Source

The character of Desdemona

2.1 Desdemona in Othello by William Shakespeare

In William Shakespeare’s Othello, the character of Desdemona is portrayed as a young,
beautiful, white Venetian woman of a noble family (cf. Hollindale 48). Throughout the play,
Desdemona’s name is invariably accompanied by positive adjectives. For instance, Othello refers
to her as “gentle Desdemona” (Shakespeare, 1.2.25),2 Cassio calls her “divine Desdemona”
(2.1.73) as well as “virtuous Desdemona” (2.3.311, 3.1.34), Iago names her “fair Desdemona”
(4.2.224), while Emilia refers to her as “[sweet Desdemona” ](5.2.122). It is striking that none of
the characters simply says Desdemona’s name on its own but instead modifies it with
complementary adjectives such as “gentle”, “divine”, “virtuous”, “fair” and “sweet”.
Consequently, the audience is encouraged to perceive the character of Desdemona as a pleasant
and noble character from the first time her name is mentioned, which is, in fact, even before her
actual first appearance.

In the course of the play, the characters retain the positive picture of Desdemona as a “morally
perfect and entirely innocent” individual (Rice, Desdemona 209).3 Cassio alludes to her as the
“most exquisite lady” (2.3.17), the “most fresh and delicate creature” (2.3.19) – he even calls her
“perfection” (2.3.24). Lodovico refers to Desdemona as “an obedient lady” (4.1.242), while Iago
illustrates her as “fair and wise” (2.1.129). Emilia describes her as “honest, chaste, and true”
(4.2.17), an “angel” (5.2.130), or simply, “the sweetest innocent” person (5.2.200). Desdemona’s
husband Othello, naturally before being manipulated by Iago, portrays her as a “fine woman, a
fair woman, a sweet woman” (4.1.173-174) who moreover is “virtuous” (3.3.189), “honest”
(3.3.228), “gentle” (4.1.187), “[v]ery obedient” (4.1.251), a “beauty” (4.1.199) – in short, “the
world hath not a sweeter creature” (4.1.178-179). Taking into account all these descriptions of
Desdemona’s appearance and personality by various characters, she is clearly a popular, if
not the most popular, character in Othello. Not only her appearance seems attractive (taking
into consideration her beauty, fineness, exquisiteness and delicacy), but her personality appears
to exude honesty, chastity, fidelity, sweetness, fairness, wisdom, virtuousness and gentleness.
Even Desdemona herself presents her person as sincere and faithful, calling herself Othello’s
“true and loyal wife” (4.2.35). As a result, the audience, being aware of Iago’s false game, can
easily see Desdemona as the “noblewoman” (Jardine 89) of the play. She certainly is “admired
or desired by several men throughout the play” (Maillet 104), such as by the soldiers Cassio and
Iago as well as by the gentleman Roderigo. Desdemona, however, does not seem to know or care
for the other men’s appreciation and continuously remains Othello’s faithful and subordinate
wife – even though Iago makes it look like as if she is not.
Moreover, Desdemona proves herself a committed and loyal friend. On the one hand, when Iago
shares his “pessimistic view of women” (Rice, Desdemona 211) with his wife Emilia (2.1.109-113)
and hereby directly insults her (cf. Neely 219), Desdemona does not keep quiet but immediately
stands up for Emilia, disgustedly yelling, “O, fie upon thee, slanderer!” (2.1.114). Showing her
indignation (“fie upon thee”) and calling Iago a “slanderer” straightaway, Desdemona defends
Emilia from Iago’s negative opinion about women (cf. Neely 219), that is, his degradation of
them (cf. Deats 245), not least of Emilia as well. In this moment, Desdemona presents herself as
a loyal character and good friend to Emilia, not ignoring her maid’s humiliation by Iago but
instead defending her by scolding him. On the other hand, when Desdemona hears about Cassio
having lost his lieutenancy, she immediately offers him her help. She promises to “do [a]ll [her]
abilities” (3.3.1-2) to restore Cassio and Othello’s friendship so that they are “[a]s friendly as
[they] were” (3.3.7). She even goes a step further and “give[s] [him] warrant of [his] place”
(3.3.20) even before confronting her husband. When eventually talking to Othello about it,
Desdemona earnestly tries to persuade her husband to “call him [Cassio] back” (3.3.52, 3.3.55),
reminding him that he “truly loves [Othello]” (3.3.49). She wishes to settle their dispute as soon
as possible and impatiently proposes possible times for “when [he shall] come” (3.3.68):
“shortly? [...] tonight at supper? [...] tomorrow night; or Tuesday morn; [o]n Tuesday noon, or
night; or Wednesday morn” (3.3.57-62). By doing this, Desdemona not only shows her respect
for her husband and Cassio’s friendship, but she also reveals herself as a loyal friend to Cassio
himself (just as she has to Emilia).

Critics, however, argue that these two scenes make Desdemona appear in a rather bad light. The
part in which Desdemona scolds Iago for his negative attitude towards women, including his
wife, has been interpreted as Desdemona’s actual ambition to “reassure herself that she does not
resemble the universal woman which Iago describes” (Rice, Desdemona 211), which would
explain her asking Iago what he thinks of her (as a woman): “What wouldst thou write of me”
(2.1.117). Here, Desdemona has been criticized for possibly repressing her subconscious guilt
and her need to assure Iago as well as herself that she is not such a demeaned house wife (cf.
Deats 245, Rice, Desdemona 211-212) but instead “a deserving woman indeed” (2.1.144-145).
Therefore, Desdemona has been understood as striving for self-justification (cf. Rice,
Desdemona 212) rather than actually standing up for Emilia. However, since Desdemona is not
culpable of anything (at least at this point in the play), I interpret her intervention not as a
suppression of her ‘guilt’ (whether conscious or unconscious) but rather as a defense of both
herself and Emilia (since both are actually women). As a result, Desdemona does prove herself
loyal to herself and to her maid and friend – especially when taking into account that she does
speak up for another friend, Cassio, as well.

Her wish and promise to help Cassio, in turn, has also been criticized as a “desire to
demonstrate her power over her husband” (Rice, Desdemona 215), particularly because
Desdemona asks Cassio to “stay, and hear [her] speak” (3.3.31) when he wishes to “take [his]
leave” (3.3.39) since Othello is approaching. Other critics, myself included, argue that
Desdemona is simply a good and loyal friend, not having a hidden agenda but instead just
wishing to help out a dear friend (cf. Adams 53). She herself says that when she “vow[s] a
friendship, [she] perform[s] it [t]o the last article” (3.3.21-22). This statement, in my view,
confirms Desdemona’s devotion and the high value she places on friendship (to Emilia and
Cassio respectively as well as the one between her husband and Cassio) and proves that
Desdemona does not show her allegedly high influence within her marriage. She just does not
give up or let go easily when it comes to helping her friends – even if she, by being such a good
friend to Cassio, unknowingly “add[s] fuel to his [Othello’s] jealousy” (Preston 215).

