Oedipus Tyrannus: Innocent

753 Words2 Pages

"Innocent until proven guilty", this expression seems very simple to understand, once proven guilty, innocence is entirely out of the picture. However, proving that an individual is guilty is not always an easy task. There are many factors to look upon and review before making a final statement or decision, many laws that may annul the fact that someone is guilty. Sophocles' "Oedipus Tyrannus" is a perfect example of how difficult it is to prove that someone is guilty, or to prove that someone is innocent for that matter. Oedipus is accused of many crimes for which he may or may not be guilty of. It is my contention that Sophocles' Oedipus Rex is guiltless of his -so called- crimes. For the crime of patricide, it was inevitable and is not really considered patricide. What others call adultery or incest could not of occurred, for none of the two involved knew what they were getting into. Perhaps we should look to blame other characters in the play for the criminal acts committed, like Jocasta for example.

Patricide is a term used when an individual has committed the crime of murdering his father. However one can only commit patricide when he is aware that the murdered human being was in fact his biological father. Oedipus was adopted and had no idea that the man he killed was his father he thought he was adopted throughout his childhood and adulthood. Even thought his destiny was in fact to kill his own father, the unique reason the crime of patricide was committed was in self-defense. Laios, Oedipus' biological father, considered a wandered on a foreign road by Oedipus, insulted and assaulted his poor son, and other negative events transpired, which resulted in his own death. When someone commit murder by self-defense, it is...

... middle of paper ...

...ead the play or who has assisted to play in person. Oedipus blinding himself at the end of play proves his innocence and that he is misfortunate to be the man who was able to solve the Sphinx's riddle and the man who became Jocasta's husband committing incest by doing so. Oedipus committing the crime against his own father

-not knowing it was his biological father- could not be avoided, his ignorance in a certain way absolves him of all blame. As for the "incest" matter, Oedipus is certainly not guilty of such a thing for it was Jocasta who promised to marry him in the first place, we can blame Jocasta for the downfall as much as we can blame Oedipus for it. Oedipus is certainly not guilty of anything.

The take home message would have to be no matter how hard anyone tries to escape, hinder, or alter their fate, it catches up and overthrows them in the end.

Open Document