Customer Reviews

The Theban Plays: King Oedipus; Oedipus at Colonus; Antigone (Penguin Classics)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The previous reviewers who denigrate Oedipus as "predictable" only reveal their own ignorance. Any member of an Ancient Greek audience already knew the story of Oedipus, it'd be like complaining that upon going to Easter Mass, you found the story of the Crucifixion to be predictable; the point was never to have a twist, but to create a relationship between the characters and members of the audience, placing the viewers in direct relation to the mystery of life. The language is gorgeous besides.

These three plays stand as the best of the Greek tragedies, superior to the works of Sophocles' rivals Euripides and Aeschylus, mainly because these plays hold more depth and allow for more cultural analysis.
They may seem long-winded at times, even repetitive, but I assure potential readers that there is a point to the speeches, and that many 'extraneous' phrases divulge the author's meaning or bias.
Highly recommended.

The Theban plays are extraordinarily rich in their observations on the human condition; let us consider lessons to be drawn from these.

The first tragedy, King Oedipus, begins with the city of Thebes suffering great afflictions. King Oedipus swears that he will find the cause of the evil and improve the lot of the Thebans. His uncle, Creon, found that the pestilence would be lifted when the murderer of the previous king, Laius, was brought to justice. Oedipus immediately ordered that the killer be found.

Laius, the old king, had been killed while on a trip. Oedipus came to Thebes from Corinth and married Laius' widow, Jocasta, and became king. This followed by some years a curse laid upon Laius and Jocasta, reported by an oracle of the god Apollo, in which it was said that their son would kill the father and marry the mother. To prevent this, the King and Queen had their son taken away. Instead of destroying the child, the person charged with preventing the curse from coming true gave the boy away. This child, of course, was Oedipus, who later returned to Thebes and, indeed, married Jocasta, his mother, after having unwittingly killed Laius, his father.

Not knowing these facts at the time, Oedipus railed against what he saw as Creon's lust for the throne. Oedipus gives Creon the choice of death or banishment; Creon chose the latter. As his mother/wife, Jocasta, related how his father had died, at a point in a road with three forks, it dawned upon Oedipus that he was the killer of Laius.

Oedipus blinds himself and goes into exile, to fulfill the terms that he had originally stated as the penalty for the guilty person confessing to the murder of Laius. In our modern sense, it is unfair what happened to Oedipus. He had been a good king, ruling well, loved by his people. When he killed his biological father, he was not aware of that relationship and, even more to the point from our contemporary perspective, it was very close to self-defense.

Thus, the powerful lesson--misfortune can sweep over the best of us, no matter our intentions (and Oedipus' were clearly good) or behavior. In short, we do not and cannot fully control our individual fates.

Antigone is the third of the Theban trilogy. Since Oedipus went into exile, much had happened. At the beginning of this play, Creon has become King of Thebes. Before, Oedipus' two sons had vied for power. Eteocles became the ruler of Thebes, after having pushed aside Creon. Polynices resolved to, in turn, replace his own brother. Polynices gathered together an army to seize Thebes. In the ensuing battle, both brothers died. Creon emerged as regent. He ordered that Eteocles, because he had defended the city, should be buried in an honorable fashion. Polynices, since he had tried to take the city by force, would be left in the open, unburied, where his body lay from battle. Any person, decreed Creon, who tried to bury the body in accord with the traditions of the time would be executed.

Antigone, youngest daughter of Oedipus, refused to obey the ruling; she argued that to adhere to human law violates ". . .the holiest laws of heaven." Which is higher and more compelling? Human law? The laws of the gods? Antigone chose the laws of the gods. Antigone hastens to bury her brother as well as she can. She is seized and taken before Creon.
To complicate matters, Creon's son, Haemon, is betrothed to Antigone, and he urged clemency upon his father, arguing that many Thebans felt that Antigone's adherence to traditional norms was the right position. Creon has a temper tantrum upon hearing this, whereupon Haemon argues that he is trying to save his father by urging him to consider lenience for Antigone, fearing that the people will be outraged and threaten Creon's rulership.

