Skip to main content

Did Oedipus need to be taught modesty through suffering? Are there any quotations that support this?

One account of tragedy argues that it follows a pattern in which the hero, who is otherwise a great and noble character, suffers from a tragic flaw of arrogance or overwhelming pride leading to his inevitable downfall. This account is somewhat of an oversimplification, as the hero is sometimes caught in a forced choice scenario—often due to an inherited curse—and whatever path the hero chooses will lead to a downfall.


The important thing to note is that human pride or arrogance in Greek tragedy is often seen as an affront to the gods. Because the Greek pantheon is anthropomorphic, the difference between god and human is one of degree (of skill, power, strength, etc.), and thus human overreach is seen as a mortal challenging or impinging on the domain of the gods.



The tyrant is a child of Pride...


Until from his high crest headlong


He plummets to the dust of hope.



A tyrant was a ruler by popular acclaim or by force, while a king was an hereditary ruler. Because the people and Oedipus himself do not know Oedipus's birth circumstances until the end of the play, he is a tyrant; only when his parentage is discovered do we realize he was actually a king as well as tyrant. This quotation suggests that tyrants are proud and powerful and, because of that, endure a spectacular downfall.



Count no man happy till he dies, free of pain at last.



Even when one is wealthy or powerful, one is not immune to the power of the gods and fortune and should not become complacent.



If a man's contemptuous, and goes along with acts and speaks without respect for what is right and doesn't revere statues of gods, then let a sorry fate destroy him.



This quotation suggests that if someone is arrogant and does not display adequate respect for the gods, the gods will teach him modesty by destroying him.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.