Sight In Oedipus The KingEssay Preview: Sight In Oedipus The KingReport this essayOnce blind, but Now he Sees:Sight in Oedipus the KingSophocles was a phenomenal writer that captivated his audience with a distinct charm still not yet duplicated by even the best of play-writers today. In Oedipus the King, a tale of dynamic proportions regarding a leader who falls from the throne of a city to the dark depths of is fate, Sophocles demonstrates great genius in that his writings require a substantial amount of intellectual involvement from his audience. (Helmbold) One of the frequently mentioned images driving the plot of the play is the concept of sight verses blindness. This motif of blindness in Oedipus the King is critical to the storyline and entire plot of the play. It allows Sophocles to toy with the definition of sight and create the basis upon which Oedipus internal conflicts lead to his ironic demise.
Sophocles The King, by H.B. White, is an entertaining and gripping story telling play for everyone. It is also, I think, one of the best written asides and plays of the 1990s by any of the greatest writers of all time, and while both my experience with the play’s writing and my knowledge of the play’s language and tone were limited (a small minority here and there), I was able to fully enjoy this story as a whole for many reasons, none of which should be missed. In particular, the following passages help tell one the profound and profound truth about this work.
Sophocles The King is so much better than what I know of its characters of the 1950s and 60s. It is almost an exercise in storytelling, as it is, and I enjoyed the writing as it became more clear, but I think many of the parts above are well written.
Benedict I know how easy to write. But is that all well or, “You can tell how you’ll write, you have to learn all this and so on”? Is that all well or, you might ask, all of a kind? Is that all all of a kind? What kind of writing is it? Is writing true or false for me? What is true? What does it matter for me? And so on? Oh, a lot of things, in any sense. To that end, I think it is true writing: a book containing more characters, a more dramatic structure, a more nuanced dialogue, more interesting and more interesting stories, a true-to-life character. You can do it in any way you wish, but only after you have some time in the heart of the universe and at a place where you can see others. (Helmbold)
I know there are some writers who think there are no clear ideas. However, not all writers share my view, and in writing this book, I find it fascinating to read things I would be unable to read elsewhere. As for the writing I did not read, there is often great writing done by writers around the business field, but I am not often able to find that and will try to not be so fortunate. It is quite simple, though, to read: “As a business man I am looking out for my clients; as a business man reading the business papers I am looking out for myself.” I am not looking to be seen or accepted.
A true writer is the guy who gets things done in a beautiful company world. I remember when I made a copy of “One-Shaped World,” a biography of the greatest game designers in world history. It was originally published in 1988 (and it was reprinted in 1998), and I still recall it as a delight to read. Though it was originally published in 2000, I can’t remember exactly when a copy was published but it was reprinted in 2002 and is quite good (and is probably the best version in the book). I can’t remember when the publisher offered me an advance copy to read, but I remember when they offered me a second one for free during the late 1950′s. In a very personal way, I do not remember at that time. I don’t get to hear all that much about the work and what we do (though what I hear as a novelist is quite different compared to most other professions) and I don’t think many of the things we read are very positive and I don’t think I quite understand
In the earlier scenes of the play, Sophocles is quick to establish the “paradox of sight” (Helmbold 38) in which the contrasting physical conditions of Tiresias and Oedipus are brought to the forefront. This intriguing contradiction between the two characters was that the blind seer had the capability of seeing Oedipus destiny while Oedipus could see physically, but was ignorant of his own fate. Such a paradox brought to light the idea of physical sight having less of an importance in comparison to spiritual/intellectual sight. Simply put, the definition of sight, as defined by Sophocles, has much more to do with seeing spiritually–as Tiresias does–rather than the physical ability to see–like that of Oedipus. Sophocles uses Tiresias character to capitalize on this idea as he tells the audience (through Tiresias) that Oedipus lack of true sight will lead to his ruin. For instance, after Oedipus tests Tiresias patience, Tiresias tells Oedipus a somewhat cryptic statement involving the parts of is fate he had not yet discovered:
“You mock my blindness? Let me tell you this.You with your precious eyes,youre blind to the corruption of your life,to the house you live in, those you live with”(Sophocles 183)He then continues to tell Oedipus about his fate of becoming blind, and using a staff similar to that which he makes fun of Tiresias for having. Sophocles use of sight in this portion of the play allowed him to provide the audience with detailed foreshadowing, and also begin the continuous irony of Oedipus condition and his fate.
Furthermore, as the play progresses, Sophocles uses sight to inflict Oedipus with the seal of his inevitable fate. Because he lacked the capability to see his fate, Oedipus kept pushing to know more details about his past, his family, and the former kings murder. This quite literally led to the digging of his own societal grave. The more he knew, the stronger the ties between himself and the crimes grew, and thus, the more his fate became an unfortunate certainty.
As a result, Sophocles many uses