Meditation 5
After reading Oedipus Rex, I realized that it bothers me how all Greek Tragedies can be resolved by an off the wall idea that always is true. In Oedipus Rex, there are several examples of this, such as Oedipus being recognized as the child that was taken away because he has weak ankles from being tied together as a small child; and how the shepherd is easily locatable because the messenger thought he would be needed again some day. There are little bits to every Greek tragedy we have read this year that just complete the story and make a perfect tie to current events even though it has been 30 years since the previously discussed event happened. In all the versions of Electra, there is some idea thrown out about seeing if the hair is the same, or checking the footprints for similarities, or looking for Orestes in his cloak from his childhood or the memory of scars gained from childhood are all used to identify Orestes from his childhood and are all acceptable means of recognition (except in Euripides Version). It just bothers me how all these silly little things can tie someone to someone else or can prove the validity of a story when in reality it just seems like it was planned from the beginning for, say, Oedipus’s legs to be bound so that he would be recognized later. It just seems all to perfect and planned out for me to want to believe these stories and I don’t understand why people would take these stories as true. I mean didn’t people believe that this is what happened to the gods and that these stories are accurate representations of the gods lives? If I were to look at these stories I would be more inclined to relate them to movies in today’s society where the good guy never gets hurt, always get the girl, and the girl’s hair look amazing no matter what just happened to her. I wouldn’t believe these things actually happen, just that they are stories for entertainment because everything turns out too perfect to actually be true. They are very good stories and are very well written and enjoyable, but I just don’t understand how they could ever be perceived as true.
posted by Ann @ 3:07 PM
3 Comments:
I think you ask a lot of good questions.
So first to the question of the contrived nature. All the plays we've read but particularly Oedipus deal with fate. A longing for it a dreading of it and it's unavoidability.
Any child bound in such a way was meant to be killed or at least prevented from walking. A person would remember finding him would recognize tampering perhaps not with the fate as put out by the God’s per say but the intentions of someone and such a person would know this might come back to haunt him. In fact the Sheppard not remembering the messenger’s face is probably a lie. If you were given what you even so much as suspected to be the son of the king prophesized to kill the king. Wouldn’t you remember defying orders from his wife? This baby is like a reverse. Moses and many have the fear of his coming back. If anything is unbelievable it is the times that Oedipus is not recognized. Moreover the play is meant to seem contrived meant to seem too “perfect” that so many people have to choose the way they did makes fate seem that much more impossible to avoid. As to the other question I believe it is safe to say the Greeks did not take these stories as the word of God or absolute truths.
It was after all a competition. Imagination, writing, artistic license were expected to be involved. The Greeks did not agree on everything. There was questioning factions etc.The very fact they had multiple gods would lean towards this.One person might tell a story to put Athena in a good light another might be a bigger fan of Apollo. Obviously I am not an expert on the Greeks but they did believe in muses and this alone tells us they had a sense of discovery. I am not saying there were probably not those who thought one version or the other was blasphemous look at the reactions to the “last Temptation” or “Jesus Christ Superstar.” But people are bound to search test and push the limits.People seek the truth as much as claim to know it. It is part of all human nature but certainly of the artists.
“Not even all the controversy surrounding Martin Scorsese’s blasphemous 1988 film, “The Last Temptation of Christ,” could salvage it from being a disaster at the box office. In fact, the “Last Temptation” was so boring and so badly made that, far from making money, it actually lost money for Universal Pictures. It was a total financial failure.
“How is it . . . that the King of the Universe can be subjected to such ignominy and disrespect?!” asked Dr. James Dobson, President of Focus on the Family.
“The most serious misuse of film craft in the history of film making,” was the verdict of Reverend Lloyd Ogilvie, of the First Presbyterian Church in Hollywood.
“I have never come across a more blatant attack on Christianity,” was the opinion of Dr. Don Wildmon, Executive Director of the American Family Association.
“Absolutely the most blasphemous, degenerate, immoral depraved script and film that I believe it is possible to conceive,” concluded Bill Bright, President of Campus Crusade for Christ. “http://www.christianaction.org.za/articles/blasphemousandboring.htm
P.S I’m not saying I agree with these statements.
I agree with you that a story like Oedipus Rex and Electra seem to be too perfect. It's like "coincidence- I think not!" But I think the people of that time period believed these stories as true because they thought that life was planned out. Oedipus Rex talks about divinations and prophecies. These were believed to be true signs from the gods. It was a part of their religion to believe that a person's life was essentially a persuit of their destiny. I totally agree that to our standards, these stories are too "perfect," but to the ancient Greeks they were life.
I agree that these plays seem a bit too perfect. I like how you compared them to movies of today. The good guy always wins and everything works out perfectly. Yea there may be some sort of obstacle but in the end the bad guy loses.
Post a Comment
<< Home