Sigmund Freud develops the notion of higher fate forces that man seems to confront as part of reality. This discussion highlights a personal take on Freud’s interpretation and how it has become relevant in the 21st century. In interpreting Oedipus Tyrannus, Sigmund Freud focuses on the entire experience as a tragedy of fate. The reality seems to be bent against the man subject to the gods’ will. The futile endeavors of humans to evade the evil that threatens them are not sufficient to escape one’s fate. Freud rightly recognizes that the Oedipus myth is relevant to contemporary audiences, particularly in the early 20th century. Today’s audience is moved by the struggle between destiny and free choice since Oedipus’s fate may be our own.
Today, the modern world is dealing with a failure in leadership and a concurrent health crisis threatening the economy. In the play, the city deals with a plague and a blind administration that does not share its people’s reality. The authorities in public health reacted slowly to initial reports that persons without symptoms may transmit the novel coronavirus from China and one incident from Germany. Despite years of warnings, government and international health institutions throughout the globe reacted slowly and haphazardly to the epidemic, as shown by a yearlong series of failures. The blind leadership may have accelerated the fate to meet the modern world. Like in the play, the tragedy of fate befalls the globe as a whole, and a new plague emerges in the world to disrupt the global social and economic order. The experience relates with Sigmund Freud’s observation that maybe the gods’ supreme will always outdo humankind’s vain attempts to escape evil.
The world is facing one of the most trying times with the economic fallouts from the conflicts in Europe and the ongoing health crisis. The observation that the Oedipus Tyrannus fits the 21st century with the recent problems people have and still go through is justified. It is agreeable that human beings have the propensity to be overconfident in their understanding, turning a blind eye to important issues outside our scope. The post is relatable as with the whole covid-19 situation, leaders have relied on their wisdom, making costly mistakes. The interpretation of the play in the context of the current reality is justified, particularly with the observation that whoever is calling the shots is being Oedipus politically. The leaders have everything right in front of them with facts, but they do not believe in other informed opinions from the opposition.
The interpretation of the drama in the context of the current global health crisis is relatable. The post rightly notes that the drama may explain how the United States and its citizens experienced the pandemic. COVID ravaged the globe, causing the deaths of countless people due to negligence within the leadership ranks. As in the play, the United States leadership was blind to the severity of the disease, ignoring calls for more aggressive preventive actions. Leadership was not where it should have been in controlling the impact of the virus outbreak. The effect is that the world is still mired in old mentalities reinforced by obsolete development paradigms. Our leaders lack the qualities of resiliency, creativity, and inspiration. The discussion accurately observes that, similar to the monarch in the play, the leadership in the White House did not care to listen to the professionals.
The dynamics in leadership, global health crises, and geopolitical conflicts borrow from the play. The post appropriately acknowledges that the 21 century of the play has some similarities with the United States in 2020. The coronavirus, like the plague, killed many people, with some blaming the leader that played down the severity of the virus. The discussion recognizes the adverse effects of poor leadership, noting that having a figuratively blind leader is dangerous. The concerns are valid, noting that a leader who blinds himself in the act of selfishness, just like in the play, cannot take responsibility for their actions. Similar to the experience in the play, the discussion touches on critical issues in leadership, including the need for coordination and proactive action.
The discussion highlights an essential difference between the current reality and the play’s content regarding access to technology. It is agreeable that dealing with a plague in the 21st century would be nothing compared to attempting to control an epidemic in the past. The discussion correctly notes that in the past, the technology available today was not changing the experiences. However, the discussion acknowledges similarities in need for proper leadership in utilizing available resources to manage a crisis. Despite access to technology, the COVID-19 pandemic breached global power’s health defenses, devastating the economy and lives of people. The discussion is informative as it appropriately emphasizes that out of blindness toward the people, 21st-century leaders seem to have failed to represent the needs of communities, including in the United States.