Gregor’s Awkward Family Photo Project

Brandon Ong 12/13/15

Mr. Waddell B Block

Gregor’s Awkward Family Photo Project

Brandon Ong 12/13/15

Mr. Waddell B Block

Gregor’s Awkward Family Photo Project

In my rendition of an awkward family photo following the theme of the Metamorphosis by Franz Kafka, a standard family portrait is given a twist as their is a bat in the top right corner. This bat represents Gregor: alienated, and, to the average viewer, ridiculously out of place. I chose a bat instead of an insect, as the story depicts, for a bat lives in darkness and also do the themes of isolation and loneliness justice. Indeed, although the family structure is different from that of Gregor’s in that there is an additional member to the family, the body language of the boy and the sister, who represents Grete, further plays on the theme of isolation, as a boy, is sitting closely to his sister with his left arm propped up on her shoulder in a sibling-love like fashion. Gregor, meanwhile, is lonely hovering in the corner. As the story goes, Grete was the person that Gregor most cared about and who showed the most care for Gregor during the initial stages of his metamorphosis. This photo, then, with the distance between Grete and the bat(Gregor), being so great, was taken following Gretes heartbreaking declaration that Gregor is no longer Gregor but simply a bat. The father is also seen as being more in shape, as a result of having been going to work in place of Gregor in order to support the family. The purpose of this picture, done through photoshop, is to serve as a physical depiction of how the family would have looked like, for in one’s mind, the mental image created of a giant insect living among humans is already outrageous. When one finally goes to the extent of creating a physical representation of what Kafka describes, one can finally see how truly ridiculous the entire situation is.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Strangers on a Train, and Fight Club Questions

Brandon Ong 11/17/14

Mr. Waddell B Block

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Strangers on a Train, and Fight Club Questions

CP respond to three, Honors respond to four.

Jekyll and Hyde

3) What ultimately compels Jekyll to unleash Mr. Hyde and what compels him to continue this deadly game?

Dr. Jekyll is compelled to unleash Mr. Hyde as a result of an innate urge to take on his “evil” identity as Mr. Hyde, which he states is a form which he enjoys being in as it is the opposite of his “good” side. In this form as Mr. Hyde, Dr. Jekyll can break free from the constraints of society and commit crimes, such as the trampling of the girl and even murder. Indeed, also his good side, Jekyll, attempts to suppress Hyde, Hyde ultimately begins to take control, causing him to transform into Hyde unwantedly, compelling him to continue this deadly game. Even through medicine and his own will to stop transforming, Hyde overpowers and Jekyll finds himself losing control over his dual identity.

4) What does Jekyll mean when he says that man is “truly two” and that “in the agonized womb of consciousness, these polar twins should be continuously struggling”? Is Jekyll’s struggle, in fact, a human one?

While Jekyll himself makes use of his concoctions to transform into Hyde, it can be argued that this continuous struggle between “polar twins” is a human one. For instance, when making a decision, one is governed by their rational thinking as well as what they truly desire. The nature of decision making demonstrates and explains what Jekyll means when he describes the continuous struggle between one’s “polar twins.” All throughout our life, we are continuously struggling to make the rational decision, and compromising for what we truly desire.

5) Discuss Jekyll’s changing feelings in his relationship with Hyde. In particular, what transformation occurs as it relates to how Jekyll feels about Hyge- and vice-versa?

Initially, Jekyll treats Hyde as his source of breaking free from the constraints of society and doing things which his status and image doesn’t permit. Yet, as Hyge grows more and more violent and becomes more powerful, Jekyll begins to fear Hyde. This is especially notable after Hyge commits the murder, resulting in Jekyll wanting to suppress Hyde. On the other hand, Hyge, representing Jekyll’s id, feels compelled to commit all the things which Hyde wish he could do, without any regard as to the responsibilities of his “good” identity.