Finally, Creon realizes that he may lose all. But it is too late. Antigone has hung herself in the cave where she was condemned to starve to death; Haemon, upon her death, killed himself. When Creon's wife, Eurydice, heard the news, she committed suicide. Creon grieves and speaks of ". . .the curse of my stubborn will!"

And what is the right thing to do? To follow the sovereign's expression of law, as King Creon claims? To follow the traditional morality, as Antigone does? It is not clear. Humans may not always be able to know what is right, what the truth is, what the good is. Wisdom comes from modesty; hubris is a symptom of supreme foolishness.

The Theban plays, in the end, make us think about the extent to which people, in reality, can actually control their destiny. Or the extent to which their fates are controlled by other forces. . . . The translation is serviceable; the introduction is readable and useful.

Never have I been so fascinated by such a tale. It kept my interest as a ninth grade student and provided thought-provoking questions to contemplate. The stories of King Oedipus, Jocasta, Antigone, and Creon bring up social questions of fate, holiness, and justice which are still applicable to today's audience. WARNING: This is not light reading. Don't read it "just for fun." It can be read this way, but is far more meaningful with an understanding of Greek mythology. If you choose to read this classic (famous in most every high school), read them in order. Some of my friends have done otherwise and found their experience less great than it would be had they read the plays in their written order. Enjoy the book and remember about what Oedipus learned and its application to your life.

Though not a trilogy in the strict ancient Greek sense like Aeschylus' Oresteia and indeed written decades apart over a long life, Sophocles' three Theban plays are interrelated and ideally read together. They are immortal classics and essential for everyone; the real question is what translation to get. Though it has an undeniable literary stateliness, this E. F. Watling version will strike most as dated. Robert Fagles' is undoubtedly the best for current readers. It is not that prior ones are inaccurate, but inevitable language changes have made them ever less readable; some may think them more stately, but they lack Fagles' flow and readability. All one need do is compare his renderings of the famous closing speeches in Oedipus the King and Antigone to Watling's; his are so much more immediate yet also more poetic. Anyone who can get Watling's easily and/or cheaply should do so, as it is more than adequate, and dedicated Greekless readers will of course want several translations, but neophytes should start with Fagles, the only version most will ever need.

Oedipus the King has been an immortal world literature classic for nearly 2,500 years. Long considered the greatest Greek tragedy, it was hailed by Aristotle as the tragedy par excellence, and in the millennium plus since only Shakespeare's greatest work has even approached it. It remains a model of what tragedy should be; deftly plotted and perfectly executed, it has a sympathetic protagonist, a crushing climax, sublime poetry, and a wealth of meaningful themes. The play remains on the very short list of incomparably and undeniably great world literature masterpieces - one of the six or so best works ever.

Perhaps the aspect that has always spoken most strongly is the character of Oedipus. The archetypal tragic hero, He is one of literature's most thoroughly sympathetic personages. Whatever his faults, he is far more sinned against than sinning; his rise from humble background to king is matched only by his even more awe-inspiring fall. Arrogant, haughty, and somewhat impulsive, he has distinct flaws, but they only make him more human; we feel for him because we see his profound humanity. However ostensibly different from us, he has the indisputable human core necessary for a truly moving character. His downfall's pathos is near-unbearable; it is hard to see a man so truly broken and heavily suffering. The play is valuable for showing the nadir to which people can sink, bringing out life's inherent tragedy with incredible force and emotion.

The story itself is also key. The original audience knew the Oedipus story well, and it has continued to be so famous that most will know a lot before reading, but Sophocles portrays it with such skillful mastery that it affected Athenians with mesmerizing power and continues to do so. A tighter plot or more perfect execution could not be conceived; no one has ever made better use of foreshadowing or dramatic irony, and the breathtaking climax has rarely even been approached. The story is put together with almost mathematical precision, and the close is simply devastating. The totality of bitterly ironic events that comes down on Oedipus is so crushingly malevolent that it shows the absolute worst that can happen to a person. For this reason among many others, the play remains the consummate tragedy.

