(1036). In Oedipus the King, Oedipus is just such a character. He is described in glowing terms as “more like a god than any man alive” (66). He is called “greater than any man” (52). He exclaims “nothing can dishonor me, ever” (1355-1356). Yet he is condemned to murder his father and to sleep with his mother (1481-1484). He has attempted to escape his fate, as his parents attempted to escape theirs, and in doing so he has made that fate possible. He has cursed himself unwittingly, his own father’s killer (316-343). He has, in a fit of anger, cried “Damn my own good!” (1334). Inadvertently, that is precisely what he has done. But because he has done it inadvertently he is not an evil character, he simply fits Aristotle’s idea of a tragic character. Aristotle also writes that such a drama ought to have a change “accompanied by …a reversal, or by recognition, or by both” (1035). The change in Oedipus the King is obviously Oedipus’ fall from a position of power and respect to a pathetic blind cripple. It is, as Aristotle says it should be, a change “not from bad to good, but, reversely, from good to bad” (1037). The change in Oedipus the King is, as Aristotle says it should be, accompanied by a reversal and a recognition (1035). The reversal occurs when the messenger comes to relieve Oedipus of his fears of the curse, but his revelation that Oedipus isn’t Polybos’ son causes Oedipus to realize his guilt instead (1187-1312). The recognition occurs when Oedipus recognizes Jocasta, the woman he loves, as his mother and the man that he killed as his father (1478-1484). This fulfills Aristotle’s ideal of a change, a reversal, and a recognition. As shown by these examples, Oedipus the King illustrates Aristotle’s rules for classical drama. Although Oedipus the King came before Aristotle’s Poe...
