The second aspect of the Situation we shall consider is My Death. Here, the restriction on one's freedom is the facticity of death, because it is unavoidable fact of being a living beng. Sartre sees that death robs us of creating meaning in life because once dead we no longer have a perspective. Following this, once we die we become beings-for-others, meaning that we become only what exists in the memories of others, thus making us an object. Meaning that once we die we are determined by the perspectives of others and thus their individual experience of us.
Overall Macbeth is not a tragedy according the Aristotle's standards. Macbeth's downfall does follow the guidelines: he has something to lose, he has a downfall, and he has conflicts with his friends and relatives during his downfall. But, the heart of the play, which is the emotions created, just do not follow Aristotle's standards. The reader should feel pity, and grieve. Yet, there is no reason to feel this way because Macbeth is all evil, and in the end, the "good guy" is restored to power.
The events in Oedipus the King, written by Sophocles, show an underlying relationship of man's free will existing within the cosmic order or fate that the Greeks believed guided the universe. Man was free to choose and was ultimately held responsible for his own actions. Both the concepts of fate and free will played an integral part in Oedipus' destruction. Although he was a victim of fate, he was not controlled by it. Oedipus was destined from birth to someday marry his mother and to murder his father.
Fate is an important factor to life, which cannot be changed or escaped from. In Sophocles’ tragedy, Oedipus the King, fate can be seen in the protagonist, Oedipus, which led to his downfall. Oedipus is the King of Thebes who killed his father and married his mother because of a prophecy. He became king because he saved the city of Thebes by solving the Sphinx riddle. Though others say that Oedipus created his own fate because he had the free will to handle the prophecies in becoming his own outcome, in the end, there was no chance that Oedipus could escape the prophecy.
However, Henry would rather better society, and Victor would rather better society with a roaming hunk of dead flesh, but we all have our differences. Victor’s obsession with life is best described when he states, “One man 's life or death were but a small price to pay for the acquirement of the knowledge which I sought, for the dominion I should acquire and transmit over the elemental foes of our race” (). He is willing to give up the lives of others and his own life, very clearly explained by him working himself to a severe sickness late in the novel, just to reanimate a corpse. Henry would rather recreate the beauty in people as shown by being described as, “a being formed in the 'very poetry of nature '" (). As shown, Henry should have intervened in the work of dear Victor; yet, he did not because he believes in the privacy that all men should have.
Fate, he argues, is what brings about the play’s events, but as a “free-agent” (246) Oedipus from there on is in control of his actions. This assertion is in agreement to Dodds’ opinion on the matter. He claims, “Homeric heroes have their predetermined ‘portion of life’, they must die on their ‘appointed day’ but it never occurs to the poet or his audience that this prevents them from being free agents” (223). Dodds attempts, successfully, to refute the idea that Oedipus was merely a puppet at the mercy of the Gods. According to his essay, modern readers either “believe in free will or else [they] are determinists” (223) with no median.
By the time Oedipus reaches Colonus he realizes that he is was not responsible for his fate. His fate and his pride are the factors involved in where he feels he should die and be buried. His fate was told to him that he would rest the holy ground of Eumenides. Oedipus has his daughters perform rites when the citizens tell him he has to perform them for trespassing on holy ground. His never apologizes for his trespass, but rather regard himself as holding knowledge of the gods beyond that of the citizens due to his pride.
Tiresias stands as a model in the play for the individual who is able to see the meaning beyond plot of events although his is blind, and Oedipus represents the oblivious arrogant individual who is never content because they need to be the unsurpassed individual. In the play, Sophocles illustrates the downside of a personality like Oedipus who desires to see the truth by ending the play with the brutality of gouging out his own eyes. Ultimately, the play reinforces that seeing the truth is harmful and being content with what you have, without greedily striving for more, can help avoid fate and a related deposition.
Tragedy Essay Tragedy is like a roll of the dice. Although you may feel like you are in control, there is nothing you can do to control the outcome. Fate cannot be changed, and in Sophocles’ Oedipus the King, Oedipus Rex learns this the hard way when he tries his best to avoid and change the tragedy that was prophesied when he was born. Oedipus ends up living a life full of fear of a prophecy he cannot stop, however, he ends the play nobly and tries to fix the wrongs he had done by giving himself punishment by gouging his eyes out and exiling himself from his own kingdom, as well as ensuring that his daughters will not follow the same fate that he did. Eventually Oedipus discovers that the prophecy that he had worked so hard to avoid had already come true.
No one contradict the accusations even to save a friend or colleague. In Arthur Miller’s play, The Crucible, morals and lack thereof are crucial themes in The Crucible, but a rare and special trait in the characters. John Proctor is one character that fully embodies the theme of integrity in The Crucible, but his integrity is buried deep within him. From the moment John Proctor is introduced, Arthur Miller makes it clear that Proctor’s image of himself is distorted in regard to how he is viewed by others. Proctor considers himself a bad person.