In Oedipus the King, it argues that they are the victims of a deterministic fate. At the end of the script, the tragic prophecy comes true because of what Laius had done to change his fate. Knowing the end of Oedipus the King, the efforts the characters made to change their fate make me feel dramatic irony.
While reading, I always wonder that if Oedipus’s fate, had not been told, would this story still be a tragedy? I think fate likes the theory of Schrödinger's cat. Before fate is revealed, people will never know if their lives fit with their fate. We can believe we shape our destinies. However, once fate is told out, it is determined. No matter how hard we try to escape from fate, it is only part of our destiny.
As we can see, all of the characters, whether Laius, Jocasta, or Oedipus, are not willing to obey their destiny. Although Jocasta has no power to make decisions, she disbelieves in fates. The king Laius wants to shape his fate; therefore, he abandons Oedipus. At that moment, the tragic ending has been decided. Oedipus isn’t willing to believe his fate when he was told by Pythia and Tiresias. It shows the contrast between fate and human free will. He refuses to recognize his fate. It implies he is still blind. Compared to the end, he blinds himself, but Oedipus finally realizing that human beings can not change their fates. Even they control some events in their life, for example, Oedipus decides how he should atone, they still suffer from destiny, and the cruel end is doomed to happen. soa natural?