the characters Sophocles naturally spends the most time characterizing the protagonist of the play, Oedipus. Sophocles conveys Oedipus’ ideals, moral, and opinions about several topics throughout the play. Among the most important and prominent of his beliefs that are revealed dealt with Oedipus’ value of reasoning, intellect, inquiry, and measurement.

Sophocles portrayed Oedipus as an amiable character that the Greek audience could sympathize with and perhaps even relate to. The audience saw a respectable figure, who did not seem to commit any blatant evil, come to his destruction. They saw an indubitable tragedy. Sophocles ensured that the audience would view Oedipus as a respectable and plausible hero by giving Oedipus many of the popular sentiments of the time. These ideals were brought about by a philosophy that was thriving in Greece during Sophocles’ lifetime. Most of Oedipus’ notions, can be traced back to either the dialectic Socrates in who appeared in Plato’s several works, or Plato’s student Aristotle. These notions were being circulated throughout Greece during the time period which Oedipus was thought to be presented, making them common knowledge for the audience of the time (Friedlander 7).

Of all the virtues that the Greeks, especially the Athenians held dear was wisdom, wisdom dealing with everything in life (Friedlander 8). Socrates spurned this Greek movement for wisdom when he not only proclaimed that wisdom is the one true virtue from which all other

Penz 2

virtues originated, but he also put forth the notorious quote, “The unexamined life is not worth living.”(“Apology” 203) . Socrates throughout all of Plato’s dialogues, advocated the importance of the wisdom and said that the desire for this wisdom is the only true path to divinity. Aristotle later contributed to the theory when he wrote in his Nicomachean Ethics, that wisdom separated mankind from the animals and wisdom placed the Greeks closer to the gods that they worshiped and admired(435). The Greeks constantly sought for this wisdom so that it may bring them to their greatest pleasure, the purpose in life, a true and final happiness, the aim of their Eudaimonia.( “N.E.” 397) The Greek audience for which Sophocles wrote could easily sympathize with Oedipus in his play. This is due to the fact that Oedipus was struck down from his pedestal while merely attempting to discover himself and in that process to attain wisdom and happiness. The goals for which Oedipus sought were noble goals that a majority of the audience members may have been seeking.

Plato, in his Republic delineated a duelist theory of our world. Plato wrote that our world is actually a cave where people are bound and forced to look at shadows on the wall for their entire life(67). In Plato’s opinion, reality cannot exist in this world because only shadows cast by a fire are seen(69). According to Plato, the only way to see anything in its quintessence, the only way to see bona fide truth and wisdom is to escape the cave(71). By escaping the cave the person could see the fire as a deceiver of reality because that person has now seen true light and virtue. This light, this philosophic insight of reality allows the person to return to the cave, to see objects in their veritable conformations and give them their appropriate judgement and value(74). This theory is the basis for what Socrates in Plato’s Protagoras avouched his concept of “The Art of Measurement.”(“Prot.”163). Socrates holds that since the world is in a cave, the

3

people cannot trust their judgement or perceptions because they are only of false shadows. Socrates proffered this theory in response to Protagoras’ question of why mankind commits acts that are ultimately harmful, such as smoking or excessive drinking(165). Aristotle believed that this was because of a weak moral habit(“N.E.” 411). However, Socrates did not believe in Aristotle’s famous Akrasia thesis, Socrates believed that no passion or pleasure could possibly overcome the omnipotent knowledge(“Prot. 141”). During the famed dialogue, Protagoras raised an obvious question when he asked why people will continue to smoke although they know it will cause them pain(143). In order to keep from refuting his argument, Socrates explained his Art of Measurement. Socrates declared that the only reason mankind does such harmful things such as smoking is that they simply have no way to measure the immediate pleasure of smoking against the distant pain of the cancer of other disease that smoking causes(144). Socrates said simply that these people have a flawed sense of measurement due to the dark cave they dwell in(“Prot.” 144). Without this art, the essence of wisdom, one cannot accurately weigh pleasure versus pain and one cannot achieve final pleasure…Eudaimonia.

