Read Antigone, Oedipus the King and Electra by Sophocles Edith Hall H.D.F. Kitto Online

antigone-oedipus-the-king-and-electra

This volume of Antigone, Oedipus the King, Electra contains three masterpieces by the Greek playwright Sophocles, widely regarded since antiquity as the greatest of all the tragic poets. The vivid translations, which combine elegance and modernity, are remarkable for their lucidity and accuracy, and are equally suitable for reading for pleasure, study, or theatrical perforThis volume of Antigone, Oedipus the King, Electra contains three masterpieces by the Greek playwright Sophocles, widely regarded since antiquity as the greatest of all the tragic poets. The vivid translations, which combine elegance and modernity, are remarkable for their lucidity and accuracy, and are equally suitable for reading for pleasure, study, or theatrical performance. With this edition, readers are not only offered the most influential and famous of Sophocles' works in one volume, but they are presented with two plays dominated by a female heroic figure, and the experience of the two great dynasties featured in Greek tragedy--the houses of Oedipus and Agamemnon. About the Series: For over 100 years Oxford World's Classics has made available the broadest spectrum of literature from around the globe. Each affordable volume reflects Oxford's commitment to scholarship, providing the most accurate text plus a wealth of other valuable features, including expert introductions by leading authorities, voluminous notes to clarify the text, up-to-date bibliographies for further study, and much more....

Title : Antigone, Oedipus the King and Electra
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9780199537174
Format Type : Paperback
Number of Pages : 178 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

Antigone, Oedipus the King and Electra Reviews

  • Ahmad Sharabiani
    2018-11-08 02:18

    Antigone / Oedipus the King / Electra, Sophocles, Edith Hall (Editor), H.D.F. Kitto (Translator)تاریخ نخستین خوانش: ماه آگوست سال 1999 میلادی عنوان: ادیپوس شاه، اودیپوس در کولونوس، آنتیگون/ اثر: سوفوکل؛ مترجم: محمد سعیدی؛ در 196 ص؛ نمایشنامه آنتیگون یا آنتیگونه را مریم داودی، و ابوالفضل حاجی علیزاده نیز در 152 ص، ترجمه و در انتشارات بدیهه در یال 1381 ، شابک: 9646701388؛ منتشر کرده اند داستان آنتیگون را لابد همه میدانند، آنتیگون، در اسطوره‌ های یونان، دختر ادیپ و یوکاسته است. برادرانش: پولونیکس و اتئوکلس، در جنگ مخالفان هفتگانه ی شهر تب هم‌دیگر را کشتند، پادشاه تب تدفین پولونیکس را به جرم خیانت ممنوع کرد. آنتیگون از این فرمان سرپیچی می‌کند و می‌گوید: «از قلب فرمان می‌برد». او برادر را به خاک می‌سپارد و به دستور کرئون دائی خویش و پادشاه تب زنده در گور می‌شود. ا. شربیانی

  • Abeer Abdullah
    2018-10-29 00:11

    (gunna add my arabic homework for my media class (Dramatic Arts) يصعب أحيانا على قارىء في القرن الواحد والعشرين فهم التراجيديات اليواننية لكونها سابقة لافكار و معلومات و حركات إجتماعية غيرت تفكير الإنسان المعاصر. ولكن عادةً ما يكون جوهر و فكرة المسرحية فكرة عالمية تتجاوز حدود الوقت و المكان. مسرحية أنتيجونا هي جزء من ثلاثية ثيب لسوفوقليس، تتمحور حول أنتيجونا، إبنة الملك السابق أوديب الذي تعرفنا عليه في مسرحية أوديب ملكا، و هو الملك الذي يبدو وقد حكم علية بلعنةٍ يستحيل تفاديها و هي أن يقتل أباه و يتزوج أمه. يحاول أهلة تفادي تلك اللعنه فيفشلوا، يحاول هو تفادي تلك اللعنه فيفشل، و ما كتب عليه يحدث . عندما يكتشف أوديب ماذا فعل يقتلع عيناه من الألم و العار. ، تقتل جوكاستا نفسها للسبب نفسه و يتبقون أولادهم الأربع: الولدان إتيوكلس و بولينيكس. و الفتاتان أنتيجونا و أيسمينا. عندما قرر أوديب ترك مدينة ثيب وصى أخ زوجته (و أمه) كريون بإعطاء جوكاستا الجنازة المناسبة و الإهتمام بأبنائه.تبداء مسرحبة أنتيجونا بقدومها إلى أختها إسمينا و طلبها منها أن تساعدها في دفن جثمان أخيها بولينكس، الذي أمر الملك كريون بعدم دفنه، عقابا على خيانته للمدينه بقتاله مع أخاه إتوكليس الذي أعطي كل حقوق الدفن و الجنازة المسابة. كانوا اليونانيون يؤمنون بأهمية الدفن و إعطاء الميت الطقوس المناسبة و إلا لن يحظى بالسلام و الراحة في العالم السفلي.قررت أنتيجونا مخالفاة قوانين الملك لتطبيق قوانين الآلهة ، إعطاء أخاها العزيز لديها حق الدفن و لكن إسمينا لم ترد مساعدتها لخوفها من العواقب الوخيمه. قالت إسمينا لأنتيجونا “و أعلمي أننا لسنا إلا امرأتين: والطبيعة لم تجلبنا على النضال ضد الرجال. إنا خاضعتان لسادة، و بالتالي نحن مرغمتان على الامتثال لأوامرهم هذة و ما هو أقسي منها”ولكن أنتيجونا لم تستمع لكلام أختها و قررت أن تقوم بفعل الأمر المناسب أخلاقيا، فهي لم ترى أن كونها إمرأة أو كون كريون رجل سبب كافي لعدم إعطاء أخاها حقه.إكتشف كريون عن فعل أنتيجونا و قررا قتلها عقابا لها و تطبيقا للقانون الذي وضعه، بغض النظر عن كونها إبنة أخته و كونها خطيبة إبنه، فبمنظور كريون القانون يطبق على الجميع. توسله إبنه هيمون عن عدم قتلها و الإعفاء عنها قائلا انه ليس في مصلحته ان يعاقبها و أن الشعب يعتبرها بطله لتطبيقها قانون الآلهة.ولكنة لم يستمع لوصايا إبنه و يقرر معاقبتها بوضعها في كهف لوحدها.بعد ذلك دخل على الملك العراف العجوز الأعمى تايريتيس الذي وجد من قبل في مسرحية أوديب ملكا و عادةً ما يأتي بالحقيقة. قال تايريسيس للملك أنه يتهور في تطبيق هذا القانون الذي لا معنى له و أنا هذا حتما سيجلب له المصائب و العواقب الوخيمة.يستمع كريون لنصيحة تايريسيس و لكن قد فات الأوان، فيجد كريون أنتيجونا منتحرة و يجد هيمون منتحرٌ معها، و عندما تسمع أم هيمون بخبر موته تنتحر هي الأخرى. و يجد كريون نفسه مكفوفا الأيادي و عالمه يتدهور و يتحطم أمام عينية.أنتيجونا تعتبر مسرحيه تراجيدية ذات موضوع سياسي لإحتوائها على نقد للحكم السلطوي الدكتاتوري الذي يطبق قوانين اقاسية عمياء، يبدولي أن سوفوقليس يوضح أهمية و صعوبة تطبيق نظام ديموقراطي يهتم يرغبات و حاجات الشعب و الفرد، فبالرغم من إسم المسرحية، يبدو أن البطل الحقيقي هو كريون لما فية من صفات البطل التراجيدي وفقا لتعريف أرسطو. فإن كريون هو الشخصية التي يستطيع القاريء و المتفرج أن يرى صراعها و أتخاذها للقررارات الصعبة.إنها مسرحية رائعة جدا فيها أفكار و مواضيع إنسانية خادة سنتسائل عنها طالما وجدنا على وجه الأرض.