The work's lasting value may be due primarily to its extraordinary dramatization of numerous weighty themes. All Greek tragedies were broadly philosophical in a way later plays - to say nothing of current ones - rarely are, but this is again the top example. It most famously deals with fate and has indeed never been matched for showing fatalism's dark possibility and potentially fatal consequences. However, this has also been exaggerated, because a close reading clearly shows that Oedipus himself inadvertently caused his downfall; this is what makes him a tragic hero. Denying the conventional depiction may seem strange, but it after all makes him more relatable. As far as we know, we are not victims of venomous fate but are fragile beings suffering from limitations we are unable to overcome. The play in any case has other important themes: the creation and enforcement of taboos, questions of political succession and family relations, pride vs. humility, etc. That Sophocles was able to do all this in a work of less than two thousand lines - not even half of Hamlet - is a testament both to his genius and to ancient Greek art's essential concision.

As in Oedipus the King, the character of Oedipus is perhaps the most immediate strength. He is one of literature's most thoroughly sympathetic personages, and the truly pathetic depiction of him here as a broken old man near death - blind, seemingly at least partly senile, and dependent on his daughters for even the simplest tasks - may be even more moving than his downfall in Oedipus the King, powerful as that was. Here he is reduced to the most abject misery possible to humanity - a state so pitiful that even reading of it is nearly unbearable. Though he had clear faults even in his prime and caused his own decline, it is virtually impossible not to sympathize with him; he is truly more sinned against than sinning. He has flaws even here; his impulsiveness has increased, his temper has shortened, and he lashes out at people - including his own sons - with little provocation. Yet he remains sympathetic; such things if anything make him even more human; we feel for him because we see his profound humanity. His state is indeed so low that he is forgiven by Zeus and allowed to die not only with dignity but with some satisfaction at a return of his importance after decades of pained exile. On top of everything else, the play is a thoroughly moving depiction of true compassion and noble forgiveness. Despite many dark moments, it is uncharacteristically optimistic for ancient Greek drama - indeed no tragedy at all, though ostensibly styled one. It suggests that there is always a possibility of at least partial redemption and underscores the profound significance of empathy and mercy. Sophocles' nearing death may have brought on such thoughts, but their universality makes them timeless; the play continues to speak at least as powerfully as the tragedies to those willing to listen, and its greater palatability makes it potentially more relatable.

Unlike the prior two Theban plays and Greek drama generally, Colonus has very little action. It is essentially an emotional drama that works via dialogue, but there is also substantial philosophical dramatization. The grand themes and monumental speculation of Oedipus the King and Antigone are mostly gone, but it does handle important issues like the responsibility of parents toward children and vice versa, questions of political succession, society's treatment of outsiders, the significance of ritual, etc. Those who value the first two plays for taking on weighty issues more grandly and overtly may be somewhat disappointed, but this still has a good amount of weighty themes, and its elegiac aura is in its way even more emotional. Unlike them, it does not stand well on its own, but this edition thankfully makes the point moot; it comes off much better in context, adding considerably to the book's worth.

As in Oedipus the King, the title character may be the most stirring aspect. Though not a tragic hero in Oedipus' strict sense, Antigone has fundamentally human thoughts and feelings that make her supremely relatable; we feel with and for her because we see ourselves in her. She may be extremely high strung, and her actions and emotions may be highly wrought, but she is an extreme case of what the dark, often contradictory emotions at humanity's heart can lead to if followed to the logical conclusion. Whatever her faults, she does not deserve her dark end, and the depiction of her doomed love and tragic end are profoundly moving; few portrayals are more pathos-drenched. However superficially different from us, she has the indisputable human core necessary for a truly moving character. Whether or not we agree with her, we sympathize strongly, and her determination and resilience are truly admirable.

