According to the ancient Greeks, a hero was an immortal religious figure that had received cult honors and was anticipated to come back, so to bring prosperity to the entire community (that worshiped the hero), including the animals and the fertility of the crops (Nagy). However, a hero could also be a mortal, hence a literary figure, whose life had to undergo an ordeal, in order to receive immortalization after he dies (Nagy).
Born with a heavy legacy already on his shoulders, Oedipus spent his entire life trying to avert an ominous prophecy that placed him as the person that would kill his father and marry his mother. Surprisingly, the harder he tried to escape his fated destiny, the closer he got to it with each decision he made out of seemingly free will. While trying to “construct a life which what he has been told will happen will not happen” (Johnston), though, his life was put under more and more suffering.
Oedipus appears to be a man of strong will to act according to his vision of experience, and regardless of other people’s opposition or alternative suggestions, he insists on following the course of actions he himself had initiated. With a great sense of responsibility, he accepts the chain of events he sets in motion, and, although disaster is close, he blames no other, but himself; even during the dreadful time when he learns the dramatic truth in regards his life. Until the very end, Oedipus acts with determination, as he imposes his own punishment and asks for banishment, while stabbing his own eyes out. There is not a single moment in the entire play, where Oedipus makes any sort of compromise, and stands proudly face to face with his destiny: if he had to suffer, he would be the one to determine the kind of suffering he would undergo.
What distinguishes Oedipus as a tragic hero is his attitude towards what is meant to be, or else fate. He chooses to defy fate, rather than learn from his experiences and accept what Sophocles believed: that the cosmos was ruled by powerful fates, as set by the gods, which drove each individual’s life to a predetermined path, and if anyone dared to defy fate, was doomed to self-destruction. Oedipus wanted to live on his own terms, but fate would make him face the consequences of his god-defiance. Oedipus’ perception for heroic greatness is closely interwoven with his utmost commitment to his free will. Ironically, he has to cope with a situation that he himself had initiated with his free will and is forced to suffer an almost living death, due to the actions he freely chose to take. Inevitably, these actions bring him to finally confronting his destiny. At no point of the play, was he forced to choose a particular direction. He was provided with alternatives and was not obliged to act in a certain way. However, his dedication to free will, led his steps to the known horrible consequences.
Tragic does not mean terrible or pathetic in Oedipus King, because no accident can be referred to as tragic accident, given that they occur by chance (Johnston). Tragedy in Oedipus, as defined by Sophocles, is to make decisions that eventually result in the hero’s own destruction. If Oedipus had a different character and traits, he might have escaped his tragic fate and all the suffering. The sense of freedom that Oedipus never compromised might be negotiable for someone else, when wanting to survive, please others around him, or go by the rules applied in their society. The kind of person Oedipus is, is what complements his tragic figure in the play.
Some might say Oedipus was a very egoistic character, which would be true. Oedipus does not seek for answers, so to accept limitations upon what he perceives as personal freedom, nor does he live a life devoted to his community and the gods. Oedipus does not learn anything from his suffering; he learns that he could not be more wrong about life, but he does not beg for salvation and forgiveness, or change the way he sees things.
The three parameters that define a tragic hero
What Aristotle wanted to achieve, when he introduced the tragic heroes to his audience, was a threefold effect: the audience becomes emotionally attached to the tragic hero; fears about what may happen to the hero; and when the hero’s suffering has begun, the audience pities him (Struck). In fact, through tragedies, tragedians wanted to make the audience go through a catharsis and refine “his or her of difficult ethical issues through a vicarious experious of such thorny problems” (Struck). For this reason, the tragic hero could not be anything else but a complex characters, masterly constructed, to elicit all three effects that have been previously mentioned. Oedipus has managed to gather the threefold parameters and also make his audience feel he was a better and larger version of themselves, hence a tragic hero indeed. Furthermore, according to Aristotle, a real tragic hero needs to have a tragic flaw that is not idiosyncratic, rather than objectively decided (Struck). In other words, a tragic hero should have a human failing. Oedipus does not know the truth about his real family, which is his main failing, for which he bears no responsibility. This is when the audience starts feeling afraid of Oedipus’ life, and what will happen to him, since none of the decisions he makes are capable of changing the course of his fate. Finally, the audience feels great sorrow and pity for Oedipus, when he falls and decides not the easy road -that of suicide- but to blind himself. With his decision, he prolongs and amplifies his suffering; and, although he is not literary dead, he is dead in effect, as he receives none of the advantages of those breathing life. Moreover, unlike other tragic heroes, Oedipus’ suffering does not end when the curtain falls, but will continue even after the end of the tragedy. This, makes the audience perceive Oedipus’ suffering as part of his natural state, which in turns evokes more pity for the tragic hero.
A Drama of Character or a Play of Action?
According to Aristotle, a tragic hero and the elements that comprise a tragic situation are ideally found when there is a man “who occupies the mean between saintliness and depravity. He is not extra-ordinary in virtue and righteousness and yet does not fall into bad fortune because of evil and wickedness but because of some hamartia of a kind found in men of high reputation and good fortune” (The Poetics as cited in Asuamah, Kwaku, and Adwoah). Hamartia is a Greek word that means sin; something going wrong and is crucial to the Greek tragedies, so to determine where a tragic situation begins. It is not of character, rather than of action (Asuamah, Kwaku, and Adwoah).
Oedipus is not a tragic hero, who falls from high up to low down, due to a tragic flaw. Instead, he is a play of action, where his fall is bind with the hero’s moving from ignorance to knowledge, before the final destruction and misfortune (Sackey).
Conclusion
Oedipus was a tragic hero, in more ways than one. Among the various aspects of what consisted a tragic hero provided throughout this paper, Oedipus is a distinguishing example of all. Tragic heroes were supposed to be living a life of suffering, before they gained after-death immortality, and Oedipus was born with a heavy fate. He was destined to kill his father and marry his mother, according to the prophecy, yet, he spent his life trying to rebut it, only to find himself in the exact position the Gods – as determiners of people’s fates- wanted him to be from the beginning. Oedipus’ determination to live life the way he had chosen, and his strong egoistic character that would not compromise with anything contributed to eventually meeting his destiny. He was a man of duty, though, and no matter what the consequences of his actions are, he accepts them without putting blames on other people or the gods. His life creates a sense of pity for his fate and his audience fears of what might happen to him, while they become more and more emotionally attached to him. In other words, Oedipus has all the parameters that Aristotle had set, in regards what makes a tragic hero.
Works Cited:
Asuamah, Adade-Yeboah, Kwaku, Ahenkora and Adwoah, Amankwah (2012). “The Tragic Hero of the Classical Period”. English Language and Literature Studies; Vol. 2, No. 3; 2012. ISSN 1925-4768 E-ISSN 1925-4776. Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
Johnston, Ian (2004). “Fate, Freedom, and the Tragic Experience: An Introductory Lecture on Sophocles's Oedipus the King”. Vancouver Island University. Web. April 4, 2014 <https://records.viu.ca/~Johnstoi/introser/oedipus.htm>
Nagy, Gregory (n.d). “The Concept of the Hero”. Harvard College. Web. April 4, 2014 <http://athome.harvard.edu/programs/nagy/threads/concept_of_hero.html>
Sackey, A. (1992). “The Hamartia of Aristotle”, In The Dimensions of Comparative Literature. Accra: SMA.
Struck, Peter (2009). “Oedipus as the Ideal Tragic Hero”. Unit 9. University of Pennsylvania. Web. April 4, 2014 <http://www.classics.upenn.edu/myth/php/tragedy/index.php?page=oedhero>
