You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
534 reviews for:
The Oedipus Plays of Sophocles: Oedipus the King; Oedipus at Colonus; Antigone
Sophocles
3.86 AVERAGE
534 reviews for:
The Oedipus Plays of Sophocles: Oedipus the King; Oedipus at Colonus; Antigone
Sophocles
3.86 AVERAGE
I’ve always wanted to read more plays, especially Greek tragedy and the Three Theban Plays are a good place to start. The prophecies and grief that surround Oedipus are probably one of the more well known stories, and it was great to read more about his life and destiny after his exile. I would highly recommend for anyone who wants to know more in-depth knowledge about all the events that transpired.
challenging
dark
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
adventurous
dark
emotional
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
KING OEDIPUS (4.5 stars)
A classic, a classic. A horrific tale of mortals trying to outwit the Sun god's prophecy and failing miserably. How sad it is to wrestle Fate and losing every time. I loved the Chorus's hands of intervention in between the dialogues. It felt refreshing.
OEDIPUS AT COLONIUS (2 stars)
Well, I've never had much love for sequels. They can never live up to the originals. Oedipus at Colonius, many decades since his exile, tells the ongoing tale of his cursed life. Blind, homeless, thrown out and sold by his sons. There was a cameo of Theseus, who, despite being a king, was funnily(to me) at Oedipus's beck and call. Oedipus's character changed drastically over the years. Where once he was proud and confident, and now he is a shell of a man, afraid of touching anyone in fear that they too will bear his curse (reminding me heavily of King Midas). The story wasn't as thrilling but I'm glad I got to read it.
ANTIGONE (1.5 stars)
Goodness, it's worse than the sequel. I keep hearing how good Antigone is, so I was excited to read it but it did not interest me at all. When I got to the last page, I let out a sigh. Did I read it wrongly, was my brain too fried at 3am, or was it just overhyped and I had my expectations too high? Antigone, with her strong will, went against the law and paid the price for it. People died, I did not care. I was thoroughly bored with it. Am I too harsh for saying maybe Sophocles was a one hit wonder?
A classic, a classic. A horrific tale of mortals trying to outwit the Sun god's prophecy and failing miserably. How sad it is to wrestle Fate and losing every time. I loved the Chorus's hands of intervention in between the dialogues. It felt refreshing.
OEDIPUS AT COLONIUS (2 stars)
Well, I've never had much love for sequels. They can never live up to the originals. Oedipus at Colonius, many decades since his exile, tells the ongoing tale of his cursed life. Blind, homeless, thrown out and sold by his sons. There was a cameo of Theseus, who, despite being a king, was funnily(to me) at Oedipus's beck and call. Oedipus's character changed drastically over the years. Where once he was proud and confident, and now he is a shell of a man, afraid of touching anyone in fear that they too will bear his curse (reminding me heavily of King Midas). The story wasn't as thrilling but I'm glad I got to read it.
ANTIGONE (1.5 stars)
Goodness, it's worse than the sequel. I keep hearing how good Antigone is, so I was excited to read it but it did not interest me at all. When I got to the last page, I let out a sigh. Did I read it wrongly, was my brain too fried at 3am, or was it just overhyped and I had my expectations too high? Antigone, with her strong will, went against the law and paid the price for it. People died, I did not care. I was thoroughly bored with it. Am I too harsh for saying maybe Sophocles was a one hit wonder?
I should preface this review by saying that I read the plays in the wrong order.
For school I read Oedipus Rex first, and then Antigonê. Then I went back and read Oedipus at Colonus just for myself, to see what it was like.
I'll go in the correct order, though.
I can truly see why Oedipus Rex was considered the perfect tragedy by Aristotle. There is something so clean about it that makes it very satisfying to read. It's like the equivalent of hearing Bach's Invention No. 1 in C Major after listening to a couple hours' worth of romantic era music. It's gorgeous and lovely, but taken in too strong of a dose it becomes somewhat meaningless. It's so lyrical and it blends together so much that it's tiring to listen to. Oedipus Rex was refreshing—I knew how the story went already, and I was reading mostly to see how tragedy worked. I think the concept of greek tragedy is fascinating; specifically, the idea of unity of action is something I find very interesting. The idea that the whole play is totally self-contained, and that ideally everything that occurs is woven into a tightly-knit chain of events, makes so much sense. It makes the tragic fall so much clearer, and emphasizes the hero's hamartia much better. If you are prideful, you will suffer the consequences and see everything that you are proud of stripped from you. Simple as that. The idea that the audience can project themselves onto the tragic hero makes the unity of action much more important—the idea of a greek tragedy is to teach a lesson, and the lesson is much more potent if there is nowhere for the reader to hide by saying, "ah but circumstances were different." The whole point is that circumstances don't matter. Even if you are like Oedipus, king of Thebes, beloved by all, if you commit his tragic mistake, you will end up a beggar, abhorred, infamous. Everything is self-contained. Oedipus could truly be anybody. I think that's also why the fairly obvious lack of depth of character works so well. At least for me, the characters all felt mostly two-dimensional, and a single element of their personality was emphasized. Oedipus was proud. So was Creon. Antigonê was righteous. Ismenê was pragmatic. The idea of keeping their characters limited to a single trait means that so many readers can project onto them, and it makes the lesson of the play so much more powerful. The real magic of reading is when the words on the page blend with the reader's imagination. When we as readers fill in the gaps with our own thoughts, experiences, biases, etc. the story becomes ours, and it sticks much longer. This is essentially what Sophocles is allowing us to do.