Desdemona’s good-naturedness is also reflected in her behavior toward the other characters in
the play. Although she belongs to the higher social rank of Venice (with her father as a senator
and her husband as a general), she treats all people quite equally – free of any high-handedness.
Desdemona does not seem to pay attention to race, class, rank, or hierarchy in general (cf. Neely
224): the Duke of Venice, her father, her husband Othello, the soldiers Cassio and Iago, even her
attendant Emilia as well as the clown – all are treated by her “with precisely the same
combination of politeness, generosity, openness, and firmness” (Neely 224). Therefore,
Desdemona unquestionably represents not only a well-liked but also a fair and righteous
character in the play.

Her apparent lack of interest in reputation and hierarchy is also, or rather, most notably,
portrayed in her choice of her husband. Being a white woman of a noble family in Venice,
Desdemona has made “a gross revolt” (1.1.133) by marrying the ‘socially inferior’ ‘Moor’ Othello
and, beyond that, without anyone, not even her father, knowing about it. This so-called
“violation” of the “patriarchal familial and social structure” (Orlin 175) does not make her a bad
or weak character, though – on the contrary, it characterizes Desdemona as a strong and brave
woman who is not afraid of countering Venice’s patriarchal hierarchy (cf. Boyce 155, Orlin 175).
Her commitment to the black-skinned Othello supposedly goes “against all rules of nature”
(1.3.101) – naturally referring to the early 17th century – yet Desdemona “firmly and
courageously stands up to the prejudices” (Boyce 155) of Venice in these times and endears
herself to the audience as a tolerant character, free of racial prejudices.

It soon becomes clear that Desdemona is a determined and independent character as well. She
did not end up being married to Othello by accident. In fact, she has actually been “half the
wooer” (1.3.176) of Othello. He has not simply “w[o]n” (1.3.94) her; instead, Desdemona has
been “com[ing] again” (1.3.149) and again to Othello, has been wishing to listen to his stories
“with a greedy ear” (1.3.149) and has been giving him “a world of sighs” (1.3.159), that is, “a
world of ‘kisses’” (Watts, Notes 136), as it written in another folio. Therefore, Desdemona proves
herself to be a woman who strives for what she really wants – in this case, Othello.
Definition and Characteristics of
Shakespearean tragedy.
What Is a Shakespearean Tragedy?
A Shakespearean tragedy is a play penned by Shakespeare himself, or a play written in the
style of Shakespeare by a different author. Shakespearean tragedy has got its own specific
features, which distinguish it from other kinds of tragedies. It must be kept in mind that
Shakespeare is mostly indebted to Aristotle’s theory of tragedy in his works. The elements of a
Shakespearean tragedy are discussed below.

A tragedy is the imitation of an action that is serious and also, as having

magnitude, complete in itself; in appropriate and pleasurable language;
in a dramatic rather than narrative form; with incidents arousing pity
and fear, wherewith to accomplish a catharsis of these emotions.”
— Aristotle

The 9 Elements of Shakespearean Tragedy at a

Glance:
Elements Explanation
A main character cursed by fate and
Tragic Hero
possessed of a tragic flaw.
This struggle can take place as part of
A Struggle Between Good and Evil the plot or exist within the main
character.
The fatal character flaw of the tragic
Hamartia
hero.
The good being destroyed along with
the bad at the resolution of the play.
Tragic Waste Often played out with the
unnecessary loss of life, especially of
"good guy" characters.
This can be a problem facing the hero
External Conflict
as a result of the plot or a "bad guy"
 Elements Explanation
character.
The struggle the hero engages in with
Internal Conflict
his/her fatal flaw.
The release of the audience's
Catharsis emotions through empathy with the
characters.
Supernatural Elements Magic, witchcraft, ghosts, etc.
Things end poorly for everyone,
Lack of Poetic Justice
including the "good guys."
One or more humorous characters
Comic Relief who participate in scenes intended to
lighten the mood.
All Shakespearean tragedies include these elements in some shape or form.

What Is a Tragedy?
The word tragedy was derived from the Greek word tragoidia, which means ‘the song of the
goat.’ It is called "the song of the goat" because in ancient Greece the theater performers used
to wear goatskin costumes to represent satyrs.
Today in theater and literature a tragedy is a work that has an unhappy ending. The ending
must include the main character's downfall.

Tragedy is a serious play or drama typically dealing with the problems of

a central character, leading to an unhappy or disastrous ending brought
on, as in ancient drama, by fate and a tragic flaw in this character, or, in
modern drama, usually by moral weakness, psychological
maladjustment, or social pressures.”
— Webster Dictionary

How Is a Shakespearean Tragedy Different From a

Regular Tragedy?
A Shakespearean tragedy is a specific type of tragedy (a written work with a sad ending where
the hero either dies or ends up mentally, emotionally, or spiritually devastated beyond recovery)
that also includes all of the additional elements discussed in this article.

Examples of the Elements in Macbeth

The 9 Elements of a Shakespearean Tragedy
Below we are going to take a more in-depth look at each of the elements of Shakespearean
tragedy, as well as explore a few examples.
1. The Tragic Hero
A tragic hero is one of the most significant elements of a Shakespearean tragedy. This type of
tragedy is essentially a one-man show. It is a story about one, or sometimes two, characters.
The hero may be either male or female and he or she must suffer because of some flaw of
character, because of inevitable fate, or both. The hero must be the most tragic personality in
the play. According to Andrew Cecil Bradley, a noted 20th century Shakespeare scholar, a
Shakespearean tragedy “is essentially a tale of suffering and calamity conducting to
death.” (Usually the hero has to face death in the end.)
An important feature of the tragic hero is that he or she is a towering personality in his/her
state/kingdom/country. This person hails from the elite stratum of society and holds a high
position, often one of royalty. Tragic heroes are kings, princes, or military generals, who are
very important to their subjects. Take Hamlet, prince of Denmark; he is intellectual, highly
educated, sociable, charming, and of a philosophic bent. The hero is such an important person
that his/her death gives rise to full-scale turmoil, disturbance, and chaos throughout the land.
When Hamlet takes revenge for the death of his father, he is not only killing his uncle but inviting
his own death at the hands of Laertes. And as a direct result of his death, the army of Fortinbras
enters Denmark to take control.

Characteristics of a Tragic Hero

2. Good vs. Evil
Shakespearean tragedies play out the struggle between good and evil. Most of them deal with
the supremacy of evil and suppression of good. According to Edward Dowden, a 19th century
noted poet and literary critic, “Tragedy as conceived by Shakespeare is concerned with the ruin
or restoration of the soul and of the life of man. In other words, its subject is the struggle of
Good and Evil in the world.” Evil is presented in Shakespearean tragedies in a way that
suggests its existence is an indispensable and ever-enduring thing. For example, in Hamlet, the
reader is given the impression that something rotten will definitely happen to Denmark
(foreshadowing). Though the reader gets an inkling, typically the common people of the play are
unaware of the impending evil.
In Julius Caesar, the mob is unaware of the struggle between good and evil within King Caesar.
They are also ignorant of the furtive and sneaky motives of Cassius. Goodness never beats evil
in the tragedies of Shakespeare. Evil conquers goodness. The reason for this is that the evil
element is always disguised, while goodness is open and freely visible to all. The main
character (the most pious and honest person in the tragedy) is assigned the task of defeating
the supreme evil because of his goodness. As a result, he suffers terribly and ultimately fails
due to his fatal flaw. This tragic sentiment is perfectly illustrated by Hamlet in the following lines:

O cursed spite,
That ever I was born to set it right."

