Guest Blogger - Nishant N.

These last couple days in class we have been reading Oedipus, a greek tragical play. As I was reading my line as Creon (beautifully I might add), a couple of thoughts crossed my mind that I would like share and open up for discussion. First of all, let's put ourselves in the shoe's of some of Oedipus' situations. Imagine you have just finished putting all of the puzzle pieces together from the king's murder and discover you are the actual killer! But wait, you then go on to realize that he is your real dad, which sucks. But then, to top it off, you realize you were totally having relations with your mom. What ramifications could THAT have on a person's mental stability? If I were Oedipus I think instead of going through with the promise to kill the betrayer, I would simply flee from the kingdom. I know it sounds cowardly but think about it: killing yourself would hurt.
Another thought I had has to do more with the Shepard. It is interesting to me that he would lie about the murder scene and claim that it was a band of men who killed them and not a single man. I couldn't help but wonder to myself whose reputation he was trying to protect. The king was already dead and it's not like the shepard actually had a reputation to begin with, considering he probably played a minor role in the kingdom. I suppose the only explanation is that he though he'd protect the reputation of the entire kingdom. Still, it all seems very strange to me.
Considering we just finished Hamlet, I'll discuss that as well, the ending of the play to be more specific. One thing that seem very odd to me was not a major factor, but it involved Fortinbras. Clearly, he had come to the palace, from Poland, in order to seize control. However, when he comes into the main area and everyone is dead, he undergoes a major mood change. He goes from wanting to invade the kingdom to wanting to honor the deaths of all of the characters, specifically Hamlet. Should he even care if he's going to invade the place? I sure don't think so.

Guest Blogger - Melanie J.

Ancient Greek Drama was unlike any other drama produced by man. Unlike the drama in theaters we see today, the Ancient Greeks included a chorus, tragic elements, and thought out rhythm throughout plays such as Oedipus. The purpose of a chorus in Greek Drama was to illustrate the “ideal” audience response to the action of play. This helped make the play understandable and relatable to the crowd. This is a brilliant way to help narrate a scene without directly interrupting the content of the drama. It also helps to express things that the main characters cannot say and provides a connection between actors and spectators. Next, tragic elements play a key role in the development of Ancient Greek Drama. For example, a chance happening where an incident occurs by chance, yet has an impact on the action of the play would be apparent when Oedipus kills his own father without knowing. The tension builds as the audience learns of what he did, while Oedipus is still puzzled as to who killed the king. Lastly, rhythm has a great effect on the flow of the drama. Strophes and Antistrophes help mirror each other perfectly; almost acting in opposite ways to complete each other. The combination of these three things greatly adds to make Ancient Greek Drama unlike any other tragedy.

Guest Blogger - Katie H.

So when sitting down to start my blog I could not decide what to write. We just finished Hamlet, which I do appreciate [still not sure if I like it yet, but at least I can accept it and I will stop whining] now, and we are starting Oedipus today, which I can see being interesting. As I was studying my allusions last night, i looked ahead to see what was coming and one of them was Oedipus [Greek of course] and it said that he was the son of Laius [who we have had before] and Jocasta who abandoned Oedipus at birth because of the prophecy that Oedipus would kill Laius and marry Jocasta in the future. When Oedipus learned about the prophecy he fled from his adoptive parents and went to where his real parents were and the prophecy came true. And of course we all [should] know what happens in Hamlet. As I am writing this I can’t help but wonder if Grecian tragedies have the same elements as Shakespearean tragedies. Grecian tragedies are slightly different, the tragic hero does not have to die but it was very common and they were not in trouble just because of mistake that they themselves made, it was also because of the fate of the gods (http://faculty.gvsu.edu/websterm/Tragedy.htm). The thing that I expected to be vastly different in Grecian tragedies was the meter and rhythm that they were written, but Aristotle mentions that everything must have “appropriate language” for the context (http://faculty.gvsu.edu/websterm/Tragedy.htm). Aristotle also stated that tragedies are “a more philosophical and serious business than history; for poetry speaks more of universals, history of particulars" (http://faculty.gvsu.edu/websterm/Tragedy.htm). In my opinion that makes it seem that a tragedy must be completely fiction like Harry Potter or something, which has no reference to the history of the time, but Hamlet even had references to things that were common during those days. Well, I think that I’m going to be done for now. Bye!!!!