Lhstas Efaske: Oedipus and Laius' Many Murderers

Goodhart, Sandor

doi:10.2307/464819

Cited by 24 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, whereas Oedipus knows he killed all the travellers at the crossroads ('And then I killed them all' , l. 813), a witness who escaped the massacre is a main character in the tragedy. About the number of Laius's companions, Jocasta lists ve and Oedipus, while agreeing with her, lists only three (Goodhart, 1978). Moreover, whereas Oedipus recollects having been alone at the crossroads during the unfortunate meeting with the strangers ('As I went on, when I was just approaching those three roads .…”

Section: Myth and Tragedymentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Under ' Parricide' , Webster's dictionary reads: ' One who murders a person to whom he stands in a specially sacred relation, as a father, mother, or other near relative or (in a wider sense) a ruler' (Webster, International Dictionary, 2nd edn). Whereas, according to this de nition, the well-known myth of Oedipus presents a de nite case of parricide (the killing of both father and King), contemporary close readings of Sophocles' version of the Greek myth (Goodhart, 1978;Ahl, 1991) underscore a less noticed aspect of this text: its critical view of mythical thinking, exposing the ways in which mythical beliefs might ful l themselves. In the present article I shall rst summarily present Freud's perspectives on parricide and myth in Oedipus the King, and elaborate on the arguments of contemporary literary critical perspectives on Sophocles' play.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Who killed Laius?: On Sophocles' enigmatic message

Priel

2002

The International Journal of Psychoanalysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using Laplanche's basic conceptualisation of the role of the other in unconscious processes, the author proposes a reading of Sophocles' tragedy, Oedipus the King, according to basic principles of dream interpretation. This reading corroborates contemporary literary perspectives suggesting that Sophocles' tragedy may not only convey the myth but also provide a critical analysis of how myths work. Important textual inconsistencies and incoherence, which have been noted through the centuries, suggest the existence of another, repressed story. Moreover, the action of the play points to enigmatic parental messages of infanticide and the silencing of Oedipus's story, as well as their translation into primordial guilt, as the origins of the tragic denouement. Oedipus's self-condemnation of parricide follows these enigmatic codes and is unrelated to, and may even contradict, the evidence offered in the tragedy as to the identity of Laius's murderers. Moreover, Sophocles' text provides a complex intertwining of hermeneutic and deterministic perspectives. Through the use of the mythical deterministic content, the formal characteristics of Sophocles' text, mainly its complex time perspective and extensive use of double meaning, dramatise in the act of reading an acute awareness of interpretation. This reading underscores the fundamental role of the other in the constitution of unconscious processes.

show abstract

Section: Myth and Tragedymentioning

confidence: 90%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Who killed Laius?: On Sophocles' enigmatic message

Priel

2002

The International Journal of Psychoanalysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…So if the party consisted of four men excluding the herdsman, it corresponds to the number of the entourage Jocasta mentioned, namely five. However, 1) and 3) seem most likely to be the same (11).…”

Section: -2 Ambiguitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

^|^ldquo;Not an equal, but a greater payback^|^rdquo;

Kitano

2013

CTR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I examine the character of Oedipus' action narrated on the stage, namely, the Vorgeschichte of the stage action. Two realms of action are considered separately:first, Corinth and Delphi, where the words of the drunk at the banquet was at issue, and second, the crossroads, where fatal meeting between Laios and his young son occurred.As for the first realm, I argue that what the drunk said was not only false, but implied a grave abuse against the assumed mother of Oedipus, Merope, and Oedipus had good intellectual and moral reason for not taking him seriously and not connecting Pythian oracle with the libel.As for the second, I argue that his story of the crossroads is full of indeterminacies which made it impossible to determine the culpability of his action. What is more, whether Oedipus was morally culpable or not is irrelevant to the tragic outcome at the crossroads as far as he followed the principle of exceeding, one of the basic virtues of the heroic tradition.However, to conclude that it is this heroic principle of exceeding that is denounced in this tragedy because it is inconsistent with the democratic principle of classical Athens is to oversimplify the matter implied in this tragedy. This principle was still felt positively for a spectator who could imagine himself to be in such a situation as a crossroads where it is not sure one can rely on any legal authority. Oedipus was, in this sense, "like us" and that is why his fall caused "pity" of the spectator.

show abstract

“…Plusieurs auteurs (Felman, 1983;Goodhart, 1978;Harshbarger, 1965) en effet ont depuis longtemps mis en doute la version traditionnelle de l'assassinat de Laïos par OEdipe. Ces auteurs en arrivent à la conclusion, après avoir mis en évidence les contradictions du texte de Sophocle, qu'il n'est nullement avéré qu'OEdipe se soit rendu coupable du crime dont on l'accuse.…”

Section: Les Critiques Littéraires Au Coeur De L'enquête Policièreunclassified

Recherche scientifique et enquête policière, une analogie didactique1

Larivée

Fortier

Filiatrault

2010

rum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

En vue d’attirer les élèves vers des carrières scientifiques, les auteurs proposent de leur faire lire des romans policiers dans le cadre des cours de français et de littérature. L’article comprend deux parties. Dans la première, les parentés entre la démarche scientifique et l’enquête policière sont mises en évidence. Dans la deuxième partie, on propose d’initier les adolescents aux critiques littéraires qui se sont donné pour mission de vérifier si les coupables identifiés par les détectives de romans policiers célèbres sont les vrais coupables. Cet exercice permet de développer un esprit critique et un sain scepticisme face aux théories auxquelles ils seront initiés tout au long de leur curriculum scolaire.

show abstract

Lhstas Efaske: Oedipus and Laius' Many Murderers

Cited by 24 publications

References 0 publications

Who killed Laius?: On Sophocles' enigmatic message

Who killed Laius?: On Sophocles' enigmatic message

^|^ldquo;Not an equal, but a greater payback^|^rdquo;

Recherche scientifique et enquête policière, une analogie didactique1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About