3. Hamartia
Hamartia is the Greek word for “sin” or “error”, which derives from the verb hamatanein,
meaning “to err” or “to miss the mark”. In other words, hamartia refers to the hero's tragic flaw. It
is another absolutely critical element of a Shakespearean tragedy. Every hero falls due to some
flaw in his or her character. Here I will once again reference A. C. Bradley, who asserts, “The
calamities and catastrophe follow inevitably from the deeds of men and the main source of
these deeds is character.” As a result of the fatal flaw, the hero falls from a high position, which
usually leads to his/her unavoidable death.
A good example of hamartia can be seen in Hamlet when Hamlet's faltering judgment and
failure to act lead him to his untimely death. He suffers from procrastination. He finds a number
of opportunities to kill his uncle, but he fails because of his indecisive and procrastinating
nature. Every time, he delays taking action. In one case he finds an opportunity to kill Claudius
while Claudius is praying. Still, Hamlet forgoes the excellent opportunity to achieve his goal with
the excuse that he doesn’t want to kill a man while he is praying. He wants to kill Claudius when
he is in the act of committing a sin. It is this perfectionism, failure to act, and uncertainty about
the correct path that ultimately result in Hamlet's death and lead Denmark into chaos.

Hamartia, also called tragic flaw, (hamartia from Greek hamartanein, “to
err”), inherent defect or shortcoming in the hero of a tragedy, who is in
other respects a superior being favoured by fortune."
— Encyclopedia Britannica

4. Tragic Waste
In Shakespearean tragedies, the hero usually dies along with his opponent. The death of a hero
is not an ordinary death; it encompasses the loss of an exceptionally intellectual, honest,
intelligent, noble, and virtuous person. In a tragedy, when good is destroyed along with evil, the
loss is known as a "tragic waste." Shakespearean tragedy always includes a tragic waste of
goodness. Hamlet is a perfect example of tragic waste. Even though Hamlet succeeds in
uprooting the evil from Denmark, he does so at the cost of his death. In this case, the good
(Hamlet) gets destroyed along with evil (Claudius). Neither of them wins. Instead, they fail
together.

5. Conflict
Conflict is another imperative element of a Shakespearean tragedy. There are two types of
conflicts:
External Conflict
External conflict plays a vital role in the tragedies of Shakespeare. External conflict causes
internal conflict in the mind of the tragic hero. Every tragic hero in a Shakespearean play is
confronted with external conflicts that must be addressed. Hamlet, for example, is confronted
with external conflict in the shape of his uncle, Claudius. He has to take revenge, but as a result
of his uncle's craftiness and effective security, Hamlet isn’t able to translate his ideas into action.
This external conflict gives rise to internal conflict, which hinders Hamlet from taking any action.
Internal Conflict
Internal conflict is one of the most essential elements in a Shakespearean tragedy. It refers to
the confusion in the mind of the hero. Internal conflict is responsible for the hero's fall, along
with fate or destiny. The tragic hero always faces a critical dilemma. Often, he cannot make a
decision, which results in his ultimate failure. Again, Hamlet is a perfect example. He is usually a
doer, but over the course of the play, his indecision and frequent philosophical hangups create a
barrier to action. Internal conflict is what causes Hamlet to spare the life of Claudius while he is
praying.

6. Catharsis
Catharsis is a remarkable feature of a Shakespearean tragedy. It refers to the cleansing of the
audience's pent-up emotions. In other words, Shakespearean tragedies help the audience to
feel and release emotions through the aid of tragedy. When we watch a tragedy, we identify with
the characters and take their losses personally. A Shakespearean tragedy gives us an
opportunity to feel pity for a certain character and fear for another, almost as if we are playing
the roles ourselves. The hero's hardships compel us to empathize with him. The villain's cruel
deeds cause us to feel wrath toward him. Tears flow freely when a hero like Hamlet dies. At the
same time we feel both sorry for Hamlet and happy that Claudius has received his proper
punishment.

7. Supernatural Elements
Supernatural elements are another key aspect of a Shakespearean tragedy. They play an
import role in creating an atmosphere of awe, wonder, and sometimes fear. Supernatural
elements are typically used to advance the story and drive the plot. The ghost Hamlet sees
plays an important role in stirring up internal conflict. It is the ghost who tells Hamlet his father
was killed by his uncle Claudius and assigns him the duty of taking revenge. Similarly, the
witches in Macbeth play a significant role in the plot. These witches are responsible for
motivating Macbeth to resort to murder in order to ascend the throne of Scotland.

8. Absence of Poetic Justice

Poetic Justice means good is rewarded and evil is punished; it refers to a situation in which
everything comes to a fitting and just end. There is no poetic justice in the tragedies of
Shakespeare, rather, these plays contain only partial justice. Shakespeare understood that
poetic justice rarely occurs outside of fiction. Good deeds often go without reward and immoral
people are often free to enjoy life to its fullest. “Do good and have good” was considered an
outdated ethos in the time of Shakespeare, which is why we don’t find any poetic justice in his
tragedies. Good is crushed along with evil. Hamlet dies along with Claudius.

9. Comic Relief
Comic relief is our final key element. Shakespeare didn’t follow in the footsteps of his classical
predecessors when writing tragedies. Greek and Roman writers didn’t use comic relief. But
Shakespeare wanted to relieve the tension for the reader and lighten up the mood here and
there. A few examples of comic relief scenes include the grave digger scene in Hamlet, the
drunken port scene in Macbeth, the fool is smarter than the king dialogue in King Lear, and the
Polonius in the wings speech in Hamlet. We also have the following scene in Romeo and Juliet:
MERCUTIO: “No, ‘tis not so deep as a well, nor so wide as a church-door, but ‘tis enough; ‘twill
serve. Ask for me to-morrow, and you shall find me a grave man. I am pepper’d, I warrant, for
this world.”

HAMLET: Whose Grave’s this, sirrah?

 CLOWN/GRAVEDIGGER: Mine, sir….
HAMLET: What man dost thou dig it for?
CLOWN: For no man, sir.
HAMLET: What woman then?
CLOWN: For none neither.
HAMLET: Who is to be buried in’t?
CLOWN: One that was a woman, sir; but, rest her soul, she’s dead.
HAMLET: How absolute the knave is! We must speak by the card, or
equivocation will undo us.
— Shakespeare

