Throughout the play ‘Odepus the King', reader feels that there were sufficient indicators from which Oedipus should have predicted way before time that some truth was being concealed from him (Zachrisson and Anders 313). From messages expressed metaphorically to messages almost certainly meant to convey the understanding that some truth was awaiting him, instances of indicative expressions dominate the play. From the onset, the play is characterised by views and opposing views over just how aggressively Oedipus should pursue the truth regarding his true parentage and as to who was the murderer behind the death of King Laius (Priel and Beatriz 433). As a leader, however, Oedipus the King attempts to understand his advisors, only to learn belatedly that the conflicting opinions from his advisors and people who cared to comment on how he should ago about killing the murderer of his father, were in deed specifically meant to conceal the truth from Oedipus. Instances of such occur throughout the entire play.
For instance, Tiresias was the ancient blind seer of the Thebes kingdom and thus should have been able to reveal who the murderer was. However, when asked to find the murderer, her response is such that any alert person would suspect to conceal some truth. Her response was that it was in the best interest of all people that she does not disclose the truth at that moment since after all, events that were to follow were going to reveal things.
Another incidence that should have served as a hint to Oedipus is demonstrated when confrontation ensues between Oedipus and Teiresias over who was responsible for the murder. Teiresias hints once more that Oedipus will be horrified and ashamed on learning the real truth about his true parentage. This, however, Oedipus gives a blind ear arguing that he was ready for the truth at whatever cost.
Jocasta is seen to be aggrieved by the enmity between his brother and Oedipus. He reveals that an oracle had already predicted that King Laius shall be killed by his own son (Rankine and Patrice 101). Jocasta, however, quickly assures Oedipus that this could not happen because the son was killed and abandoned in a mountainous place after birth. Oedipus later hears several conflicting stories about who his real parents were and who the actual murderer was (Eastman and Jennifer 335). In fact in one event, a drunken man announced that Oedipus was not a son of Polybus of Corinth and Merope which is what Oedipus had believed all along his life. Disturbed by these instances, Oedipus begins to suspect his parenthood as well as suspects that he is the real murderer but keeps the suspicion to himself. This conflicting information from various sources should have awakened Oedipus suspicion and quickly judged that some truth was being concealed from him.
Works cited
Eastman, Jennifer. "Freud, the Oedipus complex, and Greece or the silence of Athena." The Psychoanalytic Review 92.3 (2005): 335-354.
Priel, Beatriz. "WHO KILLED LAIUS?: ON SOPHOCLES'ENIGMATIC MESSAGE." The International Journal of Psychoanalysis 83.2 (2002): 433-443.
Rankine, Patrice D. "Passing as tragedy: Philip Roth's The Human Stain, the Oedipus myth, and the self-made man." Critique: Studies in Contemporary Fiction 47.1 (2005): 101-112.
Zachrisson, Anders. "Oedipus the king: Quest for self‐knowledge–denial of reality. Sophocles’ vision of man and psychoanalytic concept formation."The International Journal of Psychoanalysis 94.2 (2013): 313-331.
