Comparison of the Tragic Hero from Agamemnon and Oedipus the King Essay

Introduction

The tragic hero concept derives from Aristotle. Aristotle has come up with the notion which entails a way of describing what can lead to making a good protagonist in the Greek tragedy. Aristotle makes an argument that a tragic hero requires having a character who is great and nobler than most individuals. The tragic hero must practice the actions of a given seriousness level.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Denial of Truth: Agamemnon and Oedipus the King

Agamemnon and Oedipus the King are similar in that the characters are aware of the truth although they choose to reject it. The instances in both Agamemnon and Oedipus the King which represent the characters as denying the truth result in creating of dramatic irony. When Clytaemestra suggests that Agamemnon requires entering the palace while using the crimson path, he responds by claiming that such state benefits the gods and since he is a mortal, he needs no trampling upon the tinted splendors having no fear being thrown in his path. Agamemnon understands the truth that he should not anger gods, yet he still goes ahead to do that. Agamemnon hopes that he could avoid being punished by taking off his sandals. It is just before this scene takes place that Herald makes an announcement immediately after Agamemnon arrives saying that it is not appropriate straining the day's blessing by making speeches that have evil weight. Herald is afraid of telling the tale of hardship that is caused by Agamemnon. He has the belief that the sad news had the potential of inviting more trouble although he still shares them. Teiresias talks to Oedipus by telling him that he is not the killer of the king hence there is the uncertainty of whose murder he is striving to seek. Oedipus understands that the prophets do not tell lies and still he ignores these warning.

When Oedipus curses the killers, he also curses himself. All these characters are seen as hoping to attain a particular outcome and all the actions that they take end up hurting themselves instead of other people. The characters recognize the fact that truth is a great virtue that individuals should strive towards attaining it yet they are unable seeing the value of truth while situation requiring the truth has confronted them. The characters only appreciate the need for truth when the implications catch up to them. Outside of the tragic fate of the characters, the truths do not hold much value or meaning.

In both tragedies of Agamemnon and Oedipus the King, they appear to be paying individual attention to the present prophets. In Agamemnon, Cassandra is the person that is believed to possess the truth while in the Oedipus the King, Loxias, and Teiresias are the ones that are supposed to possess the truth. These prophets in both tragedies understand the past of the community, and they have the capability of predicting the future. The prophets in the two tragedies appear to be connecting the present events of the play t that of the backstory of the play. In her vision, Cassandra can view the wickedness that is within Agamemnon's house, and she also makes divination involving the Clytaemestra's murders. Prophet Teiresias is the one who names Oedipus as the Laius' murderer and can reference the encounter involving the Sphinx. Prophet Loxias can tell a prophecy to the King Laius and Oedipus which is similar to the prophecy which determines the demise between the two men.

The fact about Oracles that they always tell the truth has been universally acknowledged. The prophets usually possess the knowledge of fate and time which makes them be in a position in which they can speak in a truthful manner about the current event as well as the past events. The prophets in both Agamemnon and Oedipus the King tragedies do not speculate, and this aspect makes them different from the mere mortals. The prophets have divine powers although most of their divinations are usually questioned. In contrast to ordinary men, they appear to lack context; hence they do not acquire a full picture which makes them always to find it incredibly difficult to see the value that prophecies have and the spiritual truth value.

In Agamemnon, time is not separated from the events occurring. The timeline that Aeschylus represents is seen as following a mythical order that comprises of the events which are caused by the family of the curse. Aeschylus attempts creating a logical timeline in which the cause is the one that precedes implication. Many characters from Agamemnon view time as being something which is sensible and integral and being related to religion. Time is the one which is represented as an instrument of the divine will. In the play, the principal character is Zeus; the play portrays him as being almighty or accomplisher.

Self-Destruction and the Value of Truth

Furthermore, the righteousness which is part of the truth is being treated as being similar to Zeus. Zeus utilizes both the truth and time in delivering of justice which s an idea that develops the major conflict of the play. Clytaemestra and Agamemnon are represented as being parts of the cursed house which is destined to have the members of the family being destroyed.

Most of the wrongs which take place in the household do not get punished which is following the retribution principle which the Greek Gods favor. Gods are the ones who determine the characters' fate in a manner that they are punished to attain truth. Clytaemestra murders Agamemnon with the aim of avenging Iphigenia and punishing him because of the sins being committed in the line of his father and after that is being taken to justice by Orestes. These murders are the ones which lead to the removal of curses. In its passing, time brings the divine truth which it acts as being the creative and positive force which provides the value and meaning to events which are transpiring. Therefore, the human lives tragedies are not in vain. In both plays, the suffering of individuals is directly related to the actions that they take. Ordeus chooses to follow his fate which causes suffering to the relatives and his people.

Suffering and the Actions of Characters

Similarly, Agamemnon is causing suffering as a result of the action of his father. There are many reasons which cause suffering in both plays although each of the ideas can be traced back to the primary reasons, father's action, and fate. Agamemnon and Ordeus the king cause suffering which targets the people and families that at the results in the downfall of the protagonists. The characters recognize the fact that truth is a great virtue that individuals should strive towards attaining it yet they are unable seeing the value of truth while situation requiring the truth has confronted them. The characters only appreciate the need for truth when the implications catch up to them.

On the other hand, in the play, Oedipus the King, time is being viewed as being a series of events as well as an endless alteration which is between misery and happiness. The play does not consider time as being a series which is associated with events. Oedipus the King accepts the concept of punishment and truth.

Conclusion

The significant difference which is in the two plays is the one which concerns the sole value of truth. In the end, truth results to the tragedy in both plays. However, these tragedies are unique. In the Agamemnon play, the characters are following their fate and divine will with the aim of attaining a true and just ending. Cassandra is regarded as the epitome who represents this phenomenon. Being a prophetess, Cassandra understands that the gods know although she goes ahead accepting her destiny only to enable conflict resolution which is a form of a tragedy in her welcoming of the doom. Truth becomes the central determinant for human life regardless of how worse it has become. On the other hand, Oedipus the King bravely defies his fate through preserving of what he perceives as being personal convictions and ideas and he consciously brings them on his demise. Thus, in Oedipus the King, the truth is the one that seems to be setting up the revelation while fate is being considered as the backdrop caused by the choices made by the characters.