  • Cody Joe Bärfuß
    2018-10-29 01:34

    Don't get me wrong, Sophocles is a great playwright. But could Oedipus have really been that stupid. If someone made the prophesy that you would kill your father and make your mother your wife, don’t you think you would have been a little more cautious. Don't you think at any point he would have said "Hey, that guy is old enough to be my father an he looks a little like me. I probably shouldn’t kill him." Or perhaps he would have said "This lady is hot!...too bad she is old enough to be my mother and wait…she looks like me too!"

  • Whitney Atkinson
    2018-11-18 07:12

    Read Oedipus the King for class, really enjoyed it. (not enjoying this analysis im gonna have to do after submitting this review tho)our book also includes antigone and though i read it sophomore year, i might reread it!

  • Mariam keinashvili
    2018-11-20 07:27

    „ოიდიპოს მეფე“ ერთიანი ტრაგედიაა. რა დროშიც ვითარდება მოქმედებები სინამდვილეში ანალოგიურადაა სცენაზეც. ბერძნული სამყარო რომ კაუზალურია ამას მოწმობს მთელი ანტიკური ხანის ბერძნული ლიტერატურა, თუმცა სოფოკლეს ეს ტრაგედია განსაკუთრებულად აგებულია მიზეზ-შედეგობრიობაზე. გარდა ამისა ტრაგედიაში ერთ-ერთი მთავარია არა ცუდი ან კარგი კაცი, არა მათი ქმედებები, როგორც ბოროტი ან კეთილი ქმედებები, არამედ ადამიანი, რომელსაც მოსდის ინტელექტუალური შეცდომა, შემდეგ ყურადღებას ვაქცევთ როგორ ვითარდება მოვლენები ამ ინტელექტუალური შეცდომის ფონზე და საბოლოოდ როგორ გადაწყდება პრობლემა. ამ ტრაგედიაში დასმულია მნიშვნელოვანი აქცენტები, მაგალითად: ბედისწერისა და პასუხისმგებლობის საკითხი, თავისუფალი ნება, აქვს თუ არა რაიმე ბრალი/პასუხისმგებლობა ჩადენილისთვის ოიდიპოსს, მიუხედავად იმისა, რომ ბედისწერით განსაზღვრული ჰქონდა დედის ცოლად შერთვა და მამის მკვლელობა? რა როლი აქვს ტირესიასის გამოჩენას, რა არის ამ ტრაგედიის მთავარი სათქმელი. „ოიდიპოს მეფე“ ტრაგედიაა, ეს ნიშნავს იმას, რომ არსებობს მითი ოიდიპოსზე, რომელიც უფრო ვრცლად, ტრაგედიის ჩარჩოებში შემოგვთავაზა სოფოკლემ, მისი მიზანი იყო თუ როგორ მოხდებოდა ყველაფერი, და არა ის, თუ რა დასასრული ექნებოდა ტრაგედიას, რადგან, როგორც ვიცით, ბერძნულ თეატრში მაყურებელმა იცის რის სანახავად მიდის თეატრში თუ მან ტრაგედია უნდა ნახოს. კომედიის შემთხვევაში კი საქმე სხვაგვარადაა. კომედიაში მაყურებელს ორივე აინტერესებს რა როგორ მოხდება, როგორ დამთავრდება კომედია. სოფოკლეს ტრაგედია ოიდიპოსის მიერ ქურუმთა მიმართვით იწყება. ოიდიპოსი მწუხარებას გამოთქვამს ქალაქში დატრიალებული ჟამიანობის გამო და ცდილობს გამოარკვიოს ღმერთთა რისხვის მიზეზი. ოიდიპოსმა შეიტყო, რომ უწინ თებეს მეფე ლაიოსი ყოფილა, რომელიც ავაზაკებს მოუკლავთ. ახლა კი უფალი სამაგიერო პასუხს ითხოვს მისი მკვლელობის გამო. ოიდიპოსი ეჭვებშია, სად აღმოჩნდება ძველი მკვლელის კვალი, რადგან ის საცნობად ძნელია. ამის პასუხად კრეონტი ძალიან დიდაქტიკურ იდეას გამოთქვამს: „ამ მიწაზეო, ბრძანა ღმერთმა, რასაცა ვეძებთ, ვპოულობთ კიდეც, ჩვენ მას ვკარგავთ, რასაც არ ვეძებთ.“ (სოფოკლე, 2013, 13) ვფიქრობ რომ ეს პასაჟი საჭიროებს დაფიქრებას. ღმერთს სურს აღადგინოს სამართალი ლაიოსის მკვლელის დასჯით. ბერძნულ სამყაროში სამართლის აღდგენა ამ წესით ხდება, ამ აზრის დასტურად შეგვიძლია გავიხსენოთ ორესტეაც. ღმერთები მიწაზევე ცდილობენ დასაჯონ დამნაშავენი, შური იძიონ, თითქოს ღმერთები ასპარეზობენ ადამიანთა გულებით. კრეონტის აზრით არაფერია დაკარგული თუ ჩვენ ვფიქრობთ და ვეძებთ, დაკარგულია ის, რასაც არ ვეძებთ და არ გვახსოვს. თითქოს ეს რეალურ, დღევანდელ ცხოვრებაშიც ასეა. ის რაზეც არ ვფიქრობთ, თავისთავად დაკარგულია. ძალიან ნიშანდობლივია ასევე ტირესიასისა და ოიდიპოსის დიალოგი, რომელიც შემდგომ გაცხარებულ კამათში გადაიზრდება. ოიდიპოსს არ უნდა რომ დაფიქრდეს, მას ეჭვიც კი არ შეაქვს საკუთარ თავში და ტირესიასის უტიფრობას გმობს. ტირესიასი სწუხს რომ მეფე მრისხანებას საყვედურობს და ახსენებს იმას რომ მასთან მყოფ სიავეს ვერ ამჩნევს. ანუ ოიდიპოსი თვალხილულია თუმცა გონებით ბრმაა. და ამას ტირესიასიც ეუბნება. მინდა აღვნიშნო, რომ სანამ ოიდიპოსი საკუთარ დანაშაულს შეიტყობდა, მანამ ბევრი მინიშნება ჰქონდა, რაზეც უნდა დაფიქრებულიყო. ტირესიასი ამბობს „მე დახსნილი ვარ, რადგან ჩემში სიმართლე არის.“ (სოფოკლე, 2013, 25) სიმართლეს შეუძლია მოგანიჭოს თავისუფლება, მაშინ როცა სიმართლე შენშია, თვით მეფისთვის უსიამოვნოც კი მარტივად გასამჟღავნებელი ხდება. ამიტომ ამბობს ტირესიასი, რომ ის დახსნილია. დასჯა მას არაფრად უჩანს, რადგან მეფის მიერ მისი დასჯა არ იქნება ჭეშმარიტად დამსახურებული. ის ემსახურება უფრო მაღალ პრინციპს, ვიდრე მეფეა. ჭეშმარიტება ძალას ფლობს და სანამ ის ძალას ფლობს მანამ შეუძლია ასე საუბარი. „სწორედ ეს დღე გშობს და ეს დღევე დაგამხოვს სწორედ.