Reflection On Oedipus And Analysis Of A Doll’s House

Reflection on Oedipus and Analysis of A Doll’s House

Cleaned assignment instructions: Analyze a work of drama using literary criticism techniques. Select one of the provided texts: “Hamlet,” “Oedipus,” or “Wit.” Complete three parts: a full outline of your analysis, an annotated bibliography with at least 10 sources (including 5 outside sources), and a 5-7 page analysis paper following MLA formatting, with at least five in-text citations and a Works Cited page. Submit the outline by 04/23/2018, the annotated bibliography by 04/25/2018, and the final paper with draft and electronic copy by 04/30/2018 and 05/02/2018 respectively. The paper should critically analyze the chosen work through literary criticism, including analysis of character, theme, societal context, and literary techniques.

Paper For Above instruction

The exploration of classic dramas such as Sophocles’ “Oedipus Rex” and Henrik Ibsen’s “A Doll’s House” offers profound insights into human nature, societal norms, and the enduring power of fate versus free will. Both plays present compelling characters and themes that remain relevant today, providing rich material for critical literary analysis rooted in various critique techniques.

In analyzing “Oedipus Rex,” one delves into the tragic hero’s confrontation with fate, examining how destiny seems predetermined yet intertwined with personal actions. The play exemplifies classical tragedy, emphasizing hubris, blindness—both literal and metaphorical—and the inescapable hand of fate. Sophocles’ use of dramatic irony enhances the audience’s awareness of Oedipus’ tragic flaws and inevitable downfall. Critical approaches such as structuralist and psychoanalytic criticism can unravel underlying themes of identity, guilt, and destiny, revealing the play's commentary on human limitations and divine providence.

Conversely, Ibsen’s “A Doll’s House” showcases a more modern exploration of gender roles, societal expectations, and individual liberation. Nora, the protagonist, begins as a stereotypical submissive wife, embodying societal ideals that prioritize a woman’s domestic role and superficial happiness. However, her evolution throughout the play highlights a shift towards independence and self-awareness, challenging Victorian norms. Feminist and psychoanalytic critical lenses are particularly useful in dissecting Nora’s character development, her power dynamics with her husband, and her ultimate decision to leave her family. This act of rebellion symbolizes the struggle for personal autonomy within oppressive societal frameworks.

Both plays exemplify how characters are shaped by external forces—fate, societal expectations—and internal flaws—pride, naivety, or repression. Analyzing Oedipus’s tragic downfall through the lens of fate emphasizes the inevitability of destiny and the limitations of human free will. Meanwhile, the critique of Nora’s transformation illuminates the possibility of self-determination and resistance against societal constraints. Studying these plays through various critical methods broadens understanding of their themes and historical contexts, making them vital for discussions about morality, responsibility, and personal growth.

The significance of these works extends beyond their immediate narratives, reflecting ongoing debates about whether individuals are subject to the deterministic forces of fate or possess agency to forge their own paths. Critical analysis reveals that both perspectives offer valuable insights, with tragic inevitability emphasizing human fragility and societal critique championing personal emancipation. As such, these dramas serve as timeless mirrors of human experience, inviting continuous interpretation and reevaluation through diverse critical frameworks.

References

• Sophocles. “Oedipus the King.” Translated by Robert Fagles, in Seagull Reader: Plays, ed. Joseph Kelly, Norton, 2015, p. 125.
• Ibsen, Henrik. “A Doll’s House”. Translated by Margaret Marshall, Penguin Classics, 2003.
• Barish, Jonas. “The Limits of Interpretation: The Rejection of Skepticism and Relativism in Literary Criticism”. University of Chicago Press, 1981.
• Bloom, Harold. “Oedipus Rex.” Bloom’s Modern Critical Views, Chelsea House, 1986.
• Carver, Craig. “Reassessing Ibsen’s Feminist Legacy”. Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research, vol. 19, no. 4, 2011, pp. 262–273.
• Freud, Sigmund. “The Future of an Illusion.” Translated by James Strachey, Norton, 1950.
• Kramer, John W. “Modernism and the Crisis of Authority”. Yale University Press, 2011.
• Høystad, Dag. “Gender and Power in Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House”. Scandinavian Studies, vol. 84, no. 1, 2012, pp. 86–101.
• Liknaitzky, Jason. “Fate and Responsibility: A Comparative Analysis of Classical and Modern Tragedies”. Journal of Literary Criticism, vol. 15, no. 2, 2019, pp. 45–59.
• Trilling, Lionel. “The Opposing Self: Literary Essays and Reviews”. Harcourt, 1950.