The first step in achieving wisdom is the quest for self-knowledge, the quote on the base of the oracle’s statue at Delphi, “Know Thyself”(Friedlander 5). This was the identity that Oedipus was seeking. According to Socrates, the only way to achieve knowledge in general was though the use of inquiry(“Apology” 210) . Socrates practiced inquiry throughout his entire life. He started this practice when an oracle of Apollo told him that no one was wiser than he(“Apology” 215). In either modesty or disbelieve, Socrates led most of his life questioning others trying to find someone wiser than he. However, although he learned a great deal through his questioning, Socrates discovered only that not one person, philosopher or sophist was truly

4

wise because Socrates would reveal their self-contradictions(“Apology” 217). Regardless if Socrates would ever find anyone wiser than himself through inquiry, he believed that the life of inquiry was the most philosophical, and therefore the most divine(“Apology” 220). Oedipus too, seems to believe this as he spends a great majority of the play asking questions to anyone he suspects potentially has any information. Oedipus questions everyone that approaches him and questions every scenario that confronts him. Oedipus constantly asks questions, “How can we cleanse ourselves- what rites? What’s the source of the trouble?”(164). Whether it is Jocasta or the messenger that Oedipus is speaking with, he is constantly and desperately trying to discover Laius’ murderer, and later his own identity.

The most obvious and practical use of this inquiry is to acquire new knowledge so that intellect can be strengthened. It is obvious that Oedipus is eager to solve his problems. He is all too eager to find the killer of Laius, his statement “I’ll bring it all to light myself!”(167) illustrates his unwavering determination for answers. As Oedipus uses his intellect to analyze the information he has, his desire for answers only becomes stronger. His desire becomes strongest when Jocasta urges Oedipus not to pursue his past any further, Oedipus ignores her request stating “I must know it all, must see the truth at last.”(222). Oedipus seems to be constantly using his intellect to determine the best method to accomplish his goals. Most of his decisions are made by weighing all of his options and finding the best choice, he calculates the best option in regard to the scenario. During the beginning of the play, Oedipus says, “I have wept through the nights, you must know that, groping, laboring over many paths of thought. After a painful search I found one cure. . . .”(162). This shows the extent he labors himself to determine these calculations.

5

The second tool that Oedipus uses to strengthen his intellect is reason. Oedipus frequently uses reason in the play in order to resolve which path he must next take, what inquiries he must further make. Virtually all Greek philosophers including Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle believed that man was a being built on reason and that reason was the most necessary and healthy activity for man to practice. In this sense Oedipus seems to be the ideal person as he uses a great deal of sound reasoning. He uses this sound reasoning to accurately judge the situation and continue on his path to identity such as when he states to the chorus leader that if the killer did not flinch at murder, then he will not flinch at the words of Oedipus’ threats (175). He also uses his reason when he tells Creon that he may be danger from the killer, which ironically enough would later come true(167). However, Oedipus proves that he is still in Plato’s dark cave when he uses an even greater amount of false reason and judgement. Oedipus is often quick to judge a situation and to let anger cloud his judgement, such as when he accuses Creon and Tiresias of plotting against him(189). He also fails in his reasoning when he persists to learn the truth despite Jocasta’s pleas(223-224). If Oedipus had stopped his quest for identity when he realized that he was Laius’ killer, he would have avoided a significant amount of pain.

Oedipus uses his intellect and his reason to calculate his decisions such as whom to question or who to accuse. However, his calculations are not always correct. Oedipus seems to deviate from his reason at times. For instance, he wrongly accuses Creon of attempting to take his throne and Oedipus even has the gall to call Tiresias ignorant and blind to the light of truth to which Oedipus is actually blind (181). The quest for Oedipus’ identity is actually a simple equation which Oedipus himself cannot see because of his clouded senses. His lack of the “Art of Measurement” keeps Oedipus from true reason and intellect. However, Oedipus’ hubris leads

6

him to believe that his judgements are in fact sound and he continues blindly into a quest for knowledge which may not be beneficial. His flawed perceptions prohibit Oedipus from accurately comparing the pleasure and the pain that his identity would cause him. Tiresias indeed had the “Art of Measurement” as he vehemently tells Oedipus to, “Go on reflect on that, solve that.”(185). One of the most prevalent ironies in the play is that Oedipus himself is blind to accurate measurement and truth until he blinds himself. He expressed extremely sound judgement and measurement when he gouged out his own eyes. Oedipus compared the future pain his eyes would give him against the initial pain of the needle and made a justified decision and Oedipus seems content with his decision to wander the mountains. Oedipus had finally seen the light outside the cave, unfortunately, it would be too late to save Oedipus from disgrace.