“ (სოფოკლე, 2013, 29) ეს სიტყვები აღნიშნავს ოიდიპოსის სიკდილსაც და დაბადებასაც ერთდროულად. სიკვდილსა და დაბადებას ერთი რამისთვის - ჭეშმარიტებისთვის. დაბადებაა საკუთარი თვის შეცნობა, დამხობა კი საზარელი სიმართლე, მამის მკვლელონა და დედის ცოლად შერთვა, რასაც ის გაექცა. ჩვენ ვხედავთ, რომ ოიდიპოსის ბედი დაბადებიდანვე განსაზღვრულია. ასეთი შვილი მამას უწინასწარმეტყველეს, ლაიოსმა კი ის მოიშორა. ოიდიპოსი სიმართლის შეტყობის შემდეგ ამბობს: „თურმე ვყოფილვარ დაწყევლილი დაბადებითვე“, ამგავარდ შეიძლება ვთქვათ, რომ ოიდიპოსის ბედი დაბადებიდანვე განსაზღვრულია პირველივე შეცდომით, მამის შეცდომით. ბერძნულ სამყაროში ყველაფერი მრუდდება „პირველი შეცდომის“ შემდეგ, პირველი შეცდომა საკუთარ ზურგზე გადააქვთ იმ ადამიანებსაც, რომლებსაც ეს შეცდომა არ დაუშვიათ. ოიდიპოსი რაც უფრო გაურბის საკუთარ ბედისწერას, მით უფრო უახლოვდება მას. საინტერესოა იყო თუ არა ოიდიპოსი დამნაშავე. გაქცევა თავისთავად ნიშნავს შიშს, პირისპირ ბრძოლის შიშს, რასაც ოიდიპოსი გაექცა, თუმცა ეს გაქცევაც თავის მოტყუება იყო. გაქცევა თავისთავად როდი ნიშნავს გადარჩენას, ოიდიპოსმა მის გარდა არაფერი მოიმოქმედა, ეს ჰგავდა ბედისწერისა და თავის მოტყუებას ერთდროულად, ეს მსხვერპლი არ აღმოჩნდა საკმარისი. ეს არ იყო ბრძოლის დასასრული. მე ფრიქრობ, რომ ოიდიპოსი გარკვეულწილად იყო დამნაშავე, რადგან მას შეეძლო რომ არავინ მოეკლა, ცოლად კი საკუთარ თავზე პატარა შეერთო. მან დააშავა ისიც, რომ ფიზიკური გაქცევის გარდა, არაფერი იღონა, მან დააშავა ის, რომ წინასწარმეტყველებას წაუყრუა. ის, რაც მთელ შენს ცხოვრებას ხაზად გასდევს, შეუძლებელია დაგავიწყდეს ან შეუძლებელია მისი შიში არ გქონდეს. ერთი შეხედვით საკმაოდ რთულია ამ ტრაგედიაში თავისუფალ ნებაზე რაიმე ვთქვათ, რადგან როგორც აღვნიშნე, ღმერთები ასპარეზობენ ადამიანთა გულებით, მაგრამ აუცილებლად უნდა აღინიშნოს, რომ საქმე არაა ის, რომ ოიდიპოსი არტახებშია ბედისწერის მიერ გაკრული, არამედ მას აკლია ცოდნა საკუთარ ბედისწერაზე, რაც რეალურად მისი დაღუპვის მიზეზიც ხდება. ამ აზრით, შეიძლება ვიფიქროთ, რომ უცოდინრობაა ის, რაც ბოლოს უღებს თავისუფლებას და არა ის, რომ ადამიანებს რაღაცები განსაზღვრული აქვთ. ჩვენ თავისუფლები ვართ ჩვენს ცოდნაში, სწორედ ცოდნა გვხდის მეტად თავისუფლებს. თავისუფლების ილუზია და ილუზია იმისა, რომ გაქცევით თავს უშველი და თავიდან აირიდებ წინასწარმეტყველებას ფუჭად გარჯას უდრის. სოფოკლეს ტრაგედიაში იგრძნობა საკმაო ირონიაც. ბრმა ტირესიასი ხედავს, ხოლო თვალხილული ოიდიპოსი-ვერა. ერთგვარი ირონიაა ისიც, რომ ხალხი დახმარებისთვის იმ მეფეს მიმართავს, რომელიც ამ ჭირიანობის მიზეზია. ეს პარადოქსები მკითხველებმა ვიცით და თითქოს ღიმილსაც იწვევს, მაგრამ ეს სხვა განწყობის ღიმილია. ღიმილი უსუსურობაზე, ადამიანის სიპატარავეზე. თუმცა თუ თებეს ციკლს მივყვებით და გავეცნობით მის სამივე ტრაგედიას ვნახავთ, რომ ოიდიპოსმა საბოლოოდ მაინც გაიმარჯვა. პირველი ტრაგედია ოიდიპოსის დაბადებაა. საკუთარი თავის შეცნობამ და შიშის გაქრობამ მას თავისუფლება მიანიჭა.ბერძნული ბალანსიც აღდგა იმით, რომ ოიდიპოსი თვალებით დაბრმავდა, თუმცა გონებით მჭვრეტელი გახდა. აქ ხაზი ესმევა ხედვასაც კი. რითი ხედვაა უფრო ღირებული და სწორი. „ოიდიპოსი კოლონოსში“ აქ ოიდიპოსი ბრძენ ადამიანად გვევლინებამ რომელიც პატივისცემის ღირსია, თუმცა კი ქალაქიდან განდევნილი. საბოლოოდ რისი თქმა სურდა ამ ტრაგედიით სოფოკლეს? მე ვფიქრობ, რომ დრამატურგის მთავარი სათქმელი არ იყო მხოლოდ ერთი რამ, არამედ ტრაგედიაში გამოთქმული თითოეული დიდაქტიკური იდეა თითო-თითოდ არის მთავარი სათქმელი. თავისუფლების იდეა არ დევს მხოლოდ „ოიდიპის მეფეში“, ის დევს თვალდათხრილ ოიდიპოსში, რომლის ყოფასაც სოფოკლე აღგვიწერს „ოიდიპოსი კოლონოსში“, ის ბრმაა, თუმცა ავტონომიურია, ასევე „ანტიგონე“ რომელიც ისე იქცევა, როგორც სწორად მიაჩნია. არ უშინდება კრეონტის, მიწიერი მმართველის მუქარას. პატივს სცემს მამისა და ძმის ხსოვნას. ცოდნაში თავისუფლება ძალიან მნიშვნელოვანი საკითხია. საკუთარი თავის ცოდნა თავისუფლებას განიჭებს, ესაა მტკიცება იმისა, რომ ბედისწერას არ შეუძლია თავისთავად წარმართოს ყველაფერი, არამედ ის შენზეა დამოკიდებული, შენ შეგიძლია ის წარმართო შენი მჭერმეტყველებითა და გონიერებით. ასე რომ შეგვიძლია რომ ეს ტრაგედია განვაზოგადოთ და მთელს კაცობრიობას მოვარგოთ, მოვარგოთ ჩვენს თავებსაც, დავადგეთ საკუთარი თავის შეცნობის გზას და მასში ვიპოვნით საკუთარ თავებსაც და საკუთარ თავისუფლებასაც.