Share Your Opinion

What is the most important feature of Shakespearean tragedy?
 Comic Relief
 Tragic Waste
 Supernatural Elements
 Conflict (External & Internal)
 Absence of Poetic Justice
 Tragic Hero
 Hamartia
 Good vs. Evil
 Catharsis
See results
Desdemona’s Role in Othello and Goodnight
Desdemona
Shakespeare’s plays often put emphasis on the role of the female characters and their influence
on the male protagonists. Whether it is the impact Ophelia’s insanity had on Hamlet, the
devastating result of Romeo’s love for Juliet, or the horrid behavior of Macbeth under Lady
Macbeth’s influence, the women play an important role. In Shakespeare’s Othello Desdemona
is no different; Othello’s love and jealousy regarding his wife made this play a tragedy. Ann-
Marie MacDonald follows this pattern in her play Goodnight Desdemona (Good Morning
Juliet) with her overly dramatic female characters. It does not seem to matter what type of
character of the female lead portrays, she will inevitably be at the root of the problems within the
story. The role of the females in both Othello and Goodnight Desdemona was to become a
problem for the main character. Desdemona is the main female character in Othello and she
plays a major role in Goodnight Desdemona, and even though they are different roles in each
play she is still the cause of major plot developments in both.
Desdemona was the faithful wife of Othello in Shakespeare’s play. She was kindhearted and
wished for all to be well with the male characters, and it is her sympathy towards Cassio which
made Iago’s lies more credible. It is her naïve nature that made her an easy target for the
antagonist in the play. Desdemona does not have a deep character; she is defined as Othello’s
wife, Brabanzio’s daughter and the object of the male character’s affections. In Goodnight
Desdemona, she takes on a very different character. It was as Igor Djordjevic says in his
paper Goodnight Desdemona (Good Morning Juliet): from Shakespearean tragedy to
postmodern satyr play, both Othello and Iago, the most important male characters in Othello,
lost their central roles.When Constance entered the picture, Desdemona took on the role of the
jealous spouse, and Othello had less importance as a character but more importance as
Desdemona’s husband. It seemed that Ann- Marie MacDonald wanted to give more power to
Desdemona as a character by making her aggressive and driven. She had a goal and she was
going to accomplish it; so in essence, she was actively seeking confrontation. This is in stark
contrast to Othello, where she was avoiding confrontation and was defensive while trying to
smooth over the arising issues. As a character quick to the offense in Good Night
Desdemona, she has no qualms about becoming violent. This is demonstrated when she tells
Constance, “If thou wouldst know thyself an Amazon, acquire a taste for blood” and “Thou shall
be eaten alive in Cyprus, Con. Learn to kill.” (Pg 32) This is more like Othello’s role in the
original play, which is to act in violence before fully understanding the situation.
Even though Desdemona may seem more powerful and outspoken in Goodnight
Desdemona, she is still a weak character who is easily manipulated in both plays, whether it is
by Iago or her own emotions. In Othello, she is weak in the sense that she is unable to defend
herself against her husband’s claims or his anger at the end of her life. She is also unable to
realize that it is her behavior towards Cassio which is further contributing to Othello’s anger. She
does not seem to think about her actions; instead she simply behaves exactly how Iago thinks
she will based off her predictable nature. This lack of critical thinking on her part may have
contributed to her demise. In Goodnight Desdemona, she is driven and goal oriented, however
she is a slave to her emotions. She does not think through her assumptions about Constance,
which leads her to trouble later, and her brashness is shown quite well in this passage, “I’ll split
her head upon a pike for daws to peck at.” (pg 42) She says this during a conversation with
Iago, where he is telling her to prove Constance’s guilt before acting and Desdemona is
deciding what she is going to do to rid herself of the intruder. However, Desdemona is quite set
on exacting her punishment on Constance before even being sure of the truth of the situation.
This is a brash decision based off of raw emotion. It is the same type of thinking that Othello
experienced in Shakespeare’s play. Desdemona is able to sacrifice everything for her love of
her husband. It is as Carol Rutter mentioned in her article Unpinning Desdemona (Again) or
“Who would be toll’d with Wenches in a shrew?” when she said, “it’s discovered that it’s
women—not men—who are loyal in love (and heartbreakingly, suicidally so…” The women of
Shakespeare’s plays as well as the ones in Goodnight Desdemona are very loving people and it
inevitably leads to them becoming weak and tragic characters. The femininity of these
characters led them to be loving and nurturing women but in the big picture, it became a
weakness.
In Othello, Desdemona is a very feminine character. She is described as a daughter and a wife.
Her role is determined by her relationship to the male characters, and her behaviour is directed
by the males as well. She cares about the other characters in the play and goes out of her way
to try to help them and spare their feelings. Even when she and Othello were not on the best of
terms, Desdemona was adamant in trying to do what she believed to be the right thing, which is
evidenced when she explains, “ Yes, faith, so humbled that he hath left parts of his grief with me
to suffer with him. Good love call him back…shall I deny you?” (Pg 794-795) Even with Othello’s
dark mood and the result the discussion would have on their relationship, Desdemona was not
happy with just bringing up Cassio to her husband. She kept bringing him up, and asked
numerous times when they would speak. She was blinded by her idea of what was right for her
friend, and that caused her to not take into account what was right for her husband.
Carol Rutter’s description of Desdemona was very interesting; she said, “Simultaneously,
though, it rebukes that gaze and breaks the heart, for spectators know what Desdemona intuits,
that the innocent wife is undressing for an adulterer’s death. Scenically, then, the work that 4.3
performs visibly enacts the oxymoron that Desdemona—and all women?—are supposed to
inhabit: fair devils, civil monsters, cold as alabaster but hot as monkeys.” This explains
Desdemona as the character she is in comparison to the character her husband believes she is.
The unpinning of Desdemona does show her femininity and in the same manner, her
vulnerability. She is constantly displayed as the weak female in the play.
At the mercy of the decisions of the males around her, Ann-Marie MacDonald takes a very
different approach. She depicts Desdemona as a more masculine character. She is brash and
violent, behaving like her husband did in the original play. She talks of how women must be able
to defend themselves and think in a black and white manner, namely what is right is right and
what is wrong is wrong. She seems unable to comprehend that there are situations in between
the extremes, “Gird thou thy trembling loins, and slay professor Night!” (pg 37.) Here she is
trying to convince Constance that the right thing to do is to slay her enemy, Professor Night,
because it will make her feel better. This is not how Desdemona behaves or thinks in the other
play, and as the men’s roles have been diminished it seemed that Desdemona became a more
masculine central figure. Djordjevic describes Desdemona’s new character when he says,
“MacDonald completely reinvents Desdemona, and her character is virtually everything
Shakespeare's heroine is not. She is loud, tempestuous, violent, and generally unafraid of
anyone or anything…Desdemona's character also fits the humorous recipe of the gap between
expectation and performance, and symbolically acts as the "woman of action" aspect of the
Jungian Trinity.” He explains how she takes on some of her husband’s roles as adventurous
and demanding, which was necessary as the other characters take a lesser role in this play.
However, just as her femininity was a weakness in Othello, this masculinity is also a weakness.
She is still unable to think beyond the immediate situation and it leads to problems. She is still
obsessed with what is right, but she has a different, more violent view upon what right is exactly.
Desdemona is not a very complex character, even though she is the cause of most of the
complexities of both plays. It is her simple mindedness and inability to think critically which leads
her to trouble no matter what her train of thought is, whether it is innocent and helpful as
in Othello, or brash and violent like in Goodnight Desdemona. She is inevitably at the root of the
problems in both stories and it would have only taken some fresh thinking in either play to save
her from a lot of heartache. However that was not her role; instead she was meant to cause
issues. It was her character’s naivety which allowed Iago to manipulate almost everybody and
drive the story forward.