Every decision or quest that Oedipus made was solved by a simple equation. The equation was a matter of simply comparing pleasure and pain to decide the best path to a hedonistic lifestyle. Philosophers of the time such as Plato and Aristotle wrote of such equations and they described things such as the “Art of Measurement” and true reason to help describe what would be needed to correctly solve such an equation. Oedipus as well as other characters in the play embodied these virtues and skills, or even their defects in order to draw yet another link between literature and philosophy.

7

Works Cited

Aristotle. “Ethica Nicomachea”. Introduction to Aristotle. Ed. Richard McKeon. Trans.W.D. Ross. New York: Random House Incorporated, 1947.308-545.

Friedlander MD, Ed. “Enjoying Oedipus the King by Sophocles”. 1 Aug.1999. Online Posting. 2 Nov. 1999. .

Plato. “Apology”. Plato’s Famous Works. Trans. Stanley Lombardo and Karen Bell. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1992. 194-223.

Plato. “Protagoras”. Plato’s Famous Works. Trans. Stanley Lombardo and Karen Bell. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1992. 121-183.

Plato. “Republic”. Plato’s Famous Works. Trans. Stanley Lombardo and Karen Bell. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1992. 30-110.

Sophocles. “Oedipus the King.” Trans. Robert Fagles. The Three Theban Plays. New York: Viking Penguin Incorporated, 1982. 155-252.

Oedipus the King- Bliss in Ignorance

Oedipus the King- Bliss in Ignorance

One of the most memorable and meaningful Socratic quotes applies well when in context of Sophocles’ Theban Trilogy. “The unexamined life is not worth living,” proclaims Socrates. He could have meant many different things by this statement, and in relation to the play, Oedipus, the meaning is found to be even more complex.

Indeed, the situation of Oedipus, king of Thebes, the truth of this statement is in question. Would Oedipus have been better off if he was blind to the knowledge of his natural parents and the fate, which was foretold to someday befall him? It is true that his life would have been a far better and easier path if he had never known about his true origins. His life in Corinth would have been long and prosperous, and Thebes would have lived on under the rule of King Laius. In fact, everyone would have been better off in the end if Oedipus had not ventured out beyond the walls of Corinth. So is it worth living an examined life? (Friedlander)

Socrates had made this statement long after the creation of the Theban Trilogy. In the context of his own time, this was meant to imply that life must be examined and reflected upon, known and discovered by each individual philosopher to better enrich life for all. Yet, in terms of Oedipus Rex, this was meant in a vastly different way.

The unexamined life was one that was in the dark, unknown as to what fate lay beyond every turn and irony of living. Oedipus, up to the point in which he heard the comment in the tavern in Corinth, lived an unexamined life. To Socrates, he was an unfulfilled man, one who deserved to know more, one who was not complete. However, in a much less metaphysical sense, Oedipus’ life was complete, in that he had all that he needed and was living a happy and fruitful life. So what Socrates had meant, that the life which was not rich with self exploration and reflection was not worth living, was indeed different than its application in terms of Oedipus, who’s life was unexamined, yet complete. (Norton 653-655)

The question arises, what would life have been like, if Oedipus had not discovered his true origins? If he had stayed in Corinth, would any of this have ever happened? We find that indeed, we would have no story, if not for that lone comment of a drunkard, which sparked the fire of rebellion in the young prince Oedipus. He ventured out to Delphi to find knowledge of his background, and to discover if it was indeed the truth, despite the fact that his adopted parents of Corinth had assured him that it was false. Oedipus leaves Corinth, fulfilling the Socratic idea of the unexamined life. However, we must evaluate the eventual consequences of his actions and the implications, which they possess. What becomes of his fateful journey out of Corinth leads to the downfall of an entire city and family line.(Rivendell) If he had not murdered his true father, King Laius, the Sphinx would have never descended upon Thebes, he would have never fulfilled the prophecy, and all would have lived on in a relative peace and tranquility.

This is where the idea of freewill versus predestination comes into the play. Many ancient people believed in predestination, the idea that if something was going to happen, it would, and nothing could stop it, because they might have been impressed by the fulfillment of prophecies. It also frees people from worry about making the right decisions. In the story of Oedipus, Sophocles goes out of his way to present Oedipus as an extremely capable, beloved chief executive leader.(Norton 657) It is often said the Oedipus was fated to doom, that he could have done nothing; to the contrary, Oedipus spent every moment of his life digging his own grave. His excessive pride and arrogance, as well as his notion that he could challenge a prophecy from the gods, was the shovel he dug with. All the important decisions he made in his lifetime, he made with this hubris. His judgements were all the foundation for his demise; he, not fate, constructed his path to doom. Conspicuously, Sophocles never suggests that Oedipus has brought his destiny in himself by any ungodly pride (hubris) or tragic flaw (hamartia).