  • Ken
    2018-10-30 01:33

    I got sick of teaching Romeo & Juliet because the damned coincidences and the stupidity (esp. of Romeo) and the dramatic irony weighing so heavily on the reader/sucker just got to me. So instead, I began teaching A Midsummer Night's Dream where everyone is an ass of a different color. Well, reading (and in two cases, rereading) these long-time-no-see tragedies reminded me of that. If only this one knew what that one knew or that one thought to think of what this one thanks to thoughts. Antigone -- she is woman, hear her roar! Man, I love a lady with principles. And Oedipus, the saddest sack (read complex) that ever was or will be. Blind fury.It's only Electra that seems to come off easy. The tragedy comes for her enemies, not her. And, until the end, I'd thought of dialing Eugene O'Neill up for rewrite. Whining Becomes Electra, let's try. Whatever. A rarity for Sophocles: All's Well That Ends Well.And boy, do things end in these plays....

  • Carmen
    2018-11-13 02:20

    It’s no disgrace for a man, even a wise man, to learn many things and not be too rigid. You’ve seen many trees by a raging winter torrent, how many sway with the flood and salvage every twig, but not the stubborn—they’re ripped out, roots and all. Bend or break.This incredibly powerful and moving play was written well over two thousand years ago, yet it is as relevant and relatable as ever. Antigone's immovable conviction is tragically squared against Creon's regal pride, both as stubborn as oxen, while the audience is maddeningly positioned to see the folly and the "well, he/she's got a point" of both sides. This work would make an excellent companion piece to Faulkner's "As I Lay Dying," which also deals with family, and in particular, the rights accorded to the dead in burial - how the manner in which we honor the dead is a mirror of who we are. There is so much to say about this play, I actually found it more compelling than its predecessor, Oedipus Rex, Sophocles' other famous play based on Antigone's accursed father. Ay, there lies the rub! For in Oedipus Rex, it seems as though nothing can be done by man to avert the cruel hand of fate. However in Antigone, people are just being too selfish and stubborn, ignoring all kinds of good advice, and swearing up and down that the gods are most definitely on their side. Meanwhile, Sophocles nudges the audience to avoid a similar fate by having King Creon's son announce that unfortunately, man isn't born perfect, so we'd all do well to listen to some good advice. But my favorite part of this play, the part that really sang for me, was the Chorus' ode to man, so reminiscent of Hamlet's beautiful and, ultimately sad, "What a piece of work is a man" soliloquy. Hamlet glibly ends it by saying that man, despite his natural magnificence and beauty, doesn't interest him. In Antigone, the Chorus is marveling at how man has mastered the sea and the animals and the earth, and has even fashioned a lawful society and an intricate language by which to communicate, but there remains one thing that goes yet unconquered by man - Death. Mwahahaha!So, if TIME magazine is right, and man becomes immortal by 2045, I guess Antigone will finally become an obsolete literary relic of the ancient past that has no bearing on the modern human condition. But until that frightening time arrives, this is a work for the ages.Man the master, ingenious past all measure, past all dreams, the skills within his grasp - he forges on, now to destruction, now again to greatness.

