You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
narcon_27 's review for:
Oedipus the King
by Sophocles
One has to wonder why a work of this nature is worshipped so commonly in the literature scene. Perhaps it is derivative of the Harold Bloom literary scene we currently inhabit, favoring antiquated, simplistic works over the more developed works of the last 400 years. There are multiple problems with the work, mostly with the logic around its production, but what is most striking about its form is how lifeless and gutted it all feels. In a modern era, perhaps this story could be reworked and beneficially convoluted, as to lend some emotional depth to its characters, but what Oedipus Rex represents is a mix of shallow morality and simplistic characters, all of which, combined with its ancient prose, land this book firmly in the territory of mediocrity.
The plot goes as follows: A man, after arguing with multiple friends, finds out that he accidently married his mother and killed his father, and, out of deep despair, slashes his eyes open and abandons his children.
The firmest reason I could find for its inclusion in the western canon was how it featured one of the earliest representations of the tragic hero, but this may be the only quality that one could state for the book. In my opinion, the tragic hero, as with the hero's journey, is just something perceived from everyday life. It's seen all the time, and Sophocles certainly didn't come up with the idea, so on this front the book can be discredited. I haven't been able to find any other reasons other than 'historical value', which irks me on end; The Odyssey is still a fairly enjoyable and well-written read alongside being of significant historical value.
Besides not providing much of a point to reading it, what did I think ofOedipus? Nothing. When I read this in ninth grade, I was supposed to discuss it for a week with 3 other people and there was so little to discuss that we finished in 2 days, and I finished my essay before I was even supposed to start writing it. The book's fame is beyond me, and not in an 'I hate all classics' way; Tom Jones, Jane Eyre, Macbeth, Faulkner? I could give plenty of reasons to read any of those, besides just be objectively great books. There are so many phenomenal books out there, masterpieces left unread, hidden gems left uncovered. This is not one of them; Don't waste your time with it. Needless to say, this play would be better off classified as one of the lesser pieces of classical antiquity.
Null/5.
(1 star for utter mediocrity).
The plot goes as follows: A man, after arguing with multiple friends, finds out that he accidently married his mother and killed his father, and, out of deep despair, slashes his eyes open and abandons his children.
The firmest reason I could find for its inclusion in the western canon was how it featured one of the earliest representations of the tragic hero, but this may be the only quality that one could state for the book. In my opinion, the tragic hero, as with the hero's journey, is just something perceived from everyday life. It's seen all the time, and Sophocles certainly didn't come up with the idea, so on this front the book can be discredited. I haven't been able to find any other reasons other than 'historical value', which irks me on end; The Odyssey is still a fairly enjoyable and well-written read alongside being of significant historical value.
Besides not providing much of a point to reading it, what did I think ofOedipus? Nothing. When I read this in ninth grade, I was supposed to discuss it for a week with 3 other people and there was so little to discuss that we finished in 2 days, and I finished my essay before I was even supposed to start writing it. The book's fame is beyond me, and not in an 'I hate all classics' way; Tom Jones, Jane Eyre, Macbeth, Faulkner? I could give plenty of reasons to read any of those, besides just be objectively great books. There are so many phenomenal books out there, masterpieces left unread, hidden gems left uncovered. This is not one of them; Don't waste your time with it. Needless to say, this play would be better off classified as one of the lesser pieces of classical antiquity.
Null/5.
(1 star for utter mediocrity).