Sophocles used the riddle of the sphinx to characterized Oedipus as a tragic man for he came about his tragic discovery not because of an evil act or an evil trait but because of the person he was. Oedipus traits, which gave him riches and power ultimately, led to his tragic ending. Also, the god Apollo did not predestine that Oedipus would kill his father and marry his mother by the oracle, he only stated what he knew was inevitable because of who Oedipus was.(Norton 686-687)

Once examining these aspects of the relationship between Oedipus Rex and the idea that “The unexamined life is not worth living”, we can come to a final examination of its implications. The question was addressed, that of the value of the examined life, can be answered. Indeed, if Oedipus had not ventured beyond the protective walls of his adopted home, would anything such as what occurred in the play ever have transpired? If Oedipus had not pursued those answers to the mysteries that plagued him, despite the pleading warnings of Iöcasta, in fact his life would have been contented and happy. Instead, he follows the Socratic method of exploration and discovery, and proceeds down the path of pain and distraught. (Rivendell)

Was, after it was over, all worth it? We find that no, it was not. Being content and suited with what he knew of himself would have saved Oedipus and his children/siblings much agony. However, in the typical Greek tragedy, we must see his fall from grace through, which is indeed what happens.

In the bliss of ignorance, much pain and difficulty is averted. For what worries does the ignorant man have? In the case of Oedipus, ignorance would have suited him fine. The Socratic quote, “the unexamined life is not worth living” certainly does not hold true in the case of Oedipus Rex.

While it may hold importance and a substantial meaning for our own lives, in the case of Oedipus Rex, he would have been better off without it. Indeed, for while the unexamined life is poor in a metaphysical sense, Oedipus would have truly been fine without it. For the unexamined life is a simple one and he would have lived a long and happy life, never discovering the true nature of his birth, nor even caring. In renouncing his reign over Thebes, rejection the power and wealth, he gained something infinitely more valuable yet infinitely less tangible: wisdom. He gained insight into himself, something he had lacked for all his life. Hubris killed Oedipus the King, and humility created the new Oedipus.

Works Cited

Friedlander, Ed. “Enjoying ‘Oedipus the King’, by Sophocles.” http://www.pathguy.com (Nov. 1999).

“Oedipus.” Encarta 1996 CD-ROM. Redmond: Microsoft, 1996.

Rivendell. “Rivendell’s Greek Drama Page.” http://www.watson.org/rivendell (Nov. 1999).

Sophocles. “Oedipus the King.” The Norton Anthology of World Masterpieces. Ed. Mack et al. 6th ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1992. 652-701.

Oedipus the King and Things Fall Apart

Oedipus the King and Things Fall Apart

The poem “Oedipus the King” and the novel “Things Fall Apart, there is some differences between these two stories. These two stories were very famous in the ancient time. “Things Fall Apart has won the following awards: Nigerian National Trophy, Commonwealth Poetry Prize, Nigerian National Merit Award. Things Fall Apart and Related Readings becomes a complete literature unit with the Teacher’s Source Book which includes author information, background, chapter notes and 15 reproducible pages for student use” (Things Online). “Oedipus the King” was also prized: “Aristotle prized ‘Oedipus the King’ so highly that he used it to illustrate many of his principles of tragedy” (Sophocles 906). The background of “Oedipus the King” was also well-known. Many Americans have already known what is the poetry is about. “Although these details were commonly known, there was disagreement about the outcome of Oedipus’s life” (Sophocles 906).

“The author of “Oedipus the King”, Sophocles, “was born between 500 and 494 B.C.E. into an affluent Athenian family. He began acting and singing early, and her served as a choral leader in the celebrations for the defeat of the Persians at Marathon in 480 B.C.E.” (Sophocles 906). He was a very famous author in the around in ancient time: “Because of his dramatic and public achievements, he was venerated during his