6) Discuss TWO questions that best exemplify Hyge as a manifestation of Jekyll’s id.

a) “evil besides had left on that body an imprint of deformity and decay.”(44-45)

The description of Hyde, as told by Jekyll, shows that Hyde is physically different from Jekyll, demonstrating the idea that Hyge is purely Jekyll’s id, “evil” and showing “deformity and decay.”

b) “doing the good things in which he found his pleasure, and no longer exposed to disgrace and penance by the hands of his extraneous evil.”(43)

Here, it is described that Jekyll is able to do the things which he found pleasure in, taking part in what his id desires, in the form of Hyde, without any “disgrace and penance.”

Strangers on a Train

1) Make the case that Guy’s character is ultimately given everything that he wants by the end of the film - and thus is better off at the end because of Bruno.

All in all, while Guy was seemingly in an fatalistic conflict in which Bruno has made it impossible for Guy to not kill his father for him, Guy is ultimately given all that he desires. The major obstacle impeding Guy was that of his wife refusing to get a divorce and even threatening him with a pregnancy he wasn’t responsible for. With Bruno killing Guy’s wife, Guy’s goals to marry the Senator’s daughter and ascend to political ranking is unimpeded. Thus, he is better off because of Bruno.

3) Make the argument that this is actually a love story involving a strange love triangle in the film.

It can be argued that there is a love triangle between Bruno, Guy, and Anne, in which both Bruno and Anne are pursuing Guy, as it can even be argued that Bruno is a homosexual, supported by scenes where he clothed suggestively to support this idea. Anne is pursuing Guy out of love, while Bruno can be argued as pursuing Guy because of his desire to have Guy be involved in his plan to have him kill his father while he, Bruno, kills Guy’s wife.

6) Make the argument that this movie is about Bruno’s ability to help Guy climb higher on the social ladder.

It is without a doubt that this movie is about Bruno’s ability to help Guy climb higher on the social ladder, for Bruno solves the one obstacle impeding Guy from pursuing his goals: killing Guy’s wife. By doing so, Guy can now marry Anne, and through this marriage, become powerful politically with Anne’s father by his side. With Bruno’s help, Guy is able to ascend the steps of the social ladder.

5) Make the argument that this movie is, in fact, a dark comedy.

It can be argued that this movie is a dark comedy, as Hitchcock chooses to have particularly otherwise dark scenes be depicted in a comedic manner. Most notably, the scene in which Bruno and Guy are in a heated fight on the merry-go-round has many comedic moments. For one, the old man crawling underneath the merry-go-round to stop the machine offers a strange relief to the tense situation. Next, the children enjoying the ride and their screams as they realize they are in danger serves as a strange reaction to the fight which otherwise should be tense. Finally, the overall idea that they are fighting on a merry-go-round going at a crazy speed is comedic enough already.

Fight Club

2) Should we see Tyler as a more positive or negative manifestation of Jack’s unconscious mind?

Tyler begins as a positive manifestation of Jack’s unconscious mind, permitting Jack to break free from the constraints of society and pursue things which he otherwise wouldn't. However, as Tyler’s motives and actions become more and more radical, Tyler becomes a negative manifestation. It gets to a certain point where Jack fears for the safety of Marla, as well as what Project Mayhem and Fight Club has become, resulting in him shooting himself in the face to stop Tyler’s influence.

4) Name with examples three aspects of modern society that Tyler is rebelling against.

Tyler is rebelling against materialism - his speech to Jack, telling him that he is not what he owns, like the Ikea furniture, or the clothes he wears, even going as far as to blow up stores selling electronics and of course, the credit card companies.

Tyler is rebelling against social classes - by creating Fight Club and Project Mayhem with the grand plan of exploding all of the credit card companies, Tyler is achieving the goal of having everyone be at zero debt, which means everyone is equal.

Tyler is rebelling against social order - again, with the exploding of the credit card companies, there will nonetheless be mass chaos as people struggle to find order within society as everyone, following the event, will be regarded as equal.

5) Is Tyler’s subversion of the social order a just one? Support your answer.

