Oedipus and batman compared

The tragic hero of Hamlet finds himself burdened with the task of avenging his father's death from the start of the play, and is not himself the source of the pollution of regicide, while Oedipus is of course the unwitting fashioner of his own doom, which is unveiled to him through recognition and repentance. Sophocles has Oedipus foretelling his own tragedy when speaking to the people of Thebes. The city suffers because of the pollution of Oedipus, and irony is shown when Oedipus suggest that by avenging Laius he will protect himself, or that by getting children upon Jocasta, the dead king's wife, he will be taking the place of the son of Laius, which, unknowingly, is himself.

Oedipus and batman compared

The fascination of the latest cinema version of Batman, Batman Begins directed by Christopher Nolan consists in its mitigated return to the question of Good. The film still belongs to the. Yet the film leaves open the possibilitity of agency which Capitalist Realism forecloses. First, there is his biological father, Thomas Wayne, a rose-tinted, soft focus moral paragon, the very personification of philanthropic Capital, the 'man who built Gotham'.

In keeping with the Batman myth established in the 30's Detective Comics, Wayne Pere is killed in a random street robbery, surviving only as a moral wraith tormenting the conscience of his orphaned son. Second, there is R'as Al Ghul, who in Nolan's film is Wayne's hyperstitional [5] mentor-guru, a Terroristic figure who represents a ruthless ethical code completely opposed to the benevolent paternalism of Thomas Wayne.

Bruce is assisted in the struggle fought out in his own pysche between these two Father figures by a third, Michael Caine's Alfred, the 'maternal' carer who offers the young Bruce unconditional love. The struggle between Fathers is doubled by the conflict between Fear and Justice that has been integral to the Batman mythos since it first appeared in The challenge for Bruce Wayne in Batman Begins is not only to best Fear, as wielded by the Miller-invented crime boss Falcone and the Scarecrow with his 'weaponized hallucinogens', but to identify Justice, which, as the young Wayne must learn, cannot be equated with revenge.

Echoing the origin story as recounted in Detective Comics inwhich has Bruce famously declare, "Criminals are a superstitious cowardly lot, so my disguise must be able to strike terror into their hearts", Nolan's Wayne dedicates himself to turning fear against those who use it.

Yet Nolan's version makes the origin story both more Oedipal and more anti-Oedipal than it appeared in Detective Comics. In the original comic, Bruce settles upon the name 'Batman' when a single Bat flies into his room. Nolan's rendering of Batman's primal scene is significantly different, in that it takes place outside the family home, beyond the realm of the Oedipal, in a cave in the capacious grounds of Wayne Manor, and not with a single bat but with a whole Deleuzian pack.

Batman remains a thoroughly Oedipal figure as Batman Begins leaves us no doubt. Bruce is at the opera when the sight of bat-like figures on stage drives him to nag his parents until they leave the theatre and are killed.

The Gothic and the Oedipal elements of the Batman mythos were entwined immediately, on the two pages of Detective Comics on which Batman's origin was first told. As Kim Newman identifies, Wayne's epiphanic revelation that 'I must be a terrible creature of the night I shall become a BAT Dead, they're dead' and 'swears by [their deaths] to avenge [them] by spending the rest of my life warring on all criminals'.

As we've already seen, Miller's rendition of Batman can be seen as in many ways a postmodern investigation of this parallel. Remarks made by Alenka Zupancic suggest a possible hidden source for the complicity between Batman and noir: Some have gone even further, and seen in Oedipus the King the prototype of the noir genre.

Thus Oedipus the King appeared in the 'noir series' of French publisher Gallimard 'translated from the myth' by Didier Lamaison ' Zupancic, Ultimately, however, the problem for Batman is that he remains an Oedipus who not gone through the Oedipus complex. As Zupancic points out, the Oedipus complex turns on the discrepancy between the Symbolic and the empirical father: For Zupancic, the standard rendering of the 'typical genesis of subjectivity' has it that the child first of all encounters the Symbolic father and then comes to learn that this mighty figure is a 'simple, more or less decent man'.

Yet, as Zupancic establishes, this trajectory is the exact inverse of the one which Oedipus pursues. Oedipus begins by encountering an 'rude old man at the crossroads' and only later does he learn that this 'simple man', this 'vulgar creature', was the Father.

Thus 'Oedipus travels the path of initiation of 'symbolization' in reverse and, in so doing, he encounters the radical contingency of the Meaning borne by the symbolic. The young Wayne is convinced that his father's death is his fault, but Al Ghul tries to convince him that his parents' death is his father's responsibility because the good-natured and liberal Thomas Wayne did not know how to Act; he was a weak-willed failure.

Yet Bruce refuses to go through this initiation and retains loyalty to the 'Name of the Father' while Al Ghul remains a figure of excess and Evil.

The question Al Ghul poses to Bruce is: Wayne is forced to decide: The ultimate Evil in the film turns out to originate from Ghul's excessive zeal, not from some hoaky diabolism nor from some psycho-biographical happenstance. For Zizek, 'Anakin [Skywalker] should have become a monster out his very excessive attachment with seeing Evil everywhere and fighting it' but '[i]nstead of focusing on Anakin's hubris as an overwhelming desire to intervene, to do Good, to go to the end for those he loves and thus fall to the Dark Side, Anakin is simply shown as an indecisive warrior who is gradually sliding into Evil by giving way to the temptation of Power, by falling under the spell of the evil Emperor.

The takeover of Wayne Industries by shareholder capital means that Thomas's name has been stolen.Free My Last Duchess papers, essays, and research papers.

Oedipus and batman compared

Reviews, essays, books and the arts: the leading international weekly for literary culture. Batman Begins is a superhero film based on the DC Comics character Batman, directed by Christopher Nolan and written by Nolan and David S.

Oedipus and batman compared

ashio-midori.com stars Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Liam Neeson, Katie Holmes, Gary Oldman, Cillian Murphy, Tom Wilkinson, Rutger Hauer, Ken Watanabe, and Morgan ashio-midori.com film reboots the Batman .

Oedipus and Batman Great and tragic love is something that happens to everyone in their life time. In the two completely different stories of Oedipus and Batman they both have them same story line.

Aug 05,  · If Oedipus and Batman met each other, they would be chums. The only way they truly differ is their FATE. More importantly, they differ in their culture's understanding of fate.

Unpacking their fate relationship illuminates the modern world. Macbeth and Batman share many similarities that surprisingly do not appeal to most individuals, most teacher or students would not even try to find a comparison between Batman and Macbeth because of the lack of ambition, but frankly there are many comparisons such as the influence of many dark supernatural forces that foresee chaos, also the hero to villain concept and the tragic past and /5(1).

Batman is the Ying. Oedipus is the Yang. | the West was Written