lifetime, and after his death in 406-405 B.C.E., a cult was established in his honor” (Sophocles 906). The author of “Things Fall Apart”, Chinua Achebe, “was born the son of Isaiah Okafo” (Culross Online). “He married Chrisitie Chinwe Okoli, and now has four children: Chinelo, Ikechukwu, Chidi, and Nwando” (Culross Online). Achebe wrote this novel to reflect the African cultures: “He also fiercely resents the stereotype of Africa as an undifferentiated ‘primitive’ land, the ‘heart of darkness,’ as Conrad called it. Throughout the novel he shows how African cultures vary among themselves and how they change over time” (Chinua Online). However, Sophocles used a lot of irony in poetry, especially dramatic irony. For example, Oedipus the King killed his own father, Lauis, is major dramatic irony in this poetry. However, Chinua Achebe, “has been able to avoid imitating the trends in English literature.” (Culross Online). He “rejecting the European notion that art should be accountable to no one, and [needs] to justify itself to nobody, as he puts it in his book of essays, Morning Yet on Creation Day” (Culross Online).

The characters of “Oedipus the King” and ” Things Fall Apart”, Oedipus and Okonkwo, they were both experienced difficulty when they achieved their goal. That is really a tragedy for each a matter of their own personal failing and also a tragedy each experiences caused by outside forces over which they have no control. Indeed, they both a short temper. Oedipus is a person who gets angry easily. We can prove by examining his conversion with his brother-in-law: ” What is our trouble? How shall we cleanse

ourselves?” (Sophocles 910). However, Okonkwo is also with the same personality. Okonkwo has a very short, violent temper that is immediately triggered in response t actions that he deems to be weak. Okonkwo is a man who afraid he did not hold a title and he would be described as a woman; thus being an outcast of this society. “That was how Okonkwo first came to know that agbala was not only anther name for woman, it could also mean a mean who had taken no tiltle. And so Okonkwo was ruled by one passion–to hate everything that his father Unoka and had loved” (Achebe 13). Okonkwo basically lived by the phrase, act first and think it thought later. Unfortunately, almost every time that Okonkwo lets loose his violent temper in his manly way, he brings trouble upon himself, as well as those around him. One way to explain his actions and the misfortunes that usually follow is to conclude that Okonkwo has bad luck. Another way of looking at this fact is to say that the events are a result of coincidence. However, I disagree with these views, and instead assets that Achebe deliberately made sure that after each of Okonkwo’s outbursts, a tragedy befell him and those around him. I think that Achebe could have been trying to hint to the reader that placing too much emphasis on acting manly is bad.

Women role in and Africa in the ancient time is also discussed in novel. They were both married when they were a young lady: “Young women were considered marriageable in their mid-teen” (Chinua Online). Women were treated as a servant; their duties are cooking for their husbands, taking care everything of the household etc.

“And as he told them of the past they sat in darkness or the dim glow of logs, waiting for the women to finish their cooking. When they finished, each brought her bowl of foo-foo and bowl of soup to her husband” (Achebe 54). “The women had gone to the bush to children to visit their playmates in the neighboring compounds” (Achebe 55). However, if they did something wrong, they may be suffered from beating: “In keeping with the IBO view of female nature, the tribe allowed wife beating” (Chun Online). A good example is found when Okonkwo beat his wife, Ojiugo, only because she went out to plait her hair. “He walked back to his obi to await Ojiugo’s return. And when she returned he beat her very heavily” (Achebe 29). Actually, it was really a big fault of Okonkwo since he beat her in the Week of Peace: “You have committed a great evil” (Achebe 30). “But Okonkwo was not the man to stop beating somebody half-way through, not even for fear of a goddess” (Achebe 30). He was really an irritable man that could not control himself. He had no respect for women. In fact, not only wives were treated badly, mothers were always ignored by their children. They forget their mothers when they were rich and happy; however, they refuge their mothers when they met difficulties and sadness: “A man belongs to his fatherland when things are good and life is sweet. But when there is sorrow and bitterness he finds refuge in his motherland. A man has both joy and sorrow in his life and when the bad times come his mother is always there to comfort him” (Chun Online). The importance of respecting mother nature is depicted in a story, for the gods of the sky withheld rain for seven years. “He remembered the story

she often told of the quarral between Earth and Sky long ago, and how Sky withheld rain for seven years, until crops withered and the dead could not be buried because the hoes broke on the stony Earth” (Achebe 53). The earth goddess is to the Ibo people what mother nature is to the westerners, and without balance order is lost.