  • Amanda
    2018-10-27 06:24

    Review based on Antigone and Oedipus the King

  • Serena Garcia
    2018-11-06 03:38

    The story of Oedipus the King is about a King named Oedipus who is the ruler of a city called Thebes. A curse has befallen on this city and Oedipus sends someone for Apollo to find out why it's happening. He learns that the curse is due to the fact that their last king, Laius, was murdered and if they find out who the killer is, the curse in Thebes would be lifted. With that, a series of events ends up happening to Oedipus from being accused to being the murderer of Laius to just a whole bunch of family drama.I did enjoy this part of Sophocles writing, but it was still a little hard to get into based on how the writing was to me. I loved how the story just hits you with so much drama that just continues until the very end.I think regardless of what genre you like, I think most people would enjoy this book if it was explained to them properly so they know what's going on (since the writing can be confusing). It just catches your attention so fast and it just keeps you hooked.

  • Paul
    2018-10-29 05:31

    The play is great of course, and very fun to teach. Creon is such a bastard and the teenagers love that his teenage son is the only sane character. What I really want to recommend is this version, put out by Cambridge. The translation is excellent and uses modern language well, and the notes on the side do an excellent job of putting all the references the Greeks would have taken for granted in cultural context. Totally changes the way you understand the play.

  • Claire Sinden
    2018-11-16 03:10

    As massive classical nut, I had to get my hands on Sophocles' Electra after being force fed the dribble that is Euripedes' version. For all Electra enthusiasts, I recommend reading other translations - a favourite being Anne Carsons. And then get yourself onto youtube to watch Strauss' operatic version of Hofmannsthal's. Electra geek FTW!

  • Katie Dawe
    2018-11-21 23:30

    I thought that this was a good story overall but some of the characters got annoying overtime. Antigone was portrayed very well but she was very headstrong and refused to listen to others just like Creon.

  • Sydney Kirsch
    2018-11-06 07:30

    Antigone - 4.5/5Oedipus the King - 2/5Electra - 2/5

  • Tania
    2018-11-07 03:20

    All in all, Antigone was the best out of three. Electra was too short and Oedipus the King contained the original manpain.

  • Braxton Scott
    2018-10-22 00:21

    It isn't a book I would read again but a book that I can enjoy once. Obviously it is a classic so I respect it but I don't enjoy it.

  • Abby Cash
    2018-10-29 06:30

    I would give Antigone a 4/5. I enjoyed reading it because there were many life lessons that the characters learned and it was interesting to see the decisions that they made.

  • Harumi
    2018-10-24 00:30

    Oedipus the king is a really good book that I read. I say this because it had a lot of dramatic irony which made the book interesting. The king Oedipus had basically lived his life with full of lies, that was never told to him till the end. The lies came out till the end which caused some terrible things to happen. Overall I really enjoyed reading this book.

  • Amanda
    2018-11-02 06:16

    The Greek playwright Sophocles was and still is thought of one of the most renowned and skilled masters of his time. Of his works only seven have survived, one of which is the play Oedipus the king. The play is widely considered to be the high point in Greek literature and has set itself apart from its counterparts by virtue of its excellence. The play is the first of three works written by Sophocles concerning the fate of Oedipus and his children. It is a tale of a man struggling against the shackles of his fate and the consequences of his desperate fight. In this tale the protagonist, Oedipus, is called upon to save the city of Thebes from a curse that has befallen the city. Creon, his wife’s brother, informs him that the only way to lift the curse is by exiling the murderer of the previous king, Laios. He calls upon the blind seer Tiresias and asks him to shed light on the matter. While at first Tiresias is reluctant to speak his mind, after Oedipus threatens him he becomes angry and tells him what he knows; Oedipus himself is, in truth, the murderer of the late king Laios. While Oedipus is initially enraged at the suggestion, he later recalls to his wife the time when a seer in Corinth said to him that he would one day kill his father and marry his mother. He proceeds to recount how he met a traveler on the road who he killed, a traveler who matches the description of king Laios. After questioning a messenger from Corinth and a shepherd who had survived the attack on the king, Oedipus comes to realize that the seer of Corinth spoke truth. Overcome with grief by the news, Oedipus’ wife/mother runs into her room and kills herself and Oedipus gouges out his eyes with a golden pin on her dress. Oedipus resigns himself to exile, wandering the countryside as a blind man.The prevalent theme of this play is that it was the actions which he took to avoid his fate that eventually led him to it. It is his fear of the prophecy from the oracle of Corinth which leads him to run to the very place where he would fulfill it. “I herd all this and fled” he says, but it is this act which leads him straight to Laios and Thebes. By the same token, it is his Insistence upon hearing the truth causes his eventual demise. Both Tiresias the seer and Jocasta his wife attempt to dissuade him from his search. But he responds “I will not listen; the truth must be made known”. One could argue that it was a self fulfilling prophecy. I think the play’s thought provoking theme make an excellent story. Oedipus’ struggle against, and his eventual succumbing to, his seemingly inevitable destiny strike me at once as both poetic and tragic. The deeper significance may be difficult to grasp initially, but the more it is read the more one begins to understand the mind of the author and the meaning imbued within. I would definitely recommend this to any lover of plays and classical literature.

  • Josh Kells
    2018-11-12 04:29

    Before I begin my review I should say I only read Oedipus the King ark for my AP literature class. For the book being translated, it was a lot easier to read than most other "translated books" because with how they interperated most of Sophocles language it is very readable. When I first began the book, I honestly thought it threw us straight in the middle of the main issue/problem, which was not my favorite thing about the book at all, got a little confusing. On top of being thrown in the middle of action, the story seems as if it all took place in one day, which seems very unlikely but there is no clear change of day to night at all. The only other thing that bothers me, and it's a very little thing I know, but, you never find out the gender of the oracle, it's a weird thing to point out but it honestly does bother me not knowing only because of the way Oedipus talks to him/her. *Spoilers Ahead* Some of the things I did like was just the big twist in the end, turning out that exactly what he runs away from is what he's heading directly for, seems like a moral for us all that Sophocles is trying to tell us. My next favorite part would have to be just how Oedipus in the beginning questions everyone for having angered the gods when really the tables turn on him, for my first time reading it I honestly thought it was a little funny. Now for other books I could compare it to, I would say It reminds me a little bit of The Lord Of The Flies. I say this because as Jack is trying to lead the boys away from evil, he himself is the evil corrupting all the other boys to kill Piggy and Simon, so more of an inspiration than anything. Now I would recommend this book because it is a short read but it does keep you interested through each page. So I give this book 3 stars, even after my list of dislikes I still think it is worth reading.