Tyler’s subversion of the social order is not a just one. Through all the crimes he commits, they all seem to be a result of Jack’s id. They are simply the result of his sporadic desires, without any justification other than built up angst. From peeing in the food as a waiter, to Project Mayhem, they are all results of his innate desire to rebel, without any hint of justification or reasonable explanation

7) Does Tyler’s Fight Club really offer an identity to lost, confused, or angst-ridden men?

Rather than offer an identity to confused, lost, or angst-ridden men, it seems that Fight Club offers an opportunity to release all the stresses and angst built up as a result of following the norms and being constrained by the rules set by society. In Fight Club, the fights serve as a physical and mental release for the members.

Film Noir Questions

Brandon Ong 11/12/14

Mr. Waddell B Block

Film Noir Questions

1) According to Schraeder, is Film noir actually a genre?  Explain your answer.

According to Shraeder, Film Noir is not a genre because it only refers to those Hollywood films of the forties and early fifties that portrayed the world of dark, slick city streets, crime and corruption.

2) Identify two themes (content and ideas) that are often explored in classic film noir movies.

Two themes that are often explored in classic film noir movies are

a) the changing of frontierism to paranoia and claustrophobia,

b) the private eye has quit the police force in disgust.

3) What stylistic characteristics are prevalent within classic noir movies?  List at least 3 characteristics.

Three stylistic characteristics that are prevalent within classic noir movies are:

a) most of the scenes are lit for night

b) there is a Freudian attachment to water

c) compositional tension is preferred to physical action

4) During what period of American history did film noir begin to gain notoriety?  What years are often said to define the classic noir period?

Film noir gained notoriety in American history during the period shortly following World War II. The thirties is often said to define the classic noir period, as during these years, there was no need to produce Allied propaganda for the war.

5) What are the major phases of the classic noir movie era?

The first major phase of classic noir is the wartime period, spanning between 1941-1946. This phase during the wartime period was the phase of the private eye and the lone wolf. Next, the second phase was the postwar realistic period, which spanned from 1945-1949. During this time, films were geared towards the problems of political corruption, crime in the streets, and police routine. Lastly, the final major phase of film noir was stretched from 1949-1953, and was a period of psychotic action and suicidal impulse.

6) What is expressionism?  How is film noir fairly described as an “expressionist” genre? Expressionism is a style with the goal of expressing not impressions of the external world, but rather, an emotional experience. Film noir is fairly described as an “expressionist genre because it relied heavily on artificial studio lighting, as well as harsh unadorned exteriors, which contrasted post war realism among other things.

Oldboy Summary, Theme Analysis, and Hitchcock Comparison

Oldboy is a korean mystery thriller directed by Chan-wook based on the manga written by Nobuaki Minegishi. It is part of The Vengeance Trilogy, with the other movies of this trilogy being Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance and Sympathy for Lady Vengeance. The movie begins with a scene depicting an intoxicated Oh Dae-su(Choi Min-sik) in a police station. Upon being released, Oh Dae-su passes out, waking up in a mysterious confinement resembling a standard hotel room, with food brought to him, he is imprisoned in this room for fifteen years. Oh Dae-su has no idea as to why he has been put into this situation. He attempts to get to the bottom of this by making a list of all of those he may have wronged, speculating that he may have done so through his reputation for “having a big mouth” and his drunken ways. His only contact with the world is through television. During one of the broadcasts, Oh Dae-su realizes that his wife was murdered and he was the primary suspect, with the entire city searching for him. Growing angry and hateful over the years with no idea as to why he is being imprisoned, Oh Dae-su practices shadowboxing, plotting his revenge, and attempts to escape through a tunnel he made through chopsticks.

