hamartia in 'Oedipus Rex'
hamartia in 'Oedipus Rex'
A tragic flaw is the English equivalent of 'hamartia'. Pride tends to be the tragic flaw of the heroes of Greek tragedies. In the case of 'Oedipus Rex', the shoe fits.
Theban King Oedipus is so proud of his own intelligence that he thinks that he can escape a horrendous fate. He's so proud of his personal and professional accomplishments that he stops looking over his shoulder or looking gift horses in the mouth.
Instead, Oedipus needs to keep his guard up, to remain vigilant. He's foredoomed to kill his own father and marry his own mother. He needs to proceed carefully through every violent interaction with individuals old enough to be his father. He likewise needs to proceed carefully through every romantic attachment with individuals old enough to be his mother.
Depending on the edition and the translation that you use, hamartia, or tragic flaw as defined by Aristotle, can also possibly be defined as "sin", or "emission", or something else that underlies the character's mistakes in behaving the way they should.
His tragic flaws of which there are many can be his impatience at Creon for not returning soon enough:
I wonder anxiously what he is doing,
Too long more than is right, he's been away (Prologue 74-5)
Then when Creon comes back, Oedipus refuses to listening to him in private and he could have solved the entire situation by listen to Creon privately when Creon says:
Creon: If you will hear me with these men present
I'm ready to report--or go inside.
Oedipus: Speak out to all!The grief that burdens me
concerns these men more than it does my life. (Prologue 88-92)
And the rest is his tragedy. even accusing Tiresias and Creon of being in a conspiracy when Tiresias can't bear to tell Oedipus the truth.
The whole article is this:
The complex nature of Oedipus' "hamartia," is also important. The Greek term "hamartia," typically translated as "tragic flaw," actually is closer in meaning to a "mistake" or an "error," "failing," rather than an innate flaw. In Aristotle's understanding, all tragic heroes have a "hamartia," but this is not inherent in their characters, for then the audience would lose respect for them and be unable to pity them; likewise, if the hero's failing were entirely accidental and involuntary, the audience would not fear for the hero. Instead, the character's flaw must result from something that is also a central part of their virtue, which goes somewhat awry, usually due to a lack of knowledge. By defining the notion this way, Aristotle indicates that a truly tragic hero must have a failing that is neither idiosyncratic nor arbitrary, but is somehow more deeply imbedded -- a kind of human failing and human weakness. Oedipus fits this precisely, for his basic flaw is his lack of knowledge about his own identity. Moreover, no amount of foresight or preemptive action could remedy Oedipus' hamartia; unlike other tragic heroes, Oedipus bears no responsibility for his flaw. The audience fears for Oedipus because nothing he does can change the tragedy's outcome.
Hope this helps.