Dramatic irony in Oedipus

rex
Dramatic Irony involves a situation in a play in which the character is ignorant
of the reality which audience shares with the dramatist, and which the
character will find out later. In that situation, the character unknowingly acts
in a way we recognize in a badly mistaken way. He expects the opposite of
what the fate has in stock for him.
SophoclesThe dramatic irony was a handy tool for the writers of Greek
tragedies because they based their plays on some well-known myths. The
audience as such knew in advance what would be the outcome of the play.
They could easily understand the error of the character's understanding of the
dramatic situation and the actuality behind their speech and actions.
Irony is a basic part of the very theme of the drama of Oedipus. The play of
Oedipus Rex is based on a single all-pervasive irony that Oedipus seeks to find
the murderer which is but himself. Ironically, his curse falls upon himself, and
his quest ends in the tragic realization of his failure to overcome fate.
Ironically, he has run madly into the very ditch which he has been running so
madly to avoid throughout his life. It is ironical that he has blinded his inner
eyes by trusting too much in his external eyes. It is also ironical that Oedipus
is such a good man who wholeheartedly puts his life in escaping the doom, but
is also such a bad man who is so arrogant and proud that he challenges the
invincible. How ironical it is that he obeys the voice of his conscience to
disobey the gods and commit the unwitting crimes; not fearing that fate may
work beyond the powers of his understanding, he kills of killing a man old
enough to be his father and marries a woman old enough to be his mother.
And how ironical and even puzzlingly paradoxical it is that he escaped from
Corinth because he believed in the dangers of fate, and also because he didn't
believe that it was not possible to overcome fate! Oedipus, having achieved a
vision of the terrible truth, blinds himself. Out of this single but powerful
irony, several other ironic situations have been developed.
The success of Oedipus Rex as one of the greatest Sophoclean tragedies is
largely due to the brilliant interplay of dramatic irony in the play. From the
beginning of the play Oedipus is ignorant of the dreadful acts he has
committed: the murder of his father and marrying his mother. But the
audience watching the play is well aware of these facts. Therefore, every word,
every reaction of Oedipus with regards to the murder lends itself to dramatic
irony.
speech demanding the people to reveal the murderer in the initial part of the
play is an important instance of dramatic irony. Little does he realize that in
cursing Laius' murderer to live in wretchedness, he is cursing himself. This
curse does indeed come true when in the end of the play Oedipus and his
family are doomed to a life of pain and suffering. Another important instance
of dramatic irony is a little later in this same section when the old soothsayer
visits the king. When Oedipus beings to ridicules Teiresias' blindness, he is
turn predicts and unusual circumstance. The angry prophet warns that while
Oedipus can see, he is actually 'blind' (that means he will be denied the truth)
whereas when he will turn blind (i.e. lose his eyesight) only then will he be
able to see (or realize) the truth. It is also ironic that old Teiresias who has no
eyesight can perceive reality accurately.
There are many other instances of dramatic irony in the play. In the very first
scene (the prologue), Oedipus praises himself as a great and famous king, and
he says that "once more I must bring what is dark to light". But for a spectator
who knows the myth of Oedipus in advance, Oedipus’s confidence and self-
appreciation itself is ironic. When he adds that he will act on his own interest
"and not as though it were for some distant friend/ but for my own sake, to be
rid of evil", we understand the bitter and the unconscious dramatic irony. We
understand that he is actually going to get rid of the evil of arrogantly taking
fate in his hands and deliberately doing things that he doesn't understand,
though he means it in quite another sense. Without realizing the darkness
forthcoming in his life, he proclaims what is to be done to the murderer, and
he decks a number of curses upon his own head! The curse is painfully ironic:
I pray to God –
I pray that that man's life be consumed in evil and wretchedness.
And as for me, this curse applies no less If it should turn out that the culprit is
my guest here...
Oedipus is pitiably ignorant that the curses are going to fall upon himself.
Oedipus's failure to understand Teiresias and also the reluctance of the old
shepherd are ironic too. Oedipus's flight from Corinth is the most fatal irony in
the life of Oedipus. He is in a lifelong project of escaping the horrible fate, but
fate has disposed his plan and his life. These ironic instances evoke pity in the
heart of the spectators, yet they can do nothing but pity the poor man who has
nevertheless tried his best. What we can say to console ourselves is that 'doing
the best is life itself’.
In Oedipus Rex, Irony is not only a means and mode of communicating the
thematic messages, it is the theme of the play itself. It is what gives a new life
to a familiar old mythical story. There are, in fact, many ways in which irony
works in this play. The central/thematic irony is that Oedipus's quest for
knowledge and truth, like every human being's, is in the end absurd, at least
when it is pushed beyond the reasonable extent. The future can never be
known. If there is something that knows the future and tells us that, we are
still helpless, simply because chances can be beyond our control, and reality
goes beyond our understanding. So, the irony of Oedipus, the man's attempt to
run away from the future and his running into it, is the content and the theme
of the drama itself.
Oedipus believes that he is the wisest of all Thebans: he has solved the riddle
of the sphinx, and is now ruling them. Everyone praises him, and so does he!
But what he does is to bring to himself the realization of the utter darkness he
was in. He accuses Teiresias of lying and scolds him: "you sightless, witless,
senseless, mad and old man!" But Oedipus proves himself to be the most blind
in his belief and actions. He has been ignoring the inward eye in his trust and
confidence of the outward eye. That is perhaps why he destroys the outward
eyes at the end of the play.
Oedipus unconsciously speaks the truth in oblique ways: "I say I take the son's
part, just as though… "He moves from false confidence to partial truth, and to
disillusionment and complete realization of his fatal mistake of disbelieving
fate. Things are revealed ironically. He is bent on proving what he never can!
Everything he wants to prove comes out to be the reverse. The thematic
reality is therefore the gap between the reality and man's understanding of it.
The audience is always more knowledgeable than Oedipus, who believes to be
omniscient. One blunder he makes raises doubts in us about the next attempt
he makes. In the end, however, even the audience realizes that no human
being is free from the ironical "situation" much of which is beyond their
control. The irony of Oedipus is universal, and so no one should smugly smile
at Oedipus. Indeed, the tragic irony of Oedipus terrifies everyone who really
thinks it over.
When irony is used structurally in a novel or a play, it is sometimes called
"tragic" or "dramatic" irony. In Oedipus Rex, Oedipus attempts to find the
murderer of Laios, king of Thebes, unaware that he himself is the culprit, and
moreover the culprit to unwittingly kill Laios his father and marry his own
mother lokaste. The audience, which knows the truth, perceives the reality of
his tragedy early in the play and anticipates the consequences that Oedipus
does not expect. His statements become unconsciously ironic — as when he
says:
I must flee from Thebes...
For fear of joining my mother in marriage
And killing Polybos, my father
He does not know yet that he has done both! These cases of dramatic irony
lend pathos to the entire tragedy and enable the reader of the play or the
audience to sympathize with the ignorant and the ill-fated protagonist. The
effect of the tragedy is therefore more profound and long lasting.

Oedipus as a Tragic Hero

Oedipus, the main character of the drama, is a great king with ideal traits in his individual
personality also; but he is tragic due to a tragic flaw in terms of his moral disposition. That
mixture makes us have the tragic experience of catharsis at the end of the drama when all the
good of Oedipus is 'wasted' in his struggle against the bad.

Sophocles

In his struggle against the evil of his life, written by his fate, he invites the very doom he has
always struggled to escape from.