Oh Dae-su never successfully escapes through his self-made tunnel. Instead, he is hypnotized by a woman, causing him to pass out. Waking up on the roof of a high rise in Seoul, a phone rings, Oh Dae-su picks up and realizes that it is the man who is responsible for his imprisonment for the last fifteen years. Nothing comes out of the phone call, only taunting and further frustration on Oh Dae-su’s end. Oh Dae-su goes to a sushi restaurant, where he once again passes out. Oh Dae-su wakes up in the home of Mi-do, the chef at the sushi restaurant. Having not been in contact with woman for so long, Oh Dae-su attempts to have sex with her, forcefully. Mi-do refrains, telling him that she likes him but does not feel ready. In an attempt to figure out who imprisoned him, Oh Dae-su starts by going to every restaurant in Seoul to find the one which made the dumplings he ate for the past fifteen years. He follows the dumpling deliverer to the prison where he speaks with the warden to find out as much as he can. The warden only tells Oh Dae-su that he “talked too much.” On his way out, Oh Dae-su finds himself in danger of the gang which runs the prison, having to fight his way out to escape. Finally, Oh Dae-su meets his captor, Lee Woo-jin, who tells him that he will kill himself in five days if Oh Dae-su finds out why he was imprisoned. If Oh Dae-su fails, Mi-do will die. With their relationship developing, Mi-do and Dae-su have sex, further motivating Oh Dae-su to find out why he was imprisoned so that Mi-do will not die.

During his quest to find out why he was imprisoned, Oh Dae-su meets with an old friend who helps him realize that he and Lee Woo-jin both went to the same high school, and that he caught the Woo-jin having sex with his sister. Not knowing that they were related at the time, Dae-su told his friend before moving away and going to a different school. While he was gone, the rumour went viral and Woo-jin's sister and lover, Lee Soo-ah, suffered false signs of pregnancy. ultimately killing herself. Oh Dae-su has the prison warden, now on Dae-su’s side after Woo-jin has his hand cut off, imprison Mi-do for a while to keep her safe in case things go wrong. In confronting Woo-jin and confessing what he did, Woo-jin unleashes the truth: Mi-do is his very own daughter, and that in an elaborate scheme of revenge, imprisoned Oh Dae-su for fifteen years until Mi-do would be old enough to fall in love with Oh Dae-su, with an album to prove to him, and, contrary to belief, the warden is still loyal to Woo-jin and will show the album to Mi-do too. In a desperate rage to protect Mi-do, he begs, licks his shoes like an animal, and cuts his tongues out with scissors to show Woo-jin that he has learned from his mistakes, and, by cutting his tongue, will never be able to talk too much again. Woo-jin calls the warden, telling him not to show Mi-do the album and walks to the elevator. In his final moments, Woo-jin recounts his sisters death, puts a gun to his head, and fires. The movie ends with Oh Dae-su giving a hypnotists a handwritten account of his life(as he is now unable to speak), who then alters Oh Dae-su’s memories so that he will live  the rest of his life free from the atrocities of the past. The movie concludes with Oh Dae-su and Mi-do seemingly content, but soon after, Oh Dae-su’s face turns to that of sorrow and fear, leading for one to speculate that no matter how much the hypnotists may due, he will never be able to let go of the past.  

The director of Oldboy, Chan-wook, explores many themes throughout the movie. First, the theme of voyeurism. From being watched by Woo-jin throughout Dae-su’s entire imprisonment, to Dae-su seeing something he shouldn’t have, voyeurism, one of Hitchcock’s favoritism, may have been influenced by the film legend himself, for in his classics, such as Psycho and Vertigo, voyeurism is a central theme. In regards to the theme of incest and that of Freudian desires, through research, it is known that Chan-wook payed homage to Oedipus through Oh Dae-su. In both Oldboy and Oedipus Rex, the theme of incest and Freudian desires plays a crucial role in the stories respectively. Hitchcock is notorious for his theme of the Oedipus complex in Psycho, and in Oldboy, it is clear that Chan-wook was influenced heavily by Hitchcock. Also seen in Oldboy is the theme of the main character bringing about his own demise, a common theme in Hitchcock’s movies, as well as in Oedipus Rex. In Oldboy, Dae-su’s downfall is brought upon him by revenge-crazy Woo-jin. In Oedipus Rex, Oedipus’ downfall is arguably caused by fate. A central theme in Oldboy is also that of imprisonment, for throughout the movie, Oh Dae-su is seen imprisoned in many forms, from physical to psychological, and even to societal. Before being physically imprisoned by Woo-jin, Oh Dae-su is imprisoned in middle class life as an alcoholic. When he is put into the room for fifteen years, he is physically imprisoned and, by watching the news broadcast, realizes how trapped he was in regards to society, prior to being physically imprisoned in the room. When the movie ends, Oh Dae-su is imprisoned in another way: trapped in the past, even after trying to forget through hypnotisms.