  • Hazel
    2018-10-31 03:08

    Out of the three tragedies Antigone was my definitely my favorite. The story goes that the dead are the dead and should be regarded as such. By this I mean that you can punish someone who is alive, but you should respect them in death for they cannot defend themselves. Antigone goes to great lengths just to make a point about this. The other two plays are also thought-provoking and just as magnificent to read.

  • Jaznee
    2018-11-11 04:38

    Well I guess this is why my English teacher loves me because I love reading books beyond my jurisdiction...I really like this story I haven't yet read all three but I've read the last one because for some reason that's the order we have to read them in AP English but I'm really looking forward to reading them all

  • ندى الأبحر
    2018-11-02 02:30

    The 20-year-old me is so impressed by the Greek theater as a whole, but those specific plays are absolute EPICS. I liked every inch of them, which rarely happens as I always get sick of studying mandatory literary works! Am just so grateful that I studied Oedipus the King which led me to know the others.

  • Rawan Mkhiber
    2018-11-06 02:27

    سوفوكليس و طه حسين!!!ربّاه!

  • Asmaa
    2018-11-14 05:35

    4 stars for Antigone 3 for Oedipus the King2 for Electra

  • Michael Cayley
    2018-11-13 01:19

    A good translation of three powerful plays by one of the world's greatest dramatists, with short notes to elucidate things that might be obscure.

  • دينا سليمان
    2018-11-18 06:36

    رائعة من روائع المسرح التراجيدى اليونانى....توقفت كثيرا اثناء القراءة لأسأل نفس السؤل.. كم قرن مضت على كتابة هذه الروائع.. وأين نحن الان منها؟؟