The name of Oedipus, which means "swell foot" in Greek, comes from his swollen feet. Oedipus
is that ill-fated tragic character whose parents had to throw him away on the third day of his
birth, because it was told that he would kill his father and marry his mother. He is that tragic man
who was unfortunately pitied by the shepherd who was supposed to throw him in the mountains
of Kithairon. And instead of "dying that fortunate little death", he was given to the shepherd of
another king Polybos. He got that name and the terrible, tragic mark on his swollen feet
because of the skewer that his parents had used to pin his feet together before throwing him.
And since he was destined to kill his father, he grew up in Corinth and ran away from there, on
hearing the rumors of his evil fate, precisely to come to Thebes, kill his father and marry his
mother, without knowing that he was running into the doom he thought he was escaping from.

King Oedipus can be taken as a typical hero of classical tragedies. Aristotle, the first
philosopher to theorize the art of drama, obviously studied Oedipus and based his observation
about the qualities of a tragic hero upon the example of Oedipus. In Aristotle's conception, a
tragic hero is a distinguished person occupying a high position, living in prosperous
circumstances and falling into misfortune because of an error in judgment. Aristotle used the
word "hamartia" to indicate the protagonist's tragic weakness. According to Aristotelian percepts
about tragedy, a tragic hero would be a man of noticeable qualities of behavior, intelligent and
powerful, but by no means perfect. The fall of a totally saint like figure or a totally depraved
rogue would violate the moral expectation and the audience would think such fall design less,
chaotic and unjustifiable. Oedipus is neither a saint nor a rogue. Despite his qualities, he falls
because of his mistakes. His position is indeed as frail as ours, and he fails like common men in
one sense, and such frailty of human position is what tragedy has to make us realize.

In terms of the Aristotelian theory of tragedy, Oedipus is a tragic hero because he is not perfect,
but has tragic flaws. Aristotle points out that Oedipus' tragic flaw is excessive pride (hubris) and
self-righteousness. He also points out certain characteristics that determine as tragic hero.
Using Oedipus as an ideal model, Aristotle says that a tragic hero must be an important or
influential man who commits an error in judgment, and who must then suffer the consequences
of his actions. The tragic hero must learn a lesson from his errors in judgment, his tragic flaw,
and become an example to the audience of what happens when great men fall from their high
social or political position.

Oedipus is a great and good king. The opening scene shows Oedipus in his magnificence, as a
king who is so concerned about the welfare of his people. He addresses them as "my children"
as behooved of the good kings of those times. He is a great man with respectable moral value
and personality. As a man, he is dedicated to fighting and avoiding evil. His quest for truth is in
fact the cause of downfall, and that is one of the most tragic things. As a king, he is an epitome
itself. He loves his people. He gives his best to everything he does as a person and as a king.
He is so worried by the problem of plague that he hasn't been sleeping: indeed, he says that he
is suffering for the whole city alone. He has been walking restlessly instead of properly sleeping.
He says that he will not talk to people through messengers and will not send messengers to
them; he comes to them himself. He is a king of excellence, command and esteem. The priest
glorifies the king as a man "Surest in mortal ways and wisest in the ". He is a man who has
become the king as much through the intelligence as through his power. It is he who solved the
Sphinx's riddle and saved all citizens from the monster. He has always become the ultimate and
almost the only rescue and hope at the time of misfortune.

Oedipus is also a morally good personality, to a great extent. It is so good of him to try to avoid
the unbearable fate that he hears of we see that Oedipus is not only too confident in his own
analysis and understanding of reality, he is also always afraid of doing wrong, He is adamant in
his quest for the truth and the welfare of the people. He surrenders to the power of fate at the
end. He is of respectful towards the oracles, in the sense that he has been afraid of what they
have told him, and he does respect Teiresias before he is insulted by the apparently unjust and
false charges against him.

But as a tragic character, Oedipus has his typical tragic flaw or "hamartia". Obviously pride is his
hamartia. He is too proud and arrogant, and presumes too much about his own understanding
and his powers to control his life. But he can't control reality, chances, fate and time. He has a
bad temper and wrong judgment: the error of a tragic character is basically the "error of
judgment" according to Aristotle. Oedipus wrongly judges his situation. It may be debatable as
to whether the murder of a life-threatening stranger and the marriage of a consort are crimes.
But, due to his presumption about his abilities, he has disobeyed the gods and his destiny. In his
confidence upon what he knows and can do, he escapes from the professed evil fate, he kills a
man old enough to be his father, and he marries a woman old enough to be his mother, without
even doubting his wits.

His defiance of his predestined fate would be, in the time of Sophocles, a great crime. At least,
we can clearly understand that Sophocles seems to be rather conservatively suggesting that the
modem men of his time were wrong in trying to put too much emphasis on human potentials
and powers of Understanding, action and shaping of their own lives. Whatever our twenty-first
evaluation of the actions of Oedipus, the evaluation of his own creator Sophocles (and of the
tellers of the myth in ancient times) is that it is morally wrong to fight against what fate has
predetermined for us.

It seems that Oedipus could have avoided his ill-destiny if he had taken certain precautions. If
he could promise of never laying a hand on a man and marrying an aged woman, he would
have done better. From a human and the more prudent point of view, it can be concluded that
Oedipus falls because he remains blind at many circumstances. In any case, he is a tragic
character because he is humanly frail, morally intermediate, and good, but not unflawed by a
tragic weakness, and therefore identifiable to us and our own inescapable human condition
even today. Sophocles tragic character Oedipus is a unique tragic character that is entangled in
the moral paradox of human life and reality. His life embodies the paradox of the human
situation in which such things as tragedies are not only inevitable but also inescapable.

Oedipus as a tragic character is heroic because of his struggle, pitiable because of his
weakness before the forces of his destiny, and his tragedy arouses fear in us, because he is in
the same predicament (difficult situation) like us, though he was a great man otherwise. The
irony of his fate is that fate has done what it wanted to before he started actually believing in it.
The tragedy of Oedipus is that of the realization of his failure. And the tragedy of Oedipus is a
tragedy of the human situation. His story tells us that man must do his best — but even then he
cannot overcome the inevitable!

Summary

When Thebes is struck by a plague, the people ask King Oedipus to deliver
them from its horrors. Creon, the brother of Jocasta, Oedipus’s queen,
returns from the oracle of Apollo and discloses that the plague is
punishment for the murder of King Laius, Oedipus’s immediate
predecessor, to whom Jocasta was married. Creon further discloses that
the citizens of Thebes need to discover and punish the murderer before the
plague can be lifted. The people mourn their dead, and Oedipus advises
them, in their own interest, to search out and apprehend the murderer of
Laius.
Asked to help find the murderer, Teiresias, the ancient, blind seer of
Thebes, tells Oedipus that it would be better for all if he does not tell what
he knows. He says that coming events will reveal themselves. Oedipus
rages at the seer’s reluctance to tell the secret until he goads the old man
to reveal that Oedipus is the one responsible for Thebes’s afflictions
because he is the murderer, and that he is living in intimacy with his
nearest kin. Oedipus accuses the old man of being in league with Creon,
whom he suspects of plotting against his throne, but Teiresias answers that
Oedipus will be ashamed and horrified when he learns the truth about his
true parentage. Oedipus defies the seer, saying he will welcome the truth
as long as it frees his kingdom from the plague. Oedipus threatens Creon
with death, but Jocasta and the people advise him against doing violence
on the strength of rumor or momentary passion. Oedipus yields, but he
banishes Creon.