Oedipus and Psycho Brainstorming List

Brandon Ong B Block

9/30/14 Mr. Waddell

Oedipus and Psycho:  THE BRAINSTORMING LIST (a thorough list of details, narrative elements, ideas, etc. that the two stories have in common. This could be completed in the form of a big Venn diagram or some other chart type thing.)

Oedipus Rex:

• Oedipus’ downfall, fatal encounter with his real father, and marriage with his mother is guided less so by his own true desire by arguably, by fate.
• There is a mythical and supernatural element to Oedipus Rex - from the blind seer, the Sphinx and the prophecies from Delphi.

Similarities:

• both share a character who has been affiliated with their mother's in a perverse way : Norman Bates in Psycho, who dead mother is living in Norman’s pysche as an alternate personality after his father passed away, leading the pair to live as if they were the only two people in the world, thus igniting the Oedipus Complex which is subconsciously suppressed at a young age.

Oedipus in Oedipus Rex, while more due to fate, pursues a relationship, unknowingly,

with his mom, Jocasta, even having children with her.

• both share the commonality of having sight/eyes as major symbolism
• both share the aspect of beginning with a conflict that leads to the major problem:

Oedipus Rex begins with the problem of finding who murdered Laos to stop the plague of Thebes and transpires into Oedipus’ search for his true identity

Psycho begins with Marion stealing cash and with her death at the Bates motel, transpires into a movie about Norma Bates, who has gone insane, with his mother serving as an alternate personality.

Pyscho:

• The downfall of Norman Bates is less guided by fate, as is seen in Oedipus, and more so by a somewhat realistic story of how Norman's dead mother is living in Norman's psyche as an alternate personality, for his father died, Norman and his mother lived in an isolated environment: as if they were the only people in the world. And when his mother found a lover, murdered them both out of jealousy. Through guilt, Norman "erased the crime" by bringing his mother back to life in his own mind.

Oedipus Two Paragraph Prompt

A Two paragraph response to the following prompt:

Teiresius and Creon tells Oedipus that he “weaves” his own “doom”.  Oedipus, meanwhile, insists that fate has brought this curse on him. Who is right? Explain your answer in a well supported paragraph.

While both the blind seer, Tiresias, and Oedipus’ brother in law and uncle, Creon, tell Oedipus that he “weaves” his own “doom,” it is well supported that it is destiny which leads to his inevitable downfall. Indeed, Oedipus is correct in his insistance that fate has brought this curse upon him. While Oedipus Rex begins with the conflict of freeing Thebes from the plague by finding the person, or party, responsible for Laos’ death, the true conflict lies in Oedipus finding his identity. And through this process, from the input of Tiresias, the blindseer, messengers and shepherds who were present at the crime,  to Oedipus` own memory, actions, and experiences, it is evident that he had no way in knowing just how terrible his actions were. There is nothing Oedipus could have done to prevent his tragic demise. There is simply too much evidence which supports Oedipus claim that fate is the cause of his “doom” and not himself, as Creon and Tiresias claim. To start, it is widely known that Oedipus himself is a wise man, for it is he who saved Thebes from the Sphinx by solving a puzzle. With that said, it is strange that honorable and hoeric Oedipus, who holds such immense intellect and insight, enough to solve the puzzle of the Sphinx, would commit such atrocities. But yet, he did; through a series of unfortunate events in which he had no knowledge of the true nature of things.