  • Jmonicap
    2018-11-06 01:09

    This book was great but Oedipus is so blind and is so prideful

  • Sera
    2018-10-23 00:18

    Complex: What Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex and Electra Can Teach Us about Ourselves and Our Wars by Sera Arcaro, June 2010I love the story of Oedipus, although Oedipus himself is not a particularly likeable character. He is egotistical: When confronted with the suffering of his subjects at the beginning of the play he declares, “I know how cruelly you suffer; yet, though sick, not one of you suffers a sickness half as great as mine. Yours is a single pain; each man of you feels but his own. My heart is heavy with the city’s pain, my own, and yours together” (50). He is pompous in his empathy and selfish in his solution. When he accepts the charge of finding the former king’s murderers in order to end the blight, he readily admits, “The man who murdered him might make the same attempt on me; and so, avenging him I shall protect myself” (53).He is also a braggart: When he first appears in response to the lamentations he says, “I myself am come who fame is known to all—I, Oedipius” (49). In twelve words he refers to himself four times. There is a bit of dramatic irony here as well, since the audience knows the real reason for his lasting infamy. But his hamartia is really shown when he doubts Teiresias’ prophetic abilities and brags about his own cleverness: “When the Sphinx chanted her music here, why did not you speak out and save the city? …You were no prophet then; your birds, your voice from Heaven, were dumb. But I, who came by chance, I, knowing nothing, put the Sphinx to flight, thanks to my wit—no thanks to divination!” (61). As Albert Camus comments, his emphasis on man’s ability to solve problems without the help of the gods reflects the paradigm shift occurring in Athens at the time: a transition from “a sacred society [to:] a society built by man.” However, even atheists such as myself might still feel that Oedipus’ harangue against Teiresias is a bit overdone.Oedipus is also unlikable because his anger so quickly turns to violence: When he is fleeing Thebes, he has a right-of-way skirmish with another carriage, and in a fit of road rage his kills his father and his father’s entourage (although he does not know their identity as such), ending his account of the incident with the unapologetic statement, “I killed them all” (75). Later on his journey to self-discovery, an elderly Theban shepherd refuses to answer Oedipus’ questions. Oedipus suggests torturing the answer out of him: “Here, someone, quickly! Twist this fellow’s arms!”(88). A moment later he threatens, “Die you shall, unless you speak the truth” (88).He is also quick to accuse others: When the blind seer, Tieresias, tells him he is the cause of the plague, he refuses to listen and instead accuses Tieresias of being a crony of his brother-in-law Creon, whom he suddenly thinks is trying to overthrow him. He also jumps to conclusions when his wife, trying to protect him from the true knowledge of his birth and relationship to her, pleads “Seek no more! ….O may you never learn what man you are!” (85). Oedipus misunderstands and thinks she is afraid of learning that he is of lowly birth. Oedipus declares “My birth, however humble, I am resolved to find. But [Jocasta:], perhaps, is proud, as women will be; is ashamed of my low birth. But I do rate myself the child of Fortune, giver of all good, and I shall not be put to shame” (85). Again, dramatic irony is employed here, because we know that he is the child of his wife, which is a great misfortune. Thanks to Freud, most people associate Oedipus with a son desiring to sleep with his mother. However, Oedipus ends up sleeping with his mother precisely because he is trying to avoid sleeping with his mother. He doesn’t know his adoptive parents are not his biological parents, so when an oracle tells him the prophecy that he will kill his father and marry his mother, he immediately runs away from Corinth so that he doesn’t murder Polybus and sleep with Merope. It is in fleeing Corinth that he runs into his father at the place where three roads meet, slays him, then proceeds to Thebes where he solves the Sphynx’s riddle and wins marriage with the queen (his mother) as his reward. In running from the prophecy, he runs straight into it.If you focus only on the murderous, incestuous parts, it would be easy to dismiss this story as merely an ancient Greek tragedy set in the days before it was regarded as important to let children know they are adopted and when gods controlled your fate. But I think Oedipus’s real problem was not sexual in nature, as Freud’s co-opting of the name would have us believe. His real problem was that he failed to see that he was the cause of the problem because he was so quick to accuse and blame everyone else. In this sense, we all have an Oedipus complex.In the beginning, Oedipus sends Creon to Apollo to find out the cause of the plague, and Creon returns with this message: “There is pollution here in our midst, long-standing” (51) because the murderer of king Laius has not been found. There is no way Oedipus could know that it was him, at the point. But shortly after Creon’s report, Tieresias tells Oedipus point blank that he is “the man whose crimes pollute our city” (60). As Oedipus’ insolence makes Teiresias angrier, Teiresias says, “You have your sight, and yet you cannot see where, nor with whom, you live, nor in what horror” (62). It’s a bit cryptic, and you can’t entirely blame Oedipus for not understanding. But what we can blame him for is that he doesn’t even try. He immediately starts accusing Creon of hiring Teiresias to say this about him, in order to usurp the throne. It is only when Oedipus sees for himself that he is the cause of the pollution that he finally believes it. Of course, we’re not all failing to see that we are living in incest. But we’ve all, I’m sure, failed to see that we are the problem. We are quick to blame others, as Oedipus blames Creon and Tieresias, and this clouds his ability to understand what they are telling him.This crops up frequently in my own life, in fairly innocuous ways. I’ll get done doing the laundry and come up one sock short, and I’ll immediately think Zac has put it in his sock drawer by mistake, or that it’s lost under his pile of clothes. I generally blame Zac, silently, for anything that goes missing because I am the neat organized one who never loses things, just like Oedipus clings to the fact that he saved Thebes from the Sphynx, so surely he couldn’t also be the one bringing ruin to the city. But I’ll find the sock behind the hamper a week or two later, where I didn’t think of looking because I was so sure someone else had lost it, not me. At a restaurant the other day, we were dividing up the check, but ended up with $10 dollars too much. I had been collecting money and making change, and I was sure someone else had put too much in. Of course, when I finally demanded a reenactment of the monetary transaction, it was revealed that I was the one who had mistakenly put in the extra ten bucks. “Hah,” I said. “I’m like Oedipus. I’m blaming others for the problem and it turns out it is me.” Oedipus is really about seeing things clearly. Freud also co-opted Electra from Sophocles, to name the lesser-known Electra Complex: When a girl, in love with her father, wishes to kill her mother. This one is a little more aptly named at least, as Electra does seem rather obsessed with her father, Agamemnon, and openly wishes for the death of her mother, Clytemnestra, and her step-father, Aegisthus. It should be noted, though, that most of the time she is pining for her beloved brother, Orestes, to return from exile and slay her mother and step-father, who are responsible for the murder of her father. It is her brother who actually kills their mother, as retribution for the murder of their father, which seems to fly in the face of Freud’s Oedipus Complex.Electra can also teach us a few things, but not necessarily about matricide. Rather, it is a story about longing for revenge. The chorus counters Electra’s grief by reminding her that although her father is dead, and that’s a bad thing, “he has gone to the land to which we all must go” (107). Still, Electra feeds her sorrow and lusts for retribution. She sees it as a daughter’s duty. Her mother points out that she killed Agamemnon as retribution for Agamemnon’s murder of their daughter. Electra counters that Agamemnon had to kill the daughter, as Artemis was holding their ship hostage until she received retribution for a stag that Agamemnon had killed. We see the cycle of revenge that has led to this moment, and we are given a hint of the cycle of revenge that will continue. After Orestes successfully slays his father’s murderers, we can imagine that now Aegisthus and Clytemnestra’s children will be obligated to slay Electra and Orestus as retribution for their parent’s murder. So the moral, really, is don’t kill one of Artemis’ deer, her (read as Gollum would say it) precious.When reading Electra, you want to root for the protagonist; you want to want Lady Clytemnestra to die, as Electra’s grief is poignant and she is treated no better than a slave. As a foil, Electra’s sister is also mad about their father’s murder, but she pleads with Electra: “Why do you indulge this vain resentment? I am sure of this: Mine is as great as yours. If I could find the power, they soon would learn how much I hate them. But we are helpless; we should ride the storm with shortened sail, not show our enmity when we are impotent to do them harm” (113). While yielding one’s principles in the face of obstacles is not very noble, Electra’s obsessive and excessive longing for revenge isn’t to be emulated either. Sophocles’ Electra ends rather abruptly, after all her whining and pining, with her gleefully hearing her mother’s last wails, followed shortly by her step-father’s demise. I don’t find it the cathartic ending promised by Greek tragedy. Electra’s cruelty as she savors their deaths is not something you can or should identify with. At the end of Oedipus, you can pity him, because for all of his faults, he was not to blame for his crimes. He was an unfortunate, albeit egotistical, plaything of the gods. They made a prophecy, and any student of Greek mythology knows that the prophecies always come true. However, Electra and Orestes were not fulfilling any pre-ordained prophecy, but rather a man-made code that calls for blood retribution. At Clytemnestra’s death, the chorus proclaims, “The cry for vengeance is at work; the dead are stirring. Those who were killed of old now drink in return the blood of those who killed them” (149). This provides comfort for Electra, but for those of us who believe the dead stay dead and are no longer sentient, we know the dead can gain no additional comfort from vengeance. In a modern, secular society, we know man-made codes can be changed and adapted to avoid fates that only vengeful gods could foist upon us. After Clytemnestra’s death, Aegisthus returns and Orestus takes him inside the house to murder him, explaining, “Go in, and die on the same spot on which you killed my father” (152). Orestus wants Aegisthus to die in the same way his father died, without realizing that he is therefore making himself the same as the aggressor he hates. The oppressed is now becoming the oppressor. Aegisthus has children of his own, who may one day kill Orestes in the same spot that Orestus killed their father. Orestus, unlike our modern superheroes that always show restraint and stop short of murdering the villains, crosses a line and forfeits any moral superiority that he might have had.As a country, we have done the same thing time and time again. The hypocrisies are endless: We fought the oppression of the British empire, only to oppress slaves and native Americans. We defeated Hitler while being allies with Stalin and putting Japanese-Americans in internment camps. During the cold war, the US government, led by senator McCarthy, employed many of the same tactics against its own citizens that the communists were using against theirs. In fighting the enemy, we emulated the enemy. Similarly, in our current war on terror, we have become terrorists. We violate human rights, kill innocent civilians, squash dissent, and endorse torture. We are Electra and 9/11 is our Agamemnon. Or maybe, more comparably, we are Artemis and the WTC is our stag. We demand an excessive recompense: toppling two sovereign governments and wreaking havoc on untold numbers of non-terrorists, which touched off a cycle of revenge and violence that has no foreseeable end. While the terrorist attacks were cruel and tragic, the victims have only gone where we are all going, where numerous Americans go every day due to other causes that we do not condemn as vehemently. In going to these extremes to fight our “enemy,” we eliminate the moral superiority that separated us from our enemy. We are Orestus—feeling quite justified stepping into Aegisthus’ position and mimicking his murder, without seeing clearly that doing so eliminates the moral distinction between “us” and “them.” Being the victim of an injustice does not make us morally superior—it is only in our response to the injustice that we can show our integrity. Like Oedipus, our national narrative is pompous and egotistical, focusing on the good we have done, to the extent that we are blind to the sins we commit. Our anger, our fear, and our sense of superiority are faulty justifications for the perpetration of violence. The problem is as Aegisthus points out shortly before he is killed: “This house of Atreus must, it seems, behold death upon death, those now and those to come” (152).

