Comparing Morality In The Bloody Chamber And Oedipus Rex

Besides being the universally vital mechanism which maintains the survival of species or an engaging pastime that is tabooed in America, sex has become (and had always been) the stem of controversial social issues internationally. Traditionally, sex has been between man and woman only out of necessity of propagation, but so-called “abnormalities” such as premarital, extramarital, polygamous, and homosexual sex have further defined the confines of sexual behavior and its inextricable relationship with morality. As with literature, these ideals of sexual ethics and their religious foundations are unintentionally or intentionally maintained by story elements that revolve around such ideas, regardless of whether they are supported or subverted. Expectedly, both “The Bloody Chamber” and Oedipus Rex by Angela Carter and Sophocles, respectively, reflect the metanarrative of idealistic moral sex established by the patriarchy and depict the deterioration of character experienced by those who deviate from societal expectations.
As

Sophocles deals out a befitting punishment to Jocasta and Oedipus, “a sinner and a son of sinners”, through his blinding and her suicide for disregarding such sacred ideals practiced by the Greco-Roman gods and committing “the foulest deeds that can be in this world of ours” (Sophocles 1199). Furthermore, the transformation of Oedipus’s character, starting from his departure from Corinth, portray the astounding magnitude of pride clouding judgement [examples]. As in Carter’s tale, a patriarchal figure transgresses pre-established ideals and pays the price, but noticeably, Oedipus’s anagnorisis is much more hopeful and even beneficial as his symbolic blinding opens his eyes whereas Jocasta receives a tragic, trivial death. [relation to