Women were treated unfairly in ancient Greek. In “Oedipus the King”, “Jacasta the Queen is a victim, but not as much as she is a catalyst for Oedipus’ own victimization. She keeps her faith throughout and tried to relieve Oedipus of his” (Boyer Online). She finally committed suicide when the past of Oedipus was revealed. “Hanging from above, entangled in some twisted hanging strands” (Sophocles 938). “Because of this, readers may in turn pity her and loathe her” (Boyer Online). She However, as we referred to the article of “The Goddess Eileithyia and the Role of Women in Ancient Greece”, ” women played an interesting role in ancient Greek culture. While they were considered citizens of the state, they were not allowed to vote or even to compete in the Olympic games” (The Goddess Online). That means women in ancient Greek, they were also trapped by the publics; they had no equal rights as men.

“Oedipus the King” and “Things fall apart” are both tragedy which is “form of drama, central to Western literature, in which a person of superior intelligence and character, a leader of the community. Overcome by the very obstacles he is struggling to remove” (Encyclopedia Online). Tragedy can reflect another vision of life, again rooted in religious drama-the mystery plays and morality plays of medieval France and

England” (Encyclopedia Online). There is also a tragedy when a drama or other literary work that recounts that fall of an individual who, while undergoing suffering, deals responsibly with the situations and dilemmas that her or she faces, and who thus demonstrates that value of human effort. In ” Oedipus the King”, there is tragedy because Oedipus the King unwittingly killing his father and hen marrying his mother, the queen Jocasta. When the past of Oedipus the King was revealed, the queen Jocasta committed suicide and Oedipus decided to blind his eyes. “After years of wandering as an exile, sustained by the loving care of his daughter Antigone” (Sophocles Online). In the “Things Fall Apart”, there is also a tragedy because of the exile of Okonkwo in Mbanta: “But the missionaries persevered, and in the end they were received by the rulers of Mbanta” (Achebe 148). He was exiled since he killed many people. He killed the head of messenger who came to Umuofia to beak up a town meeting in order to show he was not weak.

The setting of two stories had differences. In “Things Fall Apart”, the setting in the personal tragedy of Okonkwo. “It set in an Ibo village in Nigeria in the late 1800s, this story unfolds like a Greek tragedy as traditional Ibo customs are challenged by new European ways. This classic was the first novel by an African writer included in the syllabus for students in English-speaking Africa” (Things Online). In “Oedipus the King”, the setting in the case of most Greek tragedies, does not require a change of scene. Throughout the play the scene with at least one door represents the façade of the

royal palace of Thebes. Even when action takes place inside the palace, such as Jocasta committed suicide and Oedipus blinded his eyes, there is no shift of scene. These interior actions are described in a speech delivered by a messenger rather than enacted before the audience. The messenger speech eliminates the need for scene changes, which, due to the limited resources of the ancient theater, would have been difficult and awkward. Sophocles, like Aeschylus and Euripides, made a virtue of the necessity of this convention of the ancient theater by writing elaborate messenger speeches which provide a vivid word picture of the offstage action. Dramatic irony is much-used literary device in this play.

In conclusion, Oedipus the King and Okonkwo should have fought again his manly pride, which reminds them that killing someone should not bother them. However, Okonkwo has trouble accepting this, but must for fear of being considered weak, like a ‘shivering old woman’ (Achebe 45). Another instance of Okonkwo’s hot temper arise while he and some other men are locked up in a cell and Okonkwo reaffirms how he believes they should have skilled Mr. Smith. Messenger overhears this remark and beats each of the men on their backs and heads with a large stick. A final illustration of Okonkwo’s rash actions leading to suffering for himself and hose around him occurs when he hastily kills the head messenger. The messenger was only able to speak 2 short sentences, before a furious Okonkwo assassinated him. This brings the ultimate suffering to Okonkwo, who hanged himself, as well as suffering for the rest of the tribe, who may

not bury him and some of whom were brought to the curt where Okonkwo and the others suffered earlier. Okonkwo’s tragic flaw was his constantly flared temper, which was a result of a fear of being considered weak, or womanly. It was this temper that was constantly bringing problems to Okonkwo and others around him. In the end, Okonkwo could fight no more and had to take his own life. I believe that Achebe purposefully arranged the novel in this manner in order to convey that being manly is not as important as some believe it to be. In ” Oedipus the King”, the story warns us against parricide and incest, and may cause its audience to feel guilty about violence against parents and incestuous behavior or desires. The message embodied in the story is a powerful one, even thought we may not at first find it striking since we have become accustomed to the incest taboo. However, I think the theory about the Oedipus the king may have the same effect as the Oedipus story itself, as expressed in the form of myth, tragedy, and comedy.