Jocasta, grieved by the enmity between her brother and Oedipus, tells her
husband that an oracle informed King Laius that he would be killed by his
own child, the offspring of Laius and Jocasta. Jocasta assures Oedipus that
this could not happen because the child was abandoned on a deserted
mountainside soon after birth. When Oedipus hears further that Laius was
killed by robbers at the meeting place of three roads and that the three
roads met in Phocis, he is deeply disturbed and begins to suspect that he
is, after all, the murderer. He hesitates to reveal his suspicion, but he
becomes more and more convinced of his own guilt.

Oedipus tells Jocasta that he believed himself to be the son of Polybus of

Corinth and Merope until a drunken man on one occasion announced that
the young Oedipus was not really Polybus’s son. Disturbed, Oedipus
consulted the oracle of Apollo, who told him he would sire children by his
own mother and that he would kill his own father. After he left Corinth, at a
meeting place of three roads, Oedipus was offended by a man in a chariot.
He killed the man and all of his servants but one. From there he went on to
Thebes, where he became the new king by answering the riddle of the
Sphinx. The riddle asked what went on all fours before noon, on two legs at
noon, and on three legs after noon. Oedipus answered, correctly, that
human beings walk on all fours as an infant, on two legs in their prime, and
with the aid of a stick in their old age. With the kingship, he also won the
hand of Jocasta, King Laius’s queen.
Oedipus summons the servant who reported King Laius’s death, but he
awaits his arrival fearfully. Jocasta assures her husband that the entire
matter is of no great consequence, that surely the prophecies of the oracles
will not come true.

A messenger from Corinth announces that King Polybus is dead and that
Oedipus is his successor. Polybus died of natural causes, so Oedipus and
Jocasta are relieved for the time being. Oedipus tells the messenger he will
not go to Corinth for fear of siring children by his mother, Merope.

The messenger goes on to reveal that Oedipus is not the son of Polybus
and Merope but a foundling whom the messenger, at that time a shepherd,
took to Polybus. The messenger relates how he received the baby from
another shepherd, who was a servant of the house of King Laius. At that
point Jocasta realizes the dreadful truth. She does not wish to see the old
servant who was summoned, but Oedipus desires clarity regardless of the
cost. He again calls for the servant. When the servant appears, the
messenger recognizes him as the herdsman from whom he received the
child years earlier. The old servant confesses that King Laius ordered him
to destroy the boy but that out of pity he gave the infant to the Corinthian to
raise as his foster son.

Oedipus, now all but mad from the realization of what he did, enters the
palace and discovers that Jocasta hanged herself by her hair. He removes
her golden brooches and with them puts out his eyes so that he will not be
able to see the results of the horrible prophecy. Then, blind and bloody and
miserable, he displays himself to the Thebans and announces himself as
the murderer of their king and the defiler of his own mother’s bed. He
curses the herdsman who saved him from death years before.

Creon, returning, orders the attendants to lead Oedipus back into the
palace. Oedipus asks Creon to have him conducted out of Thebes where
no man will ever see him again. He also asks Creon to give Jocasta a
proper burial and to see that the sons and daughters of the unnatural
marriage should be cared for and not be allowed to live poor and unmarried
because of the shame attached to their parentage. Creon leads the
wretched Oedipus away to his exile of blindness and torment.
Part I-Detailed Summary of Oedipus Rex, a
play by Sophocles

The play begins in the court of Oedipus, the king of Thebes, while he addressing the
awe stricken people of his country. They are all dying. The priest speaks to Oedipus
that all their ships engulfed by tempests while in the sea and on land plague has hit
them. He reminds him of the great deed of defeating the Sphinx and requests Oedipus:
"O Lord and Chief, We come to thee again; we lay our grief On thy head, if thou find
us not some aid". He asks him to help them return to the happy state they were in:

"Shall they that tell of thee hereafter tell

By him was Thebes raised up, and after fell!"

We find Oedipus a very caring and loving king for his nation:

"For your sake I have wept, and many ways

Have wandered on the beating wings of thought."

He tells them of dispatching Creon, his brother in law, to Apollo's House in Delphi
for seeking guidance. During this conversation Creon appears. Oedipus is anxious for
the message:

"Speak forth to all! The grief that these men bear

Is more than any fear for mine own death."

Creon reads that God wants them to find out the murderer of the old king Laius.
Oedipus is upset that how do they find the killers of such an old incident. Creon tells
him that they hear their king was killed by robbers and due to the Sphinx they could
not think of revenge of the old king. Oedipus vows to:

"It falls on me then. I will search and clear

This darkness."

He promises to obey the command of God

. The Chorus relates the affliction caused upon the people of Thebes; they talk about
dying children, women and young men. They pray for the relieving of their nation.

Oedipus declares that anybody having any knowledge or even involvement in the
murder of king Laius, should just come forward and admit; he would be sent out of
the country unharmed. Oedipus is dismayed that the killer of the old king was not
followed. He takes the charge to find the killer on himself because it is Oedipus that
has replaced him:

"his crown is on my brow,

His wife lies in my arms, and common fate"

summary part 2
The leader of a tribe asks Oedipus to seek help from Tiresias, the seer. Oedipus is
probing the clues leading to the death of Laius. Tiresias is seen coming. Oedipus
requests him to save the Theban nation:

"Thou knowest. Save our city: save thine own Greatness: save me; save all that yet
doth groan Under the dead man's wrong!"

Tiresias says that he knows it of since long but it is not useful knowledge. It is neither
in his benefit nor in the benefit of Oedipus to probe the murderer. But Oedipus insists
while the seer, Tiresias, declines. In a fit of anger, Oedipus accuses the seer of murder.
Upon this, he curses Oedipus but Oedipus won't listen to him; he wants to know of the
murderer. Tiresias finally tells him that Oedipus himself is the killer: "Thou seek'st
this man of blood: Thyself art he". He also tells Oedipus the painful fact of his
existence that he, the king of Thebes, is living in shame:

"Thou livest with those near to thee in shame Most deadly, seeing not thyself nor
them."

Oedipus does not stop at this. He keeps on irritating and instigating the seer. Oedipus
also blames Creon to be conspired with the seer against Oedipus:
 "Creon mine own Comrade, comes creeping in the dark to ban And slay me; sending
first this magic-man And schemer, this false beggar-priest, whose eye Is bright for
gold and blind for prophecy?"

Tiresias is in a rage:

"I am blind, and thou Hast mocked my blindness. Yea, I will speak now."

< br>He tells Oedipus that he is bound to be damned forever. Oedipus calls him blind
and fool. Tiresias opens up completely and says:

"The two who gave thee birth, they held me wise".

Oedipus is now startled. He wants to know of his whereabouts. He further tells him
that

"This day shall give thee birth and blot thee out".

Tiresias finally tells him that soon enough people shall call him:

"Behold the brother-father of his own Children, the seed, the sower and the sown,
Shame to his mother's blood, and to his sire Son, murderer, incest-worker".

