One could argue that King Oedipus is a victim of fate in Sophocle's classic play and that there was no way he could avoid his destiny. As a child, King Laius and Jocasta consulted an oracle, who told them that their son would one day murder his father and marry his mother. In an attempt to avoid fate, Laius and Jocasta fastened a rope around Oedipus's ankles and gave him to a servant to leave in the mountains. However, the servant took pity on the infant and gave him to shepard, who presented him to King Polybus and Queen Merope in Corinth. Oedipus was raised in Corinth under the impression that Polybus was his biological father. After hearing the same prophecy regarding his fate, Oedipus believed that he could outsmart the gods and avoid his destiny by fleeing Corinth.
However, Oedipus became a victim of his own hubris and unknowingly murdered Laius on his way to Thebes, where he eventually married Jocasta, who gave birth to his children. In the play, Sophocles makes it clear that Oedipus's mistake was thinking that he was smarter than the gods and could defy their ultimate design. No matter what Oedipus did, his fate was sealed and he could not avoid his destiny. At the end of the play, Oedipus laments that the only way to possibly avoid his fate was to die. Despite his biological parents' efforts, they too could not avoid their fate. The fact that everyone's efforts to avoid their destiny was futile, one could argue that Oedipus was a victim of fate.
Videos
Oedipus does not seem to have been capable of changing his fate. Though we may be able to argue that he is complicit in the fulfillment of the prophecy outlining his fate, it seems that we cannot make him completely responsible for that fate. After all, his decisions are largely shaped by his unwillingness to accept his fate - and we can't blame him for that when his foreseen fate was no horrendous.
Certainly this is debatable--in my interpretation of the play, Oedipus may be a victim of fate; however, he is not innocent and does bear responsibility in the outcome of his life. The role of prophecy is important in older plays, and it mimics the beliefs of people who held fast to idea that fate and destiny could not be avoided. If this is true, then Oedipus could never have hoped to escape the prophecy of the oracle. However, Oedipus is in control of how he handles the prophecy. Rather than nobly accepting his fate, Oedipus attempts to run from his destiny. He believes that his mortal intelligence and cunning will be enough...
See This Answer Now
Start your 48-hour free trial to unlock this answer and thousands more. Enjoy eNotes ad-free and cancel anytime.
Already a member? Log in here.
to thwart his destiny, hence he runs away from the home of Polybus and Merope. When he meetsTeiresias and learns more of what is in store for him, he calls Teiresias a fool and chooses to believe that he can escape his fate. So Oedipus's ignorance and cowardice causes his downfall and demise.
Generally speaking, audiences often sympathize with Oedipus at the end of the play. He is portrayed as a great man, and it's clear at the play's opening that the citizens of Thebes love and respect him. It's true that Oedipus does not knowingly kill his father and marry his mother, which is why we feel sorry for him and feel that he doesn't deserve the suffering he experiences at the end of the play. However, as the previous posters note, Oedipus is a victim of fate. He has a tragic flaw (his pride/arrogance) that is responsible for his downfall, and it's this type of flaw that Aristotle identified as being a key characteristic of a tragic figure.
Oedipus is in control of his own fate, though not until the point at which he seeks out the oracles to ask about his past. As already mentioned, he could then have gone and talked to Polybus and Merope. Instead, he takes action on his own which entirely changes his fate. Oedipus decides to circumvent the fate the gods have laid out for him; in doing so, he puts himself in the direct path of that very fate. I know, he had a really traumatic beginning, but he became a prince and has, presumably, overcome that earlier deficit.
This is always where the debate between free will and fate comes into play; however, the choices he makes to turn away from those he believes to be his parents, to murder anyone, and to marry anyone are his and his alone. The curse on the town was for harboring a murderer, and Oedipus' curses were for the murderer; he thought the punishment was fit for a murderer, so there is little doubt it's apt for him. He suffers, I know, but he only recieves the same punishment he would have given any other person; therefore, it's just.
You will receive many different and distinctive answers to such a question. I would say that an equally compelling case can be made for both options. Such complexity is testament to Sophocles' genius and greatness in the construction of his play. On one hand, Oedipus' fate cannot be overcome. He tries with the best of intentions and the highest use of his freedom to supplant his fate with a different outcome. It comes to no avail, as he becomes fate's instrument. At the same time, some uses of his freedom causes him to be victimized by his own hand. His scornful treatment of Tiresias and his prophecies as well as his unwillingness to heed the role of fate in his own life helps to move him closer to accomplishing that which he seeks to avoid. I think that Oedipus becomes the type of figure that Greek and modern audiences can examine and see parts of their own sensibility and understand how "not to behave." Oedipus might be the best example of a literary cautionary tale, a character pitted between being doomed by fate and undermined by his own hand.
In accord with the previous post, the hubris of Oedipus is what is responsible for his downfall and tragic experiences. It is, indeed, his arrogance that prohibits him from inquiring into situations. First, the one mentioned, he does not ask his parents about the prophesy. Secondly, his arrogance controls him in his unknowing murder of his father (apparently an inherited trait). And, finally, he arrogantly refuses to be attentive to the loving suggestions of Jocasta, who tries desperately to avert what she realizes will be disaster.