We must not overlook the significance of a female protagonist in an ancient Greek work. Greek society was truly a man's world; women were oppressed to an extent that has long been unthinkable in the Western world. They were not considered unequal so much as hardly thought of at all; indeed, they seem not to have been allowed at dramatic performances - a true irony here. Antigone has thus unsurprisingly been the focus of much feminist criticism. Calling it proto-feminist would be too much, but having a female protagonist - much less a sympathetic one - was indeed notable. Though lacking Greek male heroes' attributes, she is a far cry from the wily but essentially frivolous goddesses and women in Homer and elsewhere, to say nothing of helpless damsels like Helen. The play vividly showed that, however insignificant women were, their wishes could not simply be ignored - and that tragic consequences may result if they are. It was not until far later - perhaps the mid or late Victorian era - that literature had another heroine of comparable strength.

Yet she is not the only interesting character; indeed, strictly speaking, Creon is the true tragic hero. Much like Oedipus, he has tragic flaws - arrogance, narrow-mindedness, impulsiveness - that lead to his downfall. It is hard not to hate him at first, especially considering the story's background, but at least as hard not to be moved by the truly pathetic picture of the broken man he is at the end. He may have deserved punishment, but few would say he deserved the catastrophe he got, which is one of the most vivid and deeply stirring illustrations of how a rash act done quickly with little thought can lead to fatal conclusions. As important as Antigone is to the play's core emotion and thought-provoking aspect, Creon is also essential.

The story itself is a fundamental part of the play's greatness also; only Oedipus the King even rivals it for plot tightness and perfect execution. Superb handling of grand themes are also again important, including family relations, questions of political succession, private vs. public loyalty, pride vs. humility, etc. Perhaps all that need be said, though, is that this is nearly as great as Oedipus the King.

One can of course purchase these plays separately, but they are ideally read together, and getting all three Fagles translations at once is too good of a bargain to pass up. Anyone wanting to read them for the first time or searching for a new edition need look no further.

I absolutely loved Oedipus The King. It was exciting, even though I already knew the myth, and brought about catharsis. There is a wonderful use of imagery in it. Antigone, on the other hand, was not as moving to me. I had trouble identifying with Creon and did not pity Antigone. Still, I would recommend reading it. If anything you will at least have broadened your knowledge of Greek tragedy. Plus, the Oedipus plays will make up for Antigone's weaknesses. Also, keep in mind that most people like Antigone. What I've written is just my personal view.

Set in ancient Greece, Oedipus the King is a classic play about the fall of a great leader. This particular type of theater can be classified as a tragedy due to the fact that the main character has a positive view by his people and leads with great pride. The story begins with a plague throughout the land and its only stopper is told through a prophecy. The prophecy describes the murder of a king from a far off land; to stop the plague the killer must be discovered and punished accordingly. Oedipus boasts his ruling ways a he vows to discover the murderer and banish him, family, and future generations from his country. King Oedipus receives opinions and assistance from his wife Jocasta, brother-in-law Creon, and the Chorus whom reacts the decision making of Oedipus and takes the place of the people. Oedipus uses his power to summon those who might know anything about the murder. Accusations are first pointed to a group of robbers who attacked and robbed the king while he was traveling. The blind prophet Tiresias from Thebes is then sent for. Tiresias points the finger at Oedipus and blames him for the murder. The tale starts to unravel as the prophecy of Oedipus's life is told. In summary the prophet tells how Oedipus is destined to kill his father and marry his mother. This very prophecy is the reason that Oedipus moved away from his alleged parents whom in actuality acquired Oedipus as a baby before he was killed in hopes to prevent the very prophecy. Oedipus discards the prophet's words and continues his search. Signs continually point towards Oedipus for an unexpected ending.
The play is full of long speeches that derive a simple point. Foreshadowing makes up a majority of the play and gives way the play far before it is over. Great detail is put into each speech and put into a quite violent ending. I personally rate the play as poor for it is far too predictable and drawn out. The only real entertaining part of the play is the ending though predictable it is quite graphic and creative.