Themes of Fate and Moral Blindness in "Oedipus Rex" by Sophocles

Stephen Alexander Beach 

A few notes ... while Greek plays were written and submitted in trilogies, the Oedipus Cycle is not actually a trilogy that was written together. Antigone was actually written as part of a first trilogy, while Oedipus Rex was written twenty years later as part of another trilogy, and Oedipus At Colonus written when Sophocles was 80 -90 years old. 

Summarizing the Story

The story begins with Oedipus as king of Thebes, but with his people suffering a great tribulation in the form of a sickness over the land, one which has destroyed crops and the people's health. Death is all around. "... the house of Cadmus is emptied of its people while black Death grows rich in groaning and in lamentation." (30) And so the people are begging for the gods' help and for Oedipus to save them again. "Noblest of men, go, and raise up our city, go, -- and give heed. For now this land of ours calls you its savior since you saved it once." (46) 

Oedipus feels their pain and he has not been blind to it as their king. "My spirit groans for city and myself and you at once." (64) And so Creon, his brother-in-law is sent to Delphi to ask how to save the city, and Oedipus will follow through. Creon then arrives and reports that the oracle and news is going to be one that is heavy laden for them. Creon reveals that the pollution on the land is the murder guilt that lies on it from King Laius' murder. He says that the murderer is among them and must be punished. Oedipus then asks about who, if any, witnessed the killing. There was one of the king's servants, an old man, who escaped. Since right after this the Sphinx began to terrorize their city, there was never a real investigation. Oedipus then says he will get the king's murderer. 

The chorus then echoes the themes from this first part, of the people's sufferings and a call to the gods to turn the plaguing god back from his punishment. "In the unnumbered deaths of its people the city dies; those children that are born lie dead on the naked earth unpitied, spreading contagion of death; and grey haired mothers and wives everywhere stand at the altar's edge, suppliant, moaning; the hymn to the healing God rings out but with it the wailing voices are blended." (182-185) 

Oedipus then picks up speaking to the chorus, a gathered group of Theban men. He tells them to speak up and admit fault, and there can be mercy, otherwise there will be punishment and a curse. "I forbid that man, whoever he be, my land, my land where I hold sovereignty and throne; and I forbid any to welcome him or cry him greeting or make him a sharer in sacrifice or offering to the Gods, or give him water for his hands to wash. I command all to drive him from their homes, since he is our pollution, as the oracle of Pytho's God proclaimed him now to me. ... Upon the murderer I invoke this curse - whether he is one man and all unknown, or one of many - may he wear out his life in misery to miserable doom!  ... 

Sorry I have not finished the summary yet ... will complete soon 

Sin and Fate, Which Is Which? 

The main theme that emerged for me in reading Oedipus Rex was that of the generational nature of sin. In a sense, sin and fate can be said to be connected, if for no other reason that sin generates a self-fulfilling prophecy. One may read the story from the perspective that fate had determined that these things must come to pass, and indeed, Laius and Jocasta did receive a prophecy from Oedipus birth, but nevertheless I think that the point can be made that prophecy becomes inevitable fate when it is reinforced by sin. If someone tells me that I am going to be a cigarette addict, and because of this I go and buy a vape so that I can make sure that I become addicted to vaping and not cigarettes when I turn 21 in order to avoid their statement, this sinful act of vaping may indeed be the very thing that leads me to fulfilling their claim. It may be the case that in being addicted to vapes I eventually desire to branch out into other nicotine products, leading me to cigarettes. Whereas, if I refused to believe the prophecy altogether, or at least conducted myself by virtue, then I may never have smoked at all. There must be some aspect of fate which takes into consideration the actions of man. 

One cannot escape sin by more sin. One cannot live by lies and deception in pursuit of what is good. When Jocasta and Laius received the original prophecy they should not have tried to solve it by committing another act which was morally reprehensible, infanticide. Likewise, when Oedipus heard the prophecy when he was older, he should not have run away from his people (he should have accepted kingship) in fear of the prophecy. It was his running away that caused him to be alone on the roads and run into King Laius, be abused, and then retaliate by killing them all. Likewise, later on, why did Oedipus have to indulge his curiosity to the end, against the advice of everyone (Tiresias, his wife, the shepherd, etc)? It may or may not have been a bad thing, but certainly he pursued it at all costs, even threatening people their lives, like those he forced to speak, and blowing up in anger with them and Creon. This intensity may have proved Jocasta, who tries to escape the situation by suicide. Likewise, Oedipus tries to escape with blinding himself, with exiling himself, but all this does it to cast the weight of their sins up their daughters. When we indulge these moral evils, they follow us around for generations like prophecies. But maybe they are really the engrained addictions and moral failing which are then passed on through lived-modeling of those evils to the next generation. 

The way against, generation sin and past mistakes can only be through the moral courage to face one's own failure and yet choose to move forward in a moral way, not an immoral one. The damage is done, and one cannot lie their way to resetting everything, but they can begin to rebuild with virtuous actions. There must be some link in the chain that, instead of perpetuating their hurt, chooses to end it with them instead. 

Following Up Sin By Virtue

A larger question that I think the play asks is whether or not one can escape the bad consequences of one's actions. It seems during the time of the play that Oedipus is a decently good king. He certainly cares for his people and their suffering and wants to do everything possible in order to make the suffering stop. He will not stop until he gets to the bottom of it and answers the god's prophecy about finding Laius' killer. And so his moral state during the play is not necessarily a bad one. But at the same time, there seems to be a blindness of conscience present in Oedipus, since he has not reflected on the possibility that killing a band of people over ancient road rage might have been wrong. Likewise, he does not consider strongly enough the decision he made to run away from his people in Corinth (who clearly want him to be king, as the messenger says in the play). Yes, he is wise, and yes he saves the Thebans from the Sphinx, but does that wash away his past sins? Certainly it seems not to. 

Physical and Moral Blindness

And so there is the many layered play on "blindness" throughout the play. Oedipus is awake to the suffering of his people, yet blind to his own moral failings. The blind prophet Tiresias points out his moral blindness, and he refuses to see it, mocking the blind man. And yet Tiresias had the moral vision to see the truth which Oedipus was blind to. So there is physical sight, and there is moral sight it seems. Then there is the physical blindness that results from the consequences of his moral blindness. 

I personally do not see his curiosity as a moral failure, though, as some may. I do think that the truth is important to know and to pursue, even if it may lead to uncovering something one would, ideally, not like to uncover. This is because it is at least an attempt to remove the moral blindness from oneself. On the other hand, the evil deeds have been done, and so is there any real point to pursuing the truth as far as he did? Well, I think that one could argue that since his people were suffering for an unknown reason that he very much needed to pursue the truth. 

It is his response to the truth that I think was wrong by Oedipus. Was there any response that could have redeemed the situation? Surely he could have repented and made reparation and continued his rule, or could it have been that his death curses that he called down on the man who killed Laius made this impossible. Yet, he earlier also said that he would have mercy on the killer if he admitted it and allow him to leave the land unharmed. Does not he allow this for himself because he takes out his guilt in punishing himself? He does not believe there is redemption for him. (225 - 235). 

Overall there is certainly a representation of the human temptation when one thing goes wrong to just say, screw it let me go fully into the sin. If one wheel falls off the car, so to speak, to just go, let me knock the others off as well since this already happened.