So, yesterday we watched another TED talk, this one entitled "Are We In Control of Our Own Decisions?". This one was really interesting, but also very existential. In this TED talk, Dan Arieler, explained how a variety of things influence our decisions and why these things mean that we are not as in control of our choices as we think we are. When faced with tough decisions, we will often just go with the default option so we don't need to choose. Also, the variety of choices affect what looks better to us and, therefore, our choice. So this TED talk did not mention tragedy once, but it was still related to the topic. One important facet of tragedy is that the characters are often not in charge of their fates. Tragic heroes will try to control their lives and avoid tragedy, but, clearly, this does not work out for them. For example, Oedipus' whole goal in life is to not murder his father and marry his mother like the prophecy said he would. To do this, he leaves the people who he thinks are his family far behind and starts over in a new place-- that just happened to be where his real parents are from. All of his decisions end up being wrong no matter how hard he tries. This is, apparently, a common theme throughout many tragedies, which makes a lot of sense. It is frightening to think that we may not be in charge of our lives or even our choices; this lack of control also offers an explanation for the sudden changes of luck and fate are possible.
0 Comments
This week in class we read "Oedipus Rex," and, let me tell you, it was quite interesting. Very interesting. I actually enjoyed the play but, wow, a lot of stuff happened. I think most people know some sort of general synopsis of Oedipus or, at the very least, have heard of an "Oedipus complex." If you know what an Oedipus complex is, you already know why I call this play interesting. The whole thing starts out relatively normal except that the city of Thebes is being ravaged in a variety of ways. The people of Thebes call upon their old hero, Oedipus, to save the city by finding out why the Gods are angry with them and fixing it. Conversations lead Oedipus to discover that the Gods are angry with whoever killed Laius, the former king, and, if that person is rid of the city will be saved. So, Oedipus becomes very determined to find out who killed Laius, and, through many interrogations and arguments, eventually comes to the realization that, not only did he kill Laius, but Laius was also his father making his wife his mother and fulfilling the very prophecy he had worked so hard to prevent. This horrible truth is revealed in front of the entire city even though so many people tried to warn Oedipus against pressing so hard for the truth. After this news is out, Jocasta-- Oedipus' wife and mother who had no idea she was both-- runs inside and kills herself dramatically. Oedipus steals a pin from her body and gouges his eyes out and the rest is pretty much history. Hooray for happy endings. Oedipus is a prime, classic example of a tragedy-- for obvious reasons. It's incredible how quickly Oedipus goes from hero to horrible. The effects of the tragic realizations, though, impact way more than just Oedipus. Jocasta is so shocked and horrified that she kills herself. Oedipus's entire family and children must now bear the weight and shame of something that was in no way their fault, and the entire city of Thebes is shaken and left in chaos. By any definition, the story of Oedipus is a tragedy. The story demonstrates a major turn of luck for its tragic hero, all contingent on his blatant fatal flaw: anger. In addition, "Oedipus Rex" is the story of a man just trying to keep his position as hero of Thebes and questioning crimes long past and forgotten. Wow ok, we read an essay called "Tragedy and the Common Man" like last week, but none of us knew there was supposed to be a blog on it until a week later, so I'm writing this now. Hooray. This was an essay about how we tend to think of tragedy as a thing that only applies to kings or heroes and not us. However, the author argues, this is totally wrong. Tragedy applies to everyone. Tragedy is universally relatable; it must be otherwise it would not be so popular and widespread. This doesn't seem very profound or important. I think anyone could've told you that tragedies happen everywhere, to anyone. It's the rest of the author's argument, however, that was interesting and unique. The author defines tragedy as what happens when a person tries to claim or take back their place in society. To the author, tragedy isn't bad luck or sad events; instead, it is the result of bravery and questioning authority. Tragedy occurs when somebody-- anybody-- has the guts to take a stand and question what everyone else has just blindly accepted. In this view, tragedy is hardly a bad thing at all. Also in this view, tragedy is something that is applicable to every person as every single person is capable of calling something into question and seeking better for themselves. I thought this was a really new and unique view on tragedy. Clearly, I had never thought of tragedy in this way or any similar way before. I would never have thought of tragedy as being driven by bravery and questioning, but, now that I have been exposed to this view, it kind of makes a lot of sense. I can't see how this relates to all tragedies, but, then again, nothing is universally flawless and I am no tragedy expert. For me, the idea that tragedy was applicable to the common man was a no-brainer. That seemed really obvious. The author's explanation of what tragedy is, though, was very different and interesting. So, I leave you with this quote from the essay which I think really sums up the whole argument: " The thrust for freedom is the quality in tragedy which exalts. The revolutionary questioning of the stable environment is what terrifies. In no way is the common man debarred from such thoughts or such actions." |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |