Position:Home>Books & Authors> Is the idea of tragic still possible in the absence of the victim's innocenc
Question: Is the idea of tragic still possible in the absence of the victim's innocence!?
for instance, would Oedipus still be a tragedy if the main character KNEW what he was doing!? And he killed his father for, let's say!.!.!. menacing him one night when he got drunk and he slept with his mom, because his mom looked great!?
or something more mundane!.!.!. someone dies in a car accident, some truck crushes their car, however, they were speeding themselves!.!.!. does that of speeding makes them less!.!.!. of a victim!?
Is the idea of tragic still possible if the victim loses their greatness or at least their innocence!?Www@QuestionHome@Com
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:
I find it MORE tragic in the absence of innocence then when it is present!. Yes some people might say that the car got what he deserved for speeding but when you think about it he got way more than he deserved!. If we all got punished so horribly for the small mistakes we make than where would the learning begin!? We live through our mistakes so that we may learn better!. The fact that the car driver dies makes the whole thing so much more tragic for both party's!. Now the truck driver must live with the fact that he took a life and the car driver is dead for making one mistake!.
Tragedy is possible when they lose their greatness, in fact it's heightened through that fact!. They knew what they were doing is wrong and they either have to live with it or die because of it!. When you do something and are innocent of knowing that it's wrong it's tragic but you'll get over it and just see it as not your fault!. When you know what you did is wrong you have to go on with it, the guilt NEVER leaves you!.
A heavy heart is more tragic than an innocent one!.Www@QuestionHome@Com
It's tragic in some ways, because there are still victims, but it is only tragic because the victims are still innocent!. Oedipus' mother would be the tragedy, but not Oedipus himself!. He knew the consequences of his actions and chose to do them anyway!. Tragedy occurs when the person thinks he is doing the right thing, but it all goes to Hell anyway!. Some people consider Othello tragic, although I have to disagree!. It's tragic for Desdemona, certainly, but Othello himself could have chosen to act in a different manner, and then he wouldn't have lost anything!.
The "tragic hero" type definitely HAS to be innocent, or at least on the side of good!. He has to do things for the right reasons, even if it all goes wrong!.Www@QuestionHome@Com
Aristotle, the ancient Greeks, and many contemporary authors wrote according to the classic definition of tragedy - someone otherwise admirable is destroyed by a disaster for which they are ultimately responsible!. When we talk about a "tragic hero," this is what we mean - that the person, through his own ignorance, caused his own downfall!. In the classical definition, someone who chose to do dangerous things and then suffered for it would not be considered tragic, but foolish!.
This works for Oedipus, of course, who left his family to avoid killing his the man he thought was his father and the woman he thought was his mother, only to do those very things to his real parents, in his own ignorance, later down the road!. It also works for Othello - he who is so trusting of his wife has his trust manipulated by his enemy!. Putting his faith in the wrong person leads to his destruction!. The irony of being brought down by something that should have been positive is essential to the classic understanding of tragedy!.
Www@QuestionHome@Com
Yes, the idea of tragic is still very possible!. Yes, this would still be considered tragic!. Each tragic character in a play has what is known as a "tragic flaw"!. If the flaw is not ignorance, it can be something else (e!.g!., pride)!.
Had Oedipus known what he was doing, it would have made the story different & his character less likable (he would not be a tragic hero), but it would not have removed the tragic aspect!.
The law does not dole out executions for speeding, and in any event the person who was in the car has died prematurely!. This is tragic whether or not a crime is also involved!.Www@QuestionHome@Com
In the case of the victim being knowingly guilty of a crime at the same time as something horrible happens to him (to make him a victim), it would cease to be a 'tragedy' and become 'an unfortunate occurrence'!. To me, something loses the shock factor as soon as I think "wow, that guy had it coming"!.
(That first sentence is awkward, but I don't know how to word it better!)Www@QuestionHome@Com
wow that question is thought provoking, tragedy is many sided!. yes recklessness reduces the tragedy of the victim but not the tragedy their death invokes upon family and loved ones, recklessness may even compound the tragedy the family feels because the tragedy was avoidable and all the more needless!.Www@QuestionHome@Com
I find EVERY pre-mature ending of a promising life tragic!.
We all make mistakes in life!.!.!.some innocently and some knowingly which is called taking risks!. Though some may feel that those flouting the rules and hence hastening their end, deserve it!. I still feel sad and find it tragic!. Every young life is full of possibilities, promises!. To be snuffed thus is tragic!.
Recently, a young star, only 19, who rose to fame as the winner of a singing competition in India, died by drowning in a swimming pool!. Everyone is shocked by the tragedy as he touched our hearts with his melodious voice!. But there are people who find it foolish that he even tried to enter the pool when he didn't know how to swim!. So, it is a foolish act but the death is a severe punishment and no less tragic!. He might have slipped to deeper waters when all he wanted was a dip in the shallow end!.
So I would say the idea is still possible in some hearts while others may just say "just desserts"! Www@QuestionHome@Com