In Oedipus at Colonus, I went in expecting not to see much. I was mainly curious about Oedipus's character development and what kind of person he became after the events in Oedipus Rex went down. I was shocked, at the end, to find that I had become terribly emotional about the whole thing. That was not the intention, but it still happened. Oedipus's death was so clearly deus ex machina, and not well-explained at all, but the fact that he was so eager to die made me really very sad. For twenty years of his life, he didn't let himself die, because he thought it was too easy of a way out. When he finally made peace with the world and left it... but I shouldn't say "made peace". He met Theseus, and in him found something of a Hellenic ideal of a man—the man Oedipus might have been if he hadn't been so proud. He acknowledged his mistakes, but was quite adamant that nothing was truly his fault—it had all been the doing of fate, and the hands of the gods had guided him to do what he did. I for one actually agree with him. He had no way of knowing what sort of divine snare he was walking into, and although I find it hilarious that he was 100% A-OK with killing a man on the side of the road, but wasn't okay with it once he realized the man was actually important, that still doesn't mean he was guilty of patricide necessarily since he didn't do it with that intention. But he also laid a curse on the rest of his family and the house of Kadmos for generations to come, and was unwilling to make peace with Polyneicês when he came to see him. Oedipus may have learned a lot through his twenty years of wandering and suffering, but he certainly did not become less petty than he had been. On a different note, Oedipus at Colonus answered quite a few questions I had. Oedipus describes himself as being obliged to defend himself and kill Laïos, a detail never mentioned in the previous play. Apparently Laïos initiated the argument and attacked first, which puts Oedipus in a more favorable light. I think it was rather a fitting end to Oedipus's story to see him come to terms with his life, and realize that he did truly have the power to make an impact on the next generation. It was almost heart-warming to see the way he was with his daughters... almost. There were enough reminders in the story, both from conversation with others and from Oedipus's own introspection, to make sure the reader doesn't forget that Antigonê and Ismenê were also Oedipus's sisters. But overall, I think this play demonstrated the most ability to create katharsis in me. It was somehow satisfying and sad at the same time, to watch Oedipus find peace at last.
As for Antigonê, I found it interesting to have a more varied cast of characters to compare to Oedipus. There were a few more elements of tragic heroes scattered here and there between the various characters. Creon had the tragic flaw, and the tragic fall, but not everything was necessarily his fault. Antigonê had a tragic end, but she wasn't truly ever in the wrong—she had the gods on her side. The list goes on. I am of the firm belief that Oedipus was the most perfect tragic hero, but it was still interesting to see other characters. I question why the play is named as it is, since Creon seems to be the most tragic-hero-esque of all the characters in it, but perhaps it is more important to the story that the curse on the house of Kadmos continues, more so than who the curse affects the most, and Antigonê was directly next in Oedipus's bloodline. It was interesting to compare the tragic falls of Oedipus and Creon, and it really pushed me to wonder: is it more tragic for one's entire life to be turned on its head in the span of a few days? or is it worse to have the anagnorisis and see the truth, but be powerless to prevent the consequences of one's actions?
As for why greek tragedy has managed to stay popular throughout the ages, I think it offers the very appealing idea that even those most in power are very human, and very flawed, like the rest of us. It's also very interesting to see where theater as we know it started. But at the same time, it also offers that oddly satisfying feeling of relief that I'm feeling, looking back on this entire train wreck of a story. I'm so, so glad I'm not a tragic hero.
For school I read Oedipus Rex first, and then Antigonê. Then I went back and read Oedipus at Colonus just for myself, to see what it was like.
I'll go in the correct order, though.
I can truly see why Oedipus Rex was considered the perfect tragedy by Aristotle. There is something so clean about it that makes it very satisfying to read. It's like the equivalent of hearing Bach's Invention No. 1 in C Major after listening to a couple hours' worth of romantic era music. It's gorgeous and lovely, but taken in too strong of a dose it becomes somewhat meaningless. It's so lyrical and it blends together so much that it's tiring to listen to. Oedipus Rex was refreshing—I knew how the story went already, and I was reading mostly to see how tragedy worked. I think the concept of greek tragedy is fascinating; specifically, the idea of unity of action is something I find very interesting. The idea that the whole play is totally self-contained, and that ideally everything that occurs is woven into a tightly-knit chain of events, makes so much sense. It makes the tragic fall so much clearer, and emphasizes the hero's hamartia much better. If you are prideful, you will suffer the consequences and see everything that you are proud of stripped from you. Simple as that. The idea that the audience can project themselves onto the tragic hero makes the unity of action much more important—the idea of a greek tragedy is to teach a lesson, and the lesson is much more potent if there is nowhere for the reader to hide by saying, "ah but circumstances were different." The whole point is that circumstances don't matter. Even if you are like Oedipus, king of Thebes, beloved by all, if you commit his tragic mistake, you will end up a beggar, abhorred, infamous. Everything is self-contained. Oedipus could truly be anybody. I think that's also why the fairly obvious lack of depth of character works so well. At least for me, the characters all felt mostly two-dimensional, and a single element of their personality was emphasized. Oedipus was proud. So was Creon. Antigonê was righteous. Ismenê was pragmatic. The idea of keeping their characters limited to a single trait means that so many readers can project onto them, and it makes the lesson of the play so much more powerful. The real magic of reading is when the words on the page blend with the reader's imagination. When we as readers fill in the gaps with our own thoughts, experiences, biases, etc. the story becomes ours, and it sticks much longer. This is essentially what Sophocles is allowing us to do.