Then, there is Chorus guessing and vaguely discussing who and where could be the
possible murderer of the king Laius. After Chorus disappears, Creon is complaining to
the Leader and others about the accusations cast by Oedipus. Oedipus is still certain
that Creon is plotting against him while Creon is furious and dismayed over ill-
judgment by Oedipus:

"The man who thinks that bitter pride alone Can guide him, without thought-his mind
is sick."

Oedipus rex detailed Summary-Part III, a

play by Sophocles
 Suddenly, Oedipus asks him the year of the slaying of Laius. Creon says he does not
remember. Creon tells Oedipus that ever since he ascended the throne, he has helped
and served him well. Further, there is more satisfaction in enjoying silent powers;
whilst Oedipus is king, all stately powers rest with Creon then why he should plot
against him for mere show. Both argue and draw out their swords. At this moment,
queen Jocasta enters the scene. She asks them both to stay away from each other. She
also asks Creon to go home but he does not. He takes an oath that he never meant
harm to Oedipus but he would not listen. Creon leaves the scene. Then Jocasta
inquires the matter. She tells him of the prophecy given to Laius and she believes the
prophecy was not true:

"Thus did we cheat Apollo of his will. My child could slay No father".

During conversation she mentions the three way road where Laius died. This
awakens and reminds Oedipus something. He asks her to tell him the exact when her
husband died and how he looked. Oedipus is quite certain of something. He is tense
and asks of the only survivor among the companions of the king Laius while he was
slayed. She calls forth man. Oedipus tells his wife, Jocasta, that he lived in Corinthia.
He is the son of the king. But a man abused him once of not being the true son of his
parents. He demanded from his parents but they satisfied him. Then he went to the
oracle for seeking a reply. Oracle, instead of answering, issued a prophecy that he
shall marry his mother and murder his own father. He tells that he ran away:

"I heard, and, hearing, straight from where I stood, No landmark but the stars to light
my way, Fled, fled from the dark south where Corinth lay".

Oedipus tells her that it was probably him that slayed her later husband in a fit of rage
and proud. He awaits the man that survived to ask him again the story of the murder
while Jocasta says she has lost her only son due to a prophecy, so she utters:

"And I will no more turn mine eyes This way nor that for all their prophecies".

We see Chorus and Jocasta praying that the suspicions of Oedipus prove false. A
stranger brings the news of the death of Oedipus father from Corinth. Upon hearing
the news Oedipus says:

"They foretold Me for my father's murderer; and behold, He lies in Corinth dead, and
here am I And never touched the sword..."

Jocasta makes fun of the seers and oracles:

"Prophets deem A deed wrought that is wrought but in a dream."

Oedipus Rex Detailed Summary-Part IV, a

play by Sophocles
The stranger asks Oedipus why he seems afraid of talking about his parents. Upon
this, Oedipus tells him of the prophecy that he would kill his father and mate his
mother. The stranger reveals to Oedipus that he is an adopted son of the king. And
that stranger himself found Oedipus in a Glen of Kithairon. Jocasta is almost mad. He
tells Oedipus that Oedipus was found with a spike through both his feet. He further
tells that they called him

"Oedipus, 'Who-walks-in-pain.'"

Oedipus asks who and it leads to the men of Laius. The stranger had saved him and
gifted him to the king of Corinth. Oedipus wants to see the shepherd that saved his life
and gave him to the stranger. But Jocasta does not want so. When Oedipus asks her to
call the shepherd she says:

"Ask not; only pray Not to remember.... Tales are vainly told".

But Oedipus cannot wait. Jocasta wants him to stop but he would not. She is in great
anguish and goes back into her palace in deep pain and despair while Oedipus is
looking to gain the knowledge of his past and birth. The shepherd is brought and
questioned by Oedipus. The shepherd remembers the stranger and the child but when
he is told that the child is Oedipus, he is horror stricken and refuses to tell the origin
of Oedipus:

"Tis more than death and darker, if I do."

The shepherd is forced to reveal the truth of Oedipus' existence and birth i.e. he is the
son of Laius and Jocasta. Therefore, he is the husband of her own mother and father of
his own brothers and sisters; he is also the killer of her own father. Both the
prophecies had fulfilled. Oedipus says:
 "Shed light no more, ye everlasting skies That know my sin! I have sinned in birth
and breath. I have sinned with Woman. I have sinned with Death."

A messenger enters the scene to inform of the suicide of Jocasta while Oedipus has
blinded himself and wants the people to know that he himself is the murderer of his
own father. We see Oedipus cursing the one that saved him in childhood:

"My curse, my curse upon him, That man whom pity held in the wilderness, Who
saved the feet alive from the blood-fetter And loosed the barb thereof!"

< br>Creon enters the scene and Oedipus requests him:

"Cast me from Thebes ... now, quick ... where none may see My visage more, nor
mingle words with me."

Oedipus requests Creon to cast him out of the country with his daughter but his
daughters are taken from him. And Oedipus leaves alone.

The Blind Leading The Blind

Teiresias is kind of a cranky old fellow. We can see why. Even though he's blind, he
can see better than any of those around him.
He's in tune with the mind of Apollo and receives visions of the future. Teiresias is
also gifted in the magic art of augury, or telling the future from the behavior of birds.
You might think these are pretty awesome skills, but it's probably difficult when
everybody around you is doomed to shame, death, or mutilation. Not to mention, it
must be annoying that whenever Teiresias does drop a little knowledge, people don't
believe him. Both Jocasta and Oedipus are skeptical of his prophecies. Oedipus
even goes so far as to accuse Teiresias of treason.
The blind seer only shows up for one scene in Oedipus the King, but it really packs a
punch. Indeed it's the first real scene where we see any conflict, and as such, is
necessary for keeping the audience interested in the play. In this scene, Oedipus
gets angry at Teiresias because the prophet won't reveal the identity of Laius'
murderer. It's clever of Sophocles to use this scene to show Oedipus' temper. Up
until now the king has behaved rationally. He allows the Chorus to speak their mind
and is doing his best to save his people. If we didn't see his anger here and later
with Creon , we might not believe that Oedipus is capable of the multiple murders at
the crossroads.
Probably the most interesting thing about this interchange is Teiresias' attitude
towards the art of prophecy. Oedipus has good reason to be angry at him. King
Oedipus has in front of him a man with the knowledge needed to save Thebes, but
Teiresias won't reveal the necessary information. Instead he tells Oedipus that
there's no point in revealing the truth, because everything that's going to happen is
just going to happen anyway:
TEIRESIAS Well, it will come what will, though I be mute. (346)
Really? So: what is the point of prophets?
Teiresias' ironic attitude toward revealing prophecy makes him symbolic of the whole
conundrum of the play. Is Oedipus responsible for his actions? Yes, Oedipus causes
his own downfall, but if he was doomed by the gods from the beginning, is it really
his fault? This debate didn't stop with the Greeks—it manifested itself once again in
Christian thought, but was defined in terms of predestination vs. free will. Is our fate
decided from birth or do we have a choice?
This unanswerable question will most likely bug us humans till the end of our days.
Can't get enough Teiresias? Then check out Sophocles' Antigone.