|
Both of the plays, Oedipus Rex by Sophocles as well as Hamlet, by
Shakespeare, are predominantly works of classic tragedy. This,
moreover, is something that is accentuated quite strongly when
considering it in light of the exceptionally strong overtures of
inevitable destruction and doom as they are illustrated in either of
the plays. Furthermore, it would also be relevant, before going into
too much detail in concern to either of the plays, that each of the
plays tends to be uncharacteristically inclined towards scenic
integrations involving bloodshed, violence and mysticism.
Take
Shakespeare’s Hamlet for instance. The play is founded upon a plot that
is highly intricate and considerably twisted, even by Shakespeare’s
standards. Contemplate the scene towards the beginning of the play,
when the ghost of Hamlet, the dead king appears to his son, the prince
Hamlet. It is apparent that the properties of the ghostly and rather
grisly spectacle of the dead king Hamlet appear to be strongly
indicative of the manner in which he died, subsequently inducing
feelings of trepidation and fear within the subjects who happened to
experience the apparition. The elements of corporeality, moreover, are
also present within the Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex; this being something
that is accentuated especially strongly when considering it in light of
the bloody fate that Oedipus eventually and voluntarily meets as a
result of his own decision.
It is quite apparent that these elements of corporeality, in both
cases, have been integrated in order to convey to the readers/viewers
the essence of tragedy within the settings. It is obvious, however,
that this does not completely cover the reason for the exceptional
degree of corporeality within either of the plays. Take into
consideration, for instance, the manner in which the corporeal
properties of Queen Gertrude and King Claudius are portrayed within
Hamlet, through the words of the protagonist himself. Take into
consideration, for instance, the essence of his words when he engages
with himself in a soliloquy concerning his mothers union with her
husband’s brother, his uncle a scant two months after his father’s
death. ‘O most wicked speed, to post/with such dexterity to incestuous
sheets’ (Hamlet, Act 1; Scene 2). Clearly, this is something that
appears to suggest that there is a lack or moral and ethical grounding
present within the royal family, something that is made even more
apparent when considering it in light of the marked lack of grief and
misery on the part of the widow. And coincidentally, this is something
that brings forth an instance of partial similarity between the two
plays, something that is emphasized when considering it in light of the
nature of the relationship that Oedipus shares with his wife, the queen
Jocasta. While the nature of this relationship doesn’t register until
later in the play, the blind seer Teiresias makes an enigmatic
indication to it at the very start. Teiresias says to Oedipus ‘have you
eyes / And do not see your own damnation? Eyes, / And cannot see what
company you keep? / Whose son you are? I tell you, you have sinned’
(Oedipus Rex; 37).
And while it is obvious that the seer’s reference to the eyes of
Oedipus is completely metaphoric and proverbial in nature, this is
something that shifts dramatically as the plot continues to unfurl.
While it is apparent that Oedipus’ lack of intangible insight is
something that is increasingly aggravating Teiresias, the tables begin
to turn with the dawning of realization within the Oedipus. Slowly, as
he grows increasingly aware of the gravity of his misdeeds, however,
Oedipus begins to chide himself for his ignorance, gradually working
himself into a state of depression and misery that is of such insane
depth that he is obliged to eventually gouge out his own eyes. This
action, however, seems to be the anti-climax in the play, as he loses
the entire honor and respect in the eyes of his subjects with
significant rapidity. The corporeality of this lays in the fact that
Oedipus was largely perceived as a fair and a just ruler before the
misdemeanors started descending upon him in all their glory.
Immediately following the scene of his self-inflicted wounds and
blindness, however, he is portrayed as being a freak, a monstrosity who
is viewed with disdain, disgust and loathing by all of his subjects.
This is something that suggests that subjects of the time were given to
evaluating the character traits of their leaders upon the pretext of
the physical features of the individuals in question.
The nature of the fate that Oedipus eventually meets, moreover,
comes through as being rather ironic; he becomes part of the very theme
that he has been obsessed with overcoming, the plaguing and pollution
of Thebes. This is since, in his distorted state, he is thwarted and
disliked and viewed as a nuisance that Thebes must be rid of as soon as
possible. The chorus further emphasizes the negativity of his demise in
as much as taunting him with the shouted words ‘dare not see, I am
hiding / My eyes, I cannot bear / What most I long to see; unspeakable
to mortal ear, / Too terrible for eyes to see’ (Oedipus Rex; 62). And
in Hamlet, the indirectly corporeal nature of the circumstances under
which Hamlet dies (from an indirect hit, a superficial cut) seems to
suggest that his subjects place relevance in the marring/perfection of
the body in death. This is something that is symbolically indicated
through the reverent manner in which Fortinbras orders Hamlet’s corpse
to be carried away. ‘Let four captains / Bear Hamlet like a soldier to
the stage, / for he was likely, had he been put on, / To have proved
most royally’ (Hamlet, Act Five; Scene Two). Thus speaking and taking
into consideration all that has been said and discussed, one of the
things that has been made perhaps the most evident has been the subtle
but strong transfixion of the characters to the corporeal
characteristics of their leaders.
|
|
|
(0 vote)