When Oedipus first learns of the prophecy, he never asks his then mother and father about it. Had he done so, he would have known that he was living with adopted parents and that there was no reason whatsoever to leave his home. He also believes in the power of the prophecy more than human free will since he chooses to flee without discussing the issue with his parents in the hope that he would avoid the dreadful "fate" altogether. In doing so, he is led right into the belly of the beast. His pride and anger put in him line with the predictions...even so, he demands that the soothsayer tell him the truth and that the man who killed Jocasta's husband be found.
Oedipus is set-up to suffer. There's no way around it. After all, this is a tragedy, not a comedy, romance, or myth. Oedipus must suffer.
Here is the only reason, I think, why he was "destined to suffer":
His parents, Laius and Jocasta, believed in the gods' prophesy more than human choice. As a result, they tried to commit infanticide by crippling Oedipus' feet and leaving him for dead. This is Oedipus' only fate, as far as I'm concerned. This is a heinous and cowardly act that results in Oedipus' life-long suffering first as a cripple and then as a parentless child who does not know his true identity. His search for the truth (his father's murderer) is necessary to understand himself even though it leads to his blinding.
So, Oedipus has two strikes against him throughout life. The fact that he overcomes these cruel fates and becomes twice crowned prince and king is remarkable.
Fate, I think, is controlled by humans, not the gods. In the end, And, I think, humans can overcome this fate through suffering. Oedipus overcomes his cruel family history and chooses life instead of death, unlike his mother/wife.
You could argue that none of the events that unfolded against Oedipus were actually his fault.
Everything was decreed from his birth - the whole, marrying his mom and killing his dad, I mean. And if it weren't for that prophesy - his parents would likely not have gone to the measures they went to in order to avoid it, and likely it would not have happened.
Granted, Oedipus was prideful - but everyone on Earth suffers bouts of pride from time to time. Does everyone deserve the same fate Oedipus received? Arguably not.
Is Oedipus a victim of fate or his own free will in Oedipus The King?
Oedipus is a victim of fate. The gods decree when he is born that he is destined to marry his mother and murder his father.
People in Oedipus's life try to exercise free will in various ways to escape this curse. His parents, for instance, try to exert their wills by having their infant son exposed at birth so he will die. This way, he will have no chance to grow up and fulfill his dreadful fate. Of course, he is saved and is raised by foster parents. When he himself learns of his destiny, he too tries to exercise his free will. He flees what he thinks are his real parents in Corinth. Nevertheless, he ends up killing his real father and marrying his real mother.
The play very strongly states that an individual cannot escape the destiny decided on for him or her by the gods. The gods are in control, not humans, no matter how intelligent, strong, or powerful the human is (and Oedipus is all of these things). We all have to bow to our fates.
Is Oedipus a victim of fate or his own free will in Oedipus The King?
Your question really is the ultimate question of Oedipus Rex; much of Sophocles' tragedy surrounds the Oracle's prophecy and Oedipus' actions. One of the ultimate tragedies of the play is the way that fate truly works against Oedipus, who at the start of the play, is genuinely active in trying to be a good king for the people of Thebes.
One of the dominant themes of Oedipus Rex deals with the balance of personal choice and natural consequences; Oedipus does act for himself, but unwittingly makes horrendous mistakes. He is a noble man at heart, one who would never knowingly kill his own father and purposefully marry his mother. His revulsion at learning the truth actively demonstrates his severe shame at his actions. Ultimately, fate and extremely unlucky coincidence proves the largest influence in Oedipus Rex.
How can Oedipus be seen as a victim of fate in Oedipus Rex?
As Oedipus was unable to avoid fulfilling the terrible prophecy laid upon him at birth, we can see him as being powerlessly subjected to his fate.
When we consider the great lengths that Oedipus went to in order to escape killing his father and marrying his mother, we can clearly see that his will was bent on mastering his destiny. He did not want to fulfill the prophecy. He did not want to be dominated by a negative fate.
The evidence of Oedipus' efforts can be found in the fact that he leaves the parents who raised him in order to save them (and to avoid fulfilling the prophecy). He fails in this effort, offering some strong proof that he is a "victim of fate".
He learns that he has killed his father, married his mother, and had children with her; his wife-mother Jocasta...
If Oedipus can be seen as striving against the prophecy yet fulfilling it regardless of his most strenuous efforts, we can argue that he is not to blame for what happens. He is a victim, like Jocasta.
His remorse, as well, points to his status as victim. He was never in control of events, but was only an ignorant player in the drama of his life. He was saved as a child only to bring shame and a curse to his family.
OEDIPUS: Let him die who took off the fierce fetters, feeding off my feet, and rescued and saved me from my death, no good deed for me! For if I had died then, I would not have brought (1380) so much pain to my friends or me!