It's Sad, So Sad. Such a Sad Sad Situation.

The last question the book poses to ponder over is simple: does this play end in total gloom? And after thinking long and hard about it I am not totally confident in my conclusion. I probably would not have faced such a dilemma if it had not been for the last line in the blog Mr. Coon posted An Introduction to Tragedy, “I believe the writers who get the most lasting response from readers are the writers who offer a happy ending through moral development. By a happy ending, I do not mean mere fortunate events—a marriage or last-minute rescue from death—but some kind of spiritual reassessment or moral reconciliation, even with the self, even at death.”

That line confused me. If this novelist Fay Weldon is indeed speaking of tragedies, does that mean Oedipus had a happy ending? I mean I honestly am unable to find that happy ending if it exists in this play. What is the moral development in this show? It is hard to see a case for or against it!

There is a story arch, albeit from the top down--a story decline so to speak--but in searching for character arch I struggle. When you really look at it, the characters are flat. Iocaste has a moment of intense realization which leads directly to suicide, does that constitute as moral growth… furthermore does that constitute as the makings of a happy endings. I understand that in some cultures in some situations suicide is the right decision morally to avoid disgrace but ancient Greece was not one of those societies. Iocaste’s decision to end her life was not a moral reconciliation by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, while poetically and grotesquely beautiful and symbolic, what reassessment does Oedipus undergo when he gouges his own eyes out with his wife/mother’s dress pins. Sure, the symbolism is overwhelming. Some twisted form of poetic justice but what is he reconciling by blinding himself. One could argue that by physically blinding himself he is reconciling his prior blindness in life but what growth is in that? An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth--all we end up with is a ton of blind people unable to chew their own food. So now he goes into exile to repent for a sin he had no apparent control over? I don’t feel better about myself and I all learned is don’t waste your money on a soothsayer.

If a tragedy is supposed to provide you with some sort of moral lesson, spiritual actualization, I don’t see it in “Oedipus Rex,” so is this play still a tragedy? As far as the last question in the book is concerned all I see is gloom, at least as far as the title character is concerned. Not even Creon gets what he wants in the end! Maybe gloom isn’t the right word. The gloom seems to be gone by the time the play ends; however the infinite misery is playing full speed ahead. So regardless of what it means to be a tragedy, I’d say its safe to say the play ends with a sad song playing at full volume. (528)