`You are the curse, the corruption of the land!’. With these words, Tiresias, a blind prophet in
`Oedipus The King’ set the actions in play that would turn king to beggar within the day. Prophecy
and foreshadowing is an important part of playwriting, and adds an element of suspense that is not
possible any other way. Whether it be the witches of MacBeth, the ramblings of Tiresias in Oedipus:
The King, and Antigone, or whether it is the unrealized foreshadowing by Figaro in `The Marriage of
Figaro’, foreshadowing gives the reader or the audience something to puzzle themselves over, until
the play or novel is actually over. It would not be a stretch of the imagination to say that some
of the greatest plays ever written would be impotent if their elements of foreshadowing was removed.
Foreshadowing is defined, in Webster’s dictionary, as `to give a hint or suggestion of beforehand’
. In drama, foreshadowing is generally used for several purposes, including the creation of tension
, creation of atmosphere, and adds an element of credibility to a character. All of these are impor
tant elements of a play. However it is not hard to imagine a play in which more then half of the el
ements of a plot, namely exposition, discovery, point of attack, complication and crisis all be caus
ed by an act of foreshadowing or prophecy. Indeed, “Oedipus the King”, which was considered the gre
atest play in history by Aristotle, was one such play.
“Oedipus the King” was the story of the King
of Thebes, Oedipus, and his dark past history which no one, including himself to a point, was aware
of, one that involved abandonment, patricide and incest. Thebes was beset by a plague, and a deleg
ation was sent to Apollo, the Greek God of healing, where they received instructions to find the mur
derer of the previous king of Thebes, King Laius. This form of foreshadowing was necessary for the
storyline to have a starting place, and acts not only as foreshadowing, but also as discovery, becau
se it gave new information that moved the plot forwards. A problem with this is the fact that it re
quires an act of God, something that Aristotle frowned upon in his definitive text `Poetics’. In the
case of `Oedipus the King’, Sophocles managed to get around the problem by having the consultation
happen off-stage, but in a good drama, this `form’ of foresight is generally frowned upon. As such,
it should be avoided, unless where completely necessary, as in Oedipus.
Another type of foreshadow
ing showcased in `Oedipus the King’ was intended as a point of attack, and it was when the blind pro
phet Tiresias directly blamed King Oedipus for plague sent by Apollo. This form of `foreshadowing’
differs from the first one, which was intended only to give a starting point for the storyline. The
blame which is leveled against Oedipus was totally unexpected, and it left the audience in complete
suspense throughout the play, as they tried to figure out how Oedipus was involved in the plot to k
ill Laius. This helped build the suspense, and was what really started `the ball rolling’ so to spe
ak, in an effort to find out what the past of Oedipus actually was. This plot device grabbed the aud
ience’s attention, and adds complication, which is necessary in any play.
The third, and most highl
y ironic, foreshadowing happened when Oedipus, in a fit of anger, said to Tiresias, “You’ve lost you
r power, stone-blind, stone-deaf - senses, eyes blind as stone!”. By the end of the story, Oedipus
was almost exactly that. By day’s end, Oedipus no longer possessed the sense of sight, and had lost
his kingdom to his brother-in-law. A complete reversal of circumstances, which saw him, in the pla
y `Oedipus at Colonus’, enter the city the same way that Tiresias entered Oedipus’ court on that day
, blind as a bat, with a helper without whom he would be useless.
`The Marriage of Figaro’ has on
e obvious prophetic scene, where Figaro says “Look to the day’s work, Master Figaro! First bring fo
rward the hour of your wedding to make sure of the ceremony taking place, head off Marceline who’s s
o deucedly fond of you, pocket the money and the presents, thwart His Lordship’s little game, give M
aster Bazile good thrashing, ...” This scene of foresight was not the same as the two previously ci
ted examples. It is used twofold, first, and most obviously, it is used as comic relief, but second
, and more importantly, it is used to show the almost impossible odds that Figaro overcome at the ou
t right beginning of the story. Without the foreshadowing, the audience would be in the dark as to
Figaro’s plans, and an major irony of the story would be missing. That irony is that all of Figaro’
s carefully thought-out plans failed him when it was important, but despite it all, he still managed
to come out carrying out all the plans which he carefully laid out at the start. For instance, Figa
ro tried to stop Marceline from marrying him. Despite his best arguments, he was given the choice
of paying several hundred gold pieces or be married off to Marceline without a choice. His entire p
lan of stretching the law to his aims failed. However, an act of pure chance saved him from the unw
anted marriage when Marceline recognized Figaro to be her son. This all goes to say that while the
plans of Figaro may have failed him, his `vision’ of the day, so to speak, was still correct.
