Oedipus the King

968 words

When one looks at the way in which the great controversy occurred in the end of Sophocles' play, Oedipus the King, they most likely can observe the way in which the entire situation could have been avoided. If not for two of the characters in the story being so naïve in believing that getting rid of their son would save them from a prophecy about their child. Prophecies, in this story, were the capital reason that all the events took place. Many people believe that one should not fully place blame on Jocasta and Laius because that's what anyone in their society would have done, but this is still not acceptable in any case. Some may believe that Oedipus' stubbornness and false sense of pride was the actual reason that he ended up blind. If he hadn't been so headstrong and widespread about the way that he was going to punish the person who brought the plague on the city, when he found out it was he, his punishments wouldn't have had to be so severe. Also, there were three other factors that played a huge part in this unraveling tragedy in the city of Thebes, their politics, laws, and the general rules that they followed. These three things seemed to have the most effect on the story conclusion because they frame the reason why the situation was able to happen, the reason why it did happen, and if it will happen again.
Jocasta and Laius' behavior was, in fact, the primary reason that he ended up blind, but his arrogance was the actual reason that he actual ended up scratching his eyes out. If Jocasta were to be blamed for the events that took place, it would be because she was married and twice impregnated by her own son. A mother should be able to recognize her own son no matter how long she hadn't seen him. Also, if she and her husband were so afraid that their son would one day kill them, they should have murdered him themselves or at least witnessed the death of their own son. Not only did their carelessness end up bringing on their deaths, but it... [continues]

Read full essay