Flaw In Oedipus The King

712 Words3 Pages
DISMISSIVE Oedipus was an extremely curious man who was constantly seekings answers, but regardless of that, when he was given the information he seeked, he always refused to acknowledge it. Oedipus had the answers he sought for in front of his face an absurd amount of times. Yet, somehow he managed to dismiss all of them completely, because he did not like the idea of them. For one, after Creon tried to deny Oedipus’s accusation of plotting against him. Instead of listening to what Creon had to say, Oedipus chose to ignore and then insult him by telling Creon he had the, “art glib of tongue, but [Oedipus was] slow to learn From [him]; [as Oedipus] kn[ew] too well [Creon’s] venomous hate” (Sophocles and Storr 547-548). Oedipus was…show more content…
Creon repeatedly denied the accusations Oedipus bellowed at him, and yet Oedipus paid no attention to that, notwithstanding the fact that he had virtually no evidence. Comparably, when Oedipus implored Tiresias to tell him who Laius’s killer was, in spite of Tiresias promising Oedipus did not actually want to know. Since Oedipus insisted, Tiresias told him, but as Tiresias had predicted, Oedipus did not believe him and grew hostile. Tiresias grew annoyed at Oedipus’s behavior and ignorance, quickly asking if Oedipus“miss[ed any of his] words? Would…show more content…
As a result, Oedipus was lacking the knowledge he needed to prevent his fate from transpiring due to others failing to communicate information. It is understandable why the opposition believes that Oedipus could not prevent his fate since he was almost completely uninformed. However, Oedipus’s downfall can only be blamed upon himself because he was the one in control of his decisions. Oedipus could have easily questioned his friends and family to find out the truth, rather than ignoring the information he was told and refusing to ever admit he was incorrect. He had all the resources that were necessary in order for him to change or even fully prevent the prophecy he was given. According to Rebecca Gould, in The Innocence of Oedipus: The Philosophers on Oedipus the King, Part 31, despite Oedipus being “innocent of harboring any culpable desires, then; yet it [was] he, acting freely, who brought on the catastrophe, not the gods, not fate” (Gould). Oedipus was therefore not bound to the original fate he was given and by changing his behaviors he could have stopped what happened from ever occurring. If Oedipus had chosen to take more responsible actions, he would have been able to avoid the tragedies that ended up

More about Flaw In Oedipus The King

Open Document