Anoth
er scene in `The Marriage of Figaro’ which may be considered foretelling the future was when Barthol
o said “...what mortal, abandoned of gods and women, could... it be?” when he was talking to Marceli
ne about finding a man to marry her. The statement is dripping with foresight. Bartholo had little
love for Figaro, and his discovery that Figaro was his son was not a comfortable realization. As s
uch, he might have been considered `abandoned of gods’, as he was given a harsh `punishment’ by `God
’, and was not helped nor given any escape routes. He was forced to admit parenthood someone he loa
thed. This line was highly ironic, because later on, Bartholo married Marceline, after he was `aban
doned by god’ so to speak by finding out that Figaro was his son.
If one was to take a look at the
scenes of foreshadowing in both plays, there are obviously some different, as the above examples sho
w, mainly due to the fact that `Oedipus the King’ was a tragedy, and `The Marriage of Figaro’ was a
comedy. However, there was one similarity that was found throughout, mainly that foreshadowing led
to the major events of the story, which caused major changes in the lives of characters, such as the
gouging of Oedipus’ eyes, the marriage of Bartholo to Marceline, so as to allow Figaro go get marri
ed, etc... This suggests that foreshadowing is generally used only when a major impact is about to
be made, so foreshadowing is a sign of something important yet to come.
In conclusion, dramatic for
eshadowing is one of the most important parts of both plays. Oedipus could not have even started if
it was not for the first prophecy given by Apollo, and `The Marriage of Figaro’ would have lost one
of its most sweetest ironies. Most importantly, it gives a taste of things to come, which in a good
play, should be enough to keep an audience listening.
------------------------------------------------------------- curse corruption land with these words tiresias blind prophet oedipus king actio
ns play that would turn king beggar within prophecy foreshadowing important part playwriting adds el
ement suspense that possible other whether witches macbeth ramblings tiresias oedipus king antigone
whether unrealized foreshadowing figaro marriage figaro foreshadowing gives reader audience somethin
g puzzle themselves over until play novel actually over would stretch imagination that some greatest
plays ever written would impotent their elements removed defined webster dictionary give hint sugge
stion beforehand drama generally used several purposes including creation tension creation atmospher
e adds element credibility character these important elements play however hard imagine which more t
hen half elements plot namely exposition discovery point attack complication crisis caused prophecy
indeed oedipus which considered greatest history aristotle such story thebes dark past history which
including himself point aware involved abandonment patricide incest thebes beset plague delegation
sent apollo greek healing where they received instructions find murderer previous thebes laius this
form necessary storyline have starting place acts only also discovery because gave information moved
plot forwards problem with this fact requires something aristotle frowned upon definitive text poet
ics case sophocles managed around problem having consultation happen stage good drama this form fore
sight generally frowned upon such should avoided unless where completely necessary another type show
cased intended point attack when blind prophet tiresias directly blamed plague sent apollo form diff
ers from first intended only give starting storyline blame leveled against totally unexpected left a
udience complete suspense throughout they tried figure involved plot kill laius helped build suspens
e what really started ball rolling speak effort find what past actually device grabbed audience atte
ntion adds complication necessary third most highly ironic happened when anger said lost your power
stone blind stone deaf senses eyes stone story almost exactly longer possessed sense sight lost king
dom brother complete reversal circumstances colonus enter city same entered court with helper withou
t whom useless marriage figaro obvious prophetic scene where says look work master first bring forwa
rd hour your wedding make sure ceremony taking place head marceline deucedly fond pocket money prese
nts thwart lordship little game give master bazile good thrashing scene foresight same previously ci
ted examples used twofold first most obviously used comic relief second more importantly show almost
impossible odds overcome right beginning story without dark plans major irony missing irony careful
ly thought plans failed when important despite still managed come carrying plans carefully laid star
t instance tried stop marceline from marrying despite best arguments given choice paying several hun
dred gold pieces married marceline without choice entire plan stretching aims failed however pure ch
ance saved from unwanted marriage recognized goes while have failed vision speak still correct anoth
er scene considered foretelling future bartholo said what mortal abandoned gods women could talking
about finding marry statement dripping foresight bartholo little love discovery comfortable realizat
ion such might have been considered abandoned gods given harsh punishment helped given escape routes
forced admit parenthood someone loathed line highly ironic because later bartholo married after aba
ndoned speak finding take look scenes both plays there obviously some different above examples show
mainly fact tragedy comedy however there similarity found throughout mainly major events caused majo
r changes lives characters gouging eyes allow married suggests generally only impact about made sign
something come conclusion dramatic most parts both plays could even started prophecy apollo lost sw
eetest ironies importantly gives taste things come good should enough keep listeningEssay, essays, t
ermpaper, term paper, termpapers, term papers, book reports, study, college, thesis, dessertation, t
est answers, free research, book research, study help, download essay, download term papers