Besides it being known that Oedipus is a hero: man of great insight and knowledge, Oedipus also reveals that he had made efforts to prevent committing the sin of killing his father after being told he would by a prophecy after visiting Delphi. Upon hearing that he would kill his father, Oedipus left Corinth, where he was raised, in order to prevent the slaying of his father Polybos, and when news that Polybos had passed away due to natural causes, Oedipus was overjoyed as it meant that he had dodged the prophecy. Through all of this, it is shown that Oedipus did everything within his knowledge and power to prevent the prophecy from occurring on his end. There was no way Oedipus could have known how cruel fate would be in having it so that he would somehow cross paths with his real father, Laos, and kill him. Also, after hearing that Oedipus would one day kill him, Laos also took drastic measures to prevent the prophecy from occurring by binding Oedipus’ ankles together and having him die in the wild. It is due to fate that baby Oedipus would be rescued by a shepherd and be sent to be raised in Corinth and then eventually carrying out the prophecy in the end. All in all, from the idea that Oedipus is known to be an insightful and knowledgeable hero who saved Thebes from the Sphinx, to the measures both himself and Laos took in preventing the prophecies from occurring, it is evident that Oedipus is correct in his proposition that fate is what led to his “doom.”

Oedipus Rex Guide Questions

Brandon Ong 9/28/14

Mr. Waddell B Block

Oedipus Rex Guide Questions

1. Creon tells Oedipus that he has “lost his sense of balance” and is “sullen in yielding and brutal in rage”. He also asks aloud: “Was he in his right mind?”.  How would you describe Oedipus’s madness?  Is he crazy or merely confused?  Is his pursuit of the truth noble, or merely insane?

Oedipus pursuit of the truth is insane, instead of what he believes it to be: noble. In trying to find out the murderer of Laos to stop the plague of Thebes, Oedipus loses all rational thought and fair judgement. He accuses Creon for being the murderer of Laos with very little supporting evidence. Even when the legendary Tiresias, sent by Choragos, comes to reluctantly offer his wisdom to Oedipus, Oedipus, who dislikes what he hears, irrationally ignores what Tiresias tells him at first. Failing to realize that the person who murdered Laos and thus the person who would cure Thebes of the plague is actually himself, Oedipus goes insane in trying to find the culprit, ultimately turning the search for the murderer into a search for his true identity, yet even then, he constantly ignores the clues and hints that surround him throughout the entire play, contributing to how insane he is in pursuit of the truth.

2. Oedipus calls himself an “abomination” for killing his father and marrying his mother. If he was aware of neither, why does he call himself evil? Is a man responsible for the evil of his actions if he is truly unaware that they are evil? In other words, is ignorance a good excuse?

A man should not be responsible for the evil of his actions if he is truly unaware that they are evil. Especially for Oedipus, who unknowingly killed his father, and is seemingly powerless in this twisted prophecy that he is part of, Oedipus should not be held accountable, as he even made an effort to prevent the prophecy he was given which said he would murder his own father by moving away from Corinth. Oedipus did everything he could to avoid it and it is only through unknowing fate that he killed his father and married his mother. Oedipus calls himself evil despite being unaware of neither, probably because of the fact that despite not knowing it, he is still the one who committed the atrocities. Oedipus also calls himself evil for seemingly to fail to realize it all sooner, as the hints and clues were all there, whether it be his name, his injury, or what the messengers told him, Oedipus might feel disgraced that he had unknowingly ignored it in the past.

3. Recount the events that lead up to the self-blinding of Oedipus.  Why does Oedipus choose this form of self-punishment and what is the symbolic significance of this act?