  • Andrew Dore
    2018-11-16 04:16

    Summary:Oedipus, King of the Greek city Thebes, has his brother Creon go and see an oracle to find out how to end the plague in the city. When Creon returns, he informs Oedipus that the killer of the former king Laius needs to be found and prosecuted to cure everyone. A prophecy stated that Laius and his wife would have a child that would kill Laius and marry the wife. Oedipus's wife, Jocasta, tells him not to worry about anything because oracles have been wrong many times. Then a blind prophet tells Oedipus that he killed Laius. Jocasta tells him not to worry about it because her and Laius's only son had been killed. After being warned not to by his wife, Oedipus then questions a messenger about his past. The messenger tells Oedipus that he is the son on Jocasta and Laius and he did murder Laius at the crossroads many years before. Come to found out, the messenger was the man who raised Oedipus. Jocasta retreats to her room, and Oedipus, terrified at was has happened, gouges his own eyes out. He is then exiled from Thebes. My thoughts: If you are interested in Greek plays or like reading at all, then I recommend this book for you. This book is one of the few Greek tragedies to survive and that gives it a unique feeling when you pick it up. Although the vocabulary is meant for an older audience, it does not hurt for someone to read it at any level. This book was entertaining and it was funny. The humor of the Classical Greeks is alive and well within the humor that we have today. Many times, The King would make snarky remarks to his inferiors and they would snap back with one of their own. The actions of the characters are also very comical because they are all over the top. What I mean by that is that they do not react like a normal person would, they react in an overdramatic way that just adds to the humor that Sophocles was tryin to show. Reading a book from another part of the world broadens the scope of your thoughts. This book really delves into the culture that the Ancient Greeks had, because many times they were based loosely off of real figures. While I do not know for certain who Oedipus is based off of, I can know that a lot of Shakespeare's work was written to mock the royalty of the time and Sophocles was no different. After all, he was the William Shakespeare of Ancient Greece. Sophocles was one of the first tragedy playwrights. Why was that so popular with the Greeks? It is because they were always at war and they often blamed their kings for getting them into those wars. Much like how New Yorkers found refuge in Broadway shows after September 11th, the Greeks took to the theatres to escape reality. The best way for these writers to draw in crowds was to make a mockery of their situation. That is why is almost every Greek tragedy, something bad happens with the king. Had I not read Oedipus, then I would have never looked into that and found out the reason the tragedy was invented. Therefore, reading books and plays from different areas of the world give you new found knowledge that would not be gotten by reading only from your own area. I think that many people today can relate to this play because of the fact that we like seeing people that are better than us fail. Even if you do not think you think it, then why are there all these tabloids about celebrities getting divorced or gaining weight. The Greeks were no different, they cheered for their leaders to fail also. Another similarity is the sense of humor that the Greeks had. It is almost the same as our own today, and this book reminded me of that. Oedipus, while not meant to be funny, really is funny in how he handles his life day to day. Whilst there is a sad end, the way in which it was written would be popular even today. This play was a brilliant story on the struggles of a king who does not know his past. Is there a hidden message in the story, maybe but it is up to you to read it and figure it out on your own. This story entertains and it helps you learn about a time very different from our own. This story is the classic story of a scandal ruining someone's life really. This is something that even happens today, and it could be the basis of an argument on why the presidential election turned out the way it did but that is not for me to decide. This play is one which truly has stood the test of time and remained popular for centuries. Personal Rating: 5/5 Why: It was funny and educational, and it was a play that I could not put down as I read it in three nights. There were really no negatives except that it took a while to develop. Recommendations: I would recommend Oedipus to anyone who is interested in Greece, Greek culture, Greek life, Greek tragedies, the classics of Rome and Greece, or someone who is just looking for any entertaining read. Leaving Thought: My exiting remark on Oedipus the King is that it is truly one of the great works of any playwrights from not only antiquity, but from the world. This play really made you want to keep reading, and it transformed you into the amphitheaters of the Peloponnesian Peninsula. This play, I can say, is truly the first play that I enjoyed ready and quite honestly I cannot wait to read more by the brilliant Sophocles. Also, if you have read this far and are not my English teacher, Mrs. Harrison, I thank you for taking the time to read what I have to say.

  • Yu Su
    2018-11-10 07:33

    Electra: 5/5I'm most familiar with this story, through Richard Strauss' opera of the same name, one of my absolute favorite. What strikes me is that the libretto by Hofmannsthal is very close to this original Sophocles play, all the interactions, themes, except how the two plays end. This speaks a lot of the modern quality of ancient Greek plays, and Electra especially.The interesting thing about Electra is that she does very little. It is her very presence, her existence as she is, and her reason of it that put all others at their own places so the final event may happen. I guess this is common in ancient Greek dramas? Instead of action it is reasoning, debate, rhetoric that really instigate the plot.Oedipus Rex: 2/5Everyone knows the story. For me this play is a bit disappointing, flat. Much time is spent on the discovery of the truth, but little attention paid to the moral dilemma of Oedipus, or of Creon, Iocasta, Antigone, etc. And because the plot is so well known now the shock factor is gone completely. As for the language itself, I find Kitto's translation adequate but not very inspiring. Oedipus reads like a routine. I don't know why it is that I find the translation of Electra to be electrifying while this one flat. Maybe it's the original? Even the strophe and antistrophe present much better arguments in Electra, and here they basically just say the very obvious things.Antigone: 3/5Read last. There are a lot of "filler" passages too, and the old "never ignore the prophet" thing. But two passages stand out, one of Antigone's argument against Creon on burying her brother, another of Haemon's argument of the same topic. The former discusses divine law vs. human law, or in contemporary terms morality vs. law. Should people obey immoral laws? Very good question. The latter discusses how the wisest men learn from the young and foolish, which is also very true even today. But besides these there's not much else exciting going on.Conclusion:I don't know if it's the translation, or that I've just come off a Shakespeare binge (so everything in comparison would seem dull indeed), but the language does little to gripe me, especially the two Oedipus related ones. Maybe I'll find a different edition in the future to compare, but the interest in that is not very strong for now.It's still nice to know a bit about the old classics, and in extension know the ancient Greek way of thinking and its influence on modern culture.A comment on the edition:There are many minor editing/format errors, mostly verse line alignment issues. They are a bit distracting. I was surprised to find them in a supposedly decent edition like Oxford's.