How are the differences between the play and the film 'Oedipus Rex' significant?

Answer 1

Yes, some of the differences between the written and the viewed versions of the play 'Oedipus Rex' may be significant. At the same time, no, others may not be significant, particularly in regard to the 1957 version directed by Sir William Tyrone Guthrie [July 2, 1900-May 15, 1971]. But if the differences in the Guthrie film are typical of those between filmed, read and staged versions, then they don't change the overall impact of the characters and the story on the reading and viewing audience.

First, a structurally significant difference is an explanatory narrative that's given at the beginning of the film. There's no such equivalent in the play, which begins with the expected prologue.

Second, another structurally significant difference is the crowd of Thebans having a lengthy dialogue at the beginning of the actual performance in the film. Again, there's no equivalent in the play by Sophocles [496 B.C.E.-406 B.C.E.].

Third, an insignificant difference is the film using the play's English translation by William Butler Yeats [June 13, 1865-January 28, 1939].

But at the same time, the Yeats' translation is used in significantly different ways. For example, the film doesn't have the translated passages include Theban King Oedipus' pivotal curse upon himself. So the audience doesn't know that Oedipus calls the same curse upon himself as upon the harborers of the killers of Theban King Laius should he host the murderer as a guest in his own house and with his own knowledge.

The film likewise has the translation omit Theban King Creon's pivotal comment about being forced to do things against his will should he plot to become a solely reigning sovereign.

And the film has the translation omit Oedipus' having to ask for a description of Laius. Instead, the film has Jocasta give the non sequitur information in response to Oedipus' asking what Zeus' plans for him could be. This omission may or may not be considered significant.

Fourth, an insignificant difference is the film's omitting the role of the boy who guides Teiresias the blind prophet into Oedipus' presence.

Fifth, a structurally significant difference is the film dividing the parts for the chorus among several members of the crowd. So the choral odes of the play become crowd odes in the film.

Sixth, an insignificant difference is the film having Teiresias lying on the ground when he speaks his parting words about his lack of prophetic skills only being evidenced should his prophecies fail to come to pass. It's unlikely that the ancient Greeks would have had the blind Teiresias speak his words other than standing up. It especially is awkward for him in the film, because he comes and goes without the play's provision for a boy guide.

Seventh, the film has all of the choral odes spoken except for the half sung last ode. In fact, ancient Greeks expected the play to be performed with the chorus singing and dancing through their odes. This may or may not be considered significant.

Answer 2

h