Prior to the self-blinding of Oedipus, the messenger who took baby Oedipus to Corinth is brought forth, revealing the truth, and Jocasta kills herself after hearing the news. Oedipus chooses to blind himself with Jocasta’s pins. His self blinding contributes to the theme of sight. The symbolic significance of blinding himself is that it goes to show how Oedipus failed to see all that he has done despite being surrounded by clues and hints, such as his injured foot, name, and the information given by the messengers and prophet, Tiresias.  Also, it is quite ironic as Oedipus disrespected Tiresias for being blind earlier on and now Oedipus himself is blind.

4. What is the significance of Jocasta’s constant admonitions to Oedipus that he stop thinking about the prophecies and stop worrying about his fate?  When does she really learn the truth, in your opinion? Support your answer with examples from the text.

The significance of Jocasta’s constant admonitions to Oedipus that he stop thinking about the prophecies is that it demonstrates that Jocasta is fearful of the truth being revealed, and her fear of the truth signifies that deep down inside, Jocasta most likely knows that Oedipus is responsible for the death of her first husband, and even worse, that she is married and had children with her own son. Arguably, Jocasta really learns the truth when she tells Oedipus: “Why should anyone in this world be afraid, Since it is fate rules us and nothing can be foreseen? A Man should live only for the present day,” as she attempts to persuade Oedipus to forget about the past and to only live for the present day, even going as far as to say: “Have no fear of sleeping with your mother: How many men, in dreams, have lain with their mothers!” which is all in all, pretty sick and disturbing but ultimately goes to show that Jocasta, at this point, has the vague idea that the worse may be true and is now attempting to persuade Oedipus to pursue the prophecy no further.  

5.  How is this play actually about repression?  What are some examples of Oedipus repressing memories or feelings that he would prefer not to confront?

There are many moments throughout Oedipus Rex that show Oedipus, and others, such as Jocasta, repressing memories or feelings that they would prefer not to confront. All in all, this play is about finding Oedipus finding out his true identity. Initiated by the plague on Thebes which causes Oedipus to seek that who killed Laos, Oedipus, through messengers and prophets such as the shepherd and Tiresias, receives hints and clues about himself, with many leading to him being the murderer who killed Laos, as well as him being the son of his own wife, Jocasta. With that being said, there are straightforward clues which point to him being the person the prophecies speak of, such as his injured ankle, the result of his fathers doing, as well as his name itself, Oedipus, which means swollen foot. Also, it is seemingly clear that Oedipus is responsible to Laos death, but Oedipus seemingly denies the truth and goes to all efforts to have it be confirmed by the shepherd/messenger, putting aside all the hints and clues which surrounds him.

6. While the entire play contains multiple references to the eyes and sight, there are also many references to light and darkness as well.  How are these motifs related to ideas related to personal responsibility and self-knowledge?

The motifs of eyes and sight, and light and darkness, are related to the ideas of personal responsibility and self-knowledge in that one holds to their very own responsibility and self-knowledge what they know and what they don’t know, what they can see and what they already know. Oedipus has no sight of the future, but through his own knowledge, what he already experienced, and the information provided by the messenger and prophet(Tiresias), Oedipus holds the responsibility of putting the clues and hints together, that is, that he is the one who killed his father, Laos. While it may be true that Oedipus has very little say in what happened or what will happen, it is his own personal responsibility to not ignore what he already knows or has seen, and to put together his experiences and the clues surrounding him to make the twisted realization.

7. Discuss a few ways in which Oedipus Rex demonstrates the conflict between fate and free will. Ultimately, is Oedipus more a victim of prophecies and fate or is he a victim of his own bad decisions?

Oedipus is a victim of prophecies and fate. One cannot control their circumstances at birth. It is due to fate that Oedipus is born to King Laos, who received a prophecy telling him that he would be murdered by his own son, causing Laos to leave young Oedipus to die. And even after being saved by the pitying shephard and then being raised as a prince in Corinth and hearing that he would one day murder his own father, Oedipus` actions of moving away from Corinth to prevent the prophecy from occurring demonstrates that his own decisions are all part of an unavoidable, twisted fate, for no matter what he does, his tragic demise cannot be stopped.