Juvenilia ✔/ a Nonfiction Undergraduate University Collection

Oedipus Defended

ENGLISH 3863

Early Dramatic Theory

October 21st, 2021

Oedipus Defended

In Joseph S. Margon's, Aristotle and the Irrational and Improbable Elements in "Oedipus Rex", Margon seeks to address two instances in which the play, Oedipus Rex, is illogical, an element that Aristotle' states is a principle that should be avoided unless in very specific circumstances, two reasons of which are given: that illogical aspects are permitted outside of the play – which means that illogical events may occur before the plot commences and after the plot concludes – and if a poet must introduce an impossibility, that the events be probable.

 The critical problem Margon is addressing is Aristotle's apparent bias towards the play Oedipus Rex, a play that is referenced the greatest number of times in Poetics. 

By Aristotle's own admission, he considered Oedipus not knowing how Laius died an irrationality. This is, however, excused by Aristotle since the event of Laius's death happened years before the play starts and is thus 'outside the play'.

Margon breaks apart Aristotle's weakest case, and from two statements, questions whether irrationality should be permitted at all irrespective of if the irrationality occurs 'outside the play' or within (Margon, 251). 

Margon argues that events that occur outside the play are as necessary to plot as those that happen within, and as such, should be held to the same standard as those that happen within the play because events that happened outside the play still influence events unfolding and would therefore be 'within the play' (Margon, 251). 

Margon addresses two instances where the plot is illogical: that Oedipus has no knowledge of how Laius died, and that Oedipus never spoke to Jocasta about his past until necessary for the plot (Margon, 250). 

The omission of the reasons for these discussions not being had, according to Margon, is a failure of the writer by using Coleridge's principles (Margon, 253). Margon concludes that because these two irrationalities occur within the play, bordering on melodrama, the events can therefore not be considered credible and thus dubs Oedipus Rex as not a true tragedy, but a tragi-melodrama (Margon, 254).

 This seems a harsh assertion and neglects to consider some key points. Margon incorrectly utilizes a preference for ideal traits to deny the genre instead of rules. 

Though at first glance the argument seems compelling, it lacks a solid foundation to base the claims, and what seems to be a widespread assertion is based solely on a technicality of preference making it unjust argument. 

With the evidence provided, the only point that can be fairly made is that it's not a perfect play.

In addition, Margon's argument is incumbent upon the principle that "outside the play" is disregarded. It seems that Margon treats what happens in the play the same as what happens outside the play. However, this is not a fair way to analyze since the audience has no way of knowing exactly how things happened if it's not directly acted out – which is the point of it not being directly in the play; it creates tension and mystery. 

In this way, the audience must rely on character perspective and recollection, which may or may not be true or correct. Neither of the instances provided by Margon seems sufficient to be truly "improbable" events, particularly if everyone is only aware of a tiny slice of the narrative – it assumes that between Jocasta and Oedipus, the entire story be solved had the partners revealed all parts of their past to one another; however, it is only after multiple characters come together with bits and pieces that the tapestry is revealed.