Many say that the story of Oedipus, written by Sophocles, is argumentative between the ideas of innocence and guilt of the main character, Oedipus. The actual killing of the King of Thebes, Laius and his four servants might be an extreme display of Oedipus' murderous temperament, and his dealings of incest with the Queen Jocasta may also seem blameworthy; but his lack of knowledge of the fact they were his parents makes it seem as if he is not at fault. After being assumed guilty of the death of his father and the act of incest with his mother, in reality, Oedipus's actions were just unfortunate, unknown, and innocent unbeknownst to him.
             In the critical analysis of P.H. Vellacott, The Guilt of Oedipus, he states his opinion that Oedipus is to blame for his misfortune. He shows that Oedipus' character traits are shown most clearly during his spiraling downfall, thinking he is a simple man who knows nothing, yet knowing more than he realizes by the end of the story. Throughout the story, Vellacott shows that Oedipus' haste or lack of common sense is most evident. It is especially obvious when he goes against the oracle's warning. Vellacott's examination of this shows how Oedipus makes himself seem guilty.
             In addition to Vellacott's opinions, similar ideas are expressed in the paper written by Philip Wheelwright, The Guilt of Oedipus. Here, Wheelwright explains how Oedipus' guilt is due to his ignorance. He argues that even though the warning of the oracle should show Oedipus' innocence, it shows the complete opposite. Oedipus was not considered innocent under Greek law, because to the Greeks the act counted, not the motive. Wheelwright seems to argue with the Greek complex of the story causing Oedipus to be guilty of his actions.
             On the contrary of Vellacott and Wheelwright 's observations, many argue that Oedipus' expiration was caused simply because of his arr...