Oedipus as Hero in Sophocles and Camus

Steve B. Heiny (Earlham College)

In his Myth of Sisyphus Camus argues for a heroism in the modern world. Concluding his argument with a sketch of Sisyphus and of Sophocles' Oedipus, he asserts, "Ancient wisdom confirms modern heroism" (Justin O'Brien, trans. The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays. By Albert Camus. New York: Vintage, 1983. 122). In this paper I argue 1) that Camus is mistaken in his claim that Sophocles supports his modern heroism, 2) that Camus' heroism is radically different from Sophocles' heroism, and 3) that we can appreciate each model of heroism more fully, bringing each into sharper relief, by comparing and contrasting one with the other.

"To a man devoid of blinders," says Camus, "there is no finer sight than that of the intelligence at grips with a reality that transcends it" (O'Brien 55). What Camus means by "at grips with" (aux prises) is revolting from, which is the central theme of the Myth. He says, "I don't know whether this world has a meaning that transcends it. But I know that I do not know that meaning and that it is impossible for me just now to know it" (O'Brien 51). Accordingly, Camus urges revolt—which he finds heroic (O'Brien 55)—from the possibility of any grand truth, whether religious or philosophical, in favor of a defiance, which he calls his "only truth" (sa seule vérité qui est le défi) (O'Brien 55). For Camus, Oedipus' statement at the beginning of Oedipus at Colonus that he is at peace, st°rgein (7), "drives out of this world (chasse de ce monde) a god who had come into it with dissatisfaction and a preference for futile sufferings. It makes of fate a human matter, which must be settled among men" (O'Brien 122). The Oedipus we meet in Camus is thus engaged in a revolution against the gods.

But as Griswold has said ("The Myth of Sisyphus: A Reconsideration." Philosophy in Context 7 [1978]: 59n23), Sophocles' Oedipus does not revolt. Sophocles would understand Camus' assertion that the hero is "at grips with a reality that transcends [him]," quite differently from Camus. For him "at grips with" would mean wrestling with to understand. Sophocles shows Oedipus—though he is not especially pious or worshipful—trying to do whatever the god tells him to do, kakÚw / mØ dr«n ín e‡hn pãnyÉ ˜sÉ ín dhlo› yeÒw (76-7). He insists that he "must hear" (ékoust°on 1170) what the herdsman has to say, even though it promises to confirm the god's horrifying prophecy. When others try to derail his unrelenting drive toward the truth, he defies them. Sophocles' Oedipus is heroic in his determination to discover who he is, which is nothing less than discovering the objective order known to the gods alone (Dodds. E.R. "On Misunderstanding the Oedipus Rex." Oedipus Tyrannus. Ed. and trans. Luci Berkowitz and Theodore F. Brunner. New York: Norton, 1970. 228-9)

While Camus claims Oedipus drives god out of his world, Sophocles shows Oedipus "tear[ing] away" the "veils of illusion" (Dodds 229) to see himself as the god sees him—in effect bringing the god's truth into his world. Knox says god—not Protagoras' man—is the measure of all things in Sophocles (Oedipus at Thebes 184), but Versényi's adjustment—that the measure is the hero "transcending himself" in discovering the truth known to the gods ("Oedipus: Tragedy of Self-Knowledge." Arion 1:3 [1962]: 28-9)—is even more faithful to the play. Camus' hero, on the other hand, cares nothing for any truth known to the gods. He revolts from them to find meaning where he can. Again, his one truth turns out to be his defiant revolt (O'Brien 55).

In a powerful argument that we should apply Camus to our study of Sophocles ("Oedipus and the Absurd Life." Berkowitz and Brunner 178-182), Cohen terms Oedipus "an absurd hero" (182). Camus' word "absurd" beautifully captures the "mocking" (Knox 182-4), infuriating, world of Oedipus, where moral action leads to guilt (774-797), but Oedipus fights his way to truth even here. And while both Sophocles and Camus celebrate courage as a component of heroism (Cohen 181-2), they also celebrate truth as another component—but here they differ radically. Sophocles' Oedipus transcends himself and gains dignity (Versényi 29) pursuing a truth known only to the gods. Camus' absurd hero, by contrast, revolts from the prospect of a transcendent truth for the sake of his dignity (O'Brien 93, 115), and claims his heroism in his revolt, which is his one truth.