Here is a very smart and original response paper on Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex.
Dr. B.

The Root of Foreclosure
There are five choral odes within Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex and in the central choral ode is the line “[Hybris] sires the tyrant….” According to Aristotle, the first word, hybris, is an act of physical or verbal assault that brings shame to the victim. However, in Athenian law, hybris was much more than mere assault because someone who gets away with hybris often places himself within a position of superiority; this is why the Chorus says that hybris sires the tyrant. The idea of hybris appears to have originally referred to cultivated plants that grew beyond their designated boundaries and, thus, had to be pruned. Pruning is a necessary aspect of gardening; if the gardener fails to prune when needed, a plant could potentially overrun the garden and destroy it.

The fact that the second word in this sentence is “sire” is unbelievably astounding to me. Not only is this word used as a respectful form of address for someone in a position of power, i.e. a king, it also refers to the male parent (father). Like a gardener, a king is charged with the protection of the country (the garden), he is expected to rule justly (prune), and to provide heirs to stabilize the throne (to ensure future success of the garden). However, in an attempt to save his own life, “King” Laius chooses not to provide an heir. In a selfish act of hybris, Laius pierces his son’s ankles and sends him away to die, but Oedipus doesn’t die. He’s forced to live with the shame of his ankle marks; he even refers to it as the “terrible disgrace I took from my cradle.”

One of the most famous lines from the movie “The Matrix” is after Neo breaks the vase and the Oracle tells him, “Oh, what’s really going to bake your noodle later on is, would you still have broken it if I hadn’t said anything?” In Oedipus Rex, would the prophecy have come true if Laius hadn’t been told of it? Personally, I doubt that it would have. Aside from the fact that Oedipus flees from those whom he believes to be his parents upon hearing the prophecy, the basis of my argument hinges on the notions behind circumcision. When a son is eight days old, he is circumcised and given his name or names. The book, Symbols of Judaism states, “Circumcision is a way of introducing language into the body and bringing the body of the infant into the sphere of language…[it] enables human beings to enter into the dimension of language.” I would argue that circumcision is the human form of pruning; it is designed to prevent the child (plant) from overstepping his boundaries (becoming a hybris) by means of connecting the son to the father. This ritual of symbolic pruning essentially establishes paternal authority (though it does not establish paternity) and marks the beginning of what will hopefully become a healthy relationship with the law. I would also argue that it was Polybus, not Laius, who circumcised Oedipus because Oedipus was not given his name until he was adopted. Oedipus grew up having a healthy relationship with Polybus, his “father,” but the moment Polybus’ paternity is called into question, that paternal authority is severely undermined. Almost overnight, Oedipus becomes a tyrant. Before he can even say “Hybris,” he meets King Laius at the place where three roads meet (Oedipus, Laius, and Polybus arguably being the metaphorical three roads). Even though Laius has paternity over Oedipus, he does not have paternal authority because he failed to circumcise his son. The result is that – like a child screaming, “I don’t have to listen to you! You’re not my dad!” – Oedipus disobeys him and kills him. Oedipus doesn’t know to whom he should listen; one father has paternity, the other had paternal authority. If one is called into question (or is never established), foreclosure results and the child becomes a hybris. If a father is continually absent, how can he establish paternal authority? The lack of paternal authority is thus the root of foreclosure and hybris.

Hybris, in the line of Cadmus, begins with Laius and carries over to Oedipus. Laius committed an act of hybris the moment he became selfish and placed himself before the “fatherland.” Tragically, the notion that the son must pay for the sins of the father becomes true in a very evident manner in Sophocles’ Play. As a result, because the gods know that hybris will only breed tragedy and destruction for those involved, they “prune” the line of Cadmus and end it.