In Oedipus at Colonus, I went in expecting not to see much. I was mainly curious about Oedipus's character development and what kind of person he became after the events in Oedipus Rex went down. I was shocked, at the end, to find that I had become terribly emotional about the whole thing. That was not the intention, but it still happened. Oedipus's death was so clearly deus ex machina, and not well-explained at all, but the fact that he was so eager to die made me really very sad. For twenty years of his life, he didn't let himself die, because he thought it was too easy of a way out. When he finally made peace with the world and left it... but I shouldn't say "made peace". He met Theseus, and in him found something of a Hellenic ideal of a man—the man Oedipus might have been if he hadn't been so proud. He acknowledged his mistakes, but was quite adamant that nothing was truly his fault—it had all been the doing of fate, and the hands of the gods had guided him to do what he did. I for one actually agree with him. He had no way of knowing what sort of divine snare he was walking into, and although I find it hilarious that he was 100% A-OK with killing a man on the side of the road, but wasn't okay with it once he realized the man was actually important, that still doesn't mean he was guilty of patricide necessarily since he didn't do it with that intention. But he also laid a curse on the rest of his family and the house of Kadmos for generations to come, and was unwilling to make peace with Polyneicês when he came to see him. Oedipus may have learned a lot through his twenty years of wandering and suffering, but he certainly did not become less petty than he had been. On a different note, Oedipus at Colonus answered quite a few questions I had. Oedipus describes himself as being obliged to defend himself and kill Laïos, a detail never mentioned in the previous play. Apparently Laïos initiated the argument and attacked first, which puts Oedipus in a more favorable light. I think it was rather a fitting end to Oedipus's story to see him come to terms with his life, and realize that he did truly have the power to make an impact on the next generation. It was almost heart-warming to see the way he was with his daughters... almost. There were enough reminders in the story, both from conversation with others and from Oedipus's own introspection, to make sure the reader doesn't forget that Antigonê and Ismenê were also Oedipus's sisters. But overall, I think this play demonstrated the most ability to create katharsis in me. It was somehow satisfying and sad at the same time, to watch Oedipus find peace at last.
As for Antigonê, I found it interesting to have a more varied cast of characters to compare to Oedipus. There were a few more elements of tragic heroes scattered here and there between the various characters. Creon had the tragic flaw, and the tragic fall, but not everything was necessarily his fault. Antigonê had a tragic end, but she wasn't truly ever in the wrong—she had the gods on her side. The list goes on. I am of the firm belief that Oedipus was the most perfect tragic hero, but it was still interesting to see other characters. I question why the play is named as it is, since Creon seems to be the most tragic-hero-esque of all the characters in it, but perhaps it is more important to the story that the curse on the house of Kadmos continues, more so than who the curse affects the most, and Antigonê was directly next in Oedipus's bloodline. It was interesting to compare the tragic falls of Oedipus and Creon, and it really pushed me to wonder: is it more tragic for one's entire life to be turned on its head in the span of a few days? or is it worse to have the anagnorisis and see the truth, but be powerless to prevent the consequences of one's actions?
As for why greek tragedy has managed to stay popular throughout the ages, I think it offers the very appealing idea that even those most in power are very human, and very flawed, like the rest of us. It's also very interesting to see where theater as we know it started. But at the same time, it also offers that oddly satisfying feeling of relief that I'm feeling, looking back on this entire train wreck of a story. I'm so, so glad I'm not a tragic hero.
fast-paced
dark
emotional
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
if you try to discuss this book with me, I’ve only kind of half read it so don’t expect great insights
"Zavorra tormentosa, a te, il tuo te stesso".
"Chi, ditemi, chi sente serenità di dio su di sè? E' meno che illusione, e dopo l'illusione c'è tramonto".
"Tu sei la mia scuola, stanco Edipo. Tu, col tuo inferno: non so immaginare contentezza viva".
"E lagrime sul letto dove - storta vita - fruttificò due volte: l'uomo dal suo uomo, frutti dal suo frutto!".
"Ah, se tu avessi saputo non capire!"
"Se c'è degradazione che degrada a fondo, ecco, quella è eredità d'Edipo".