Wild Duck Journal # 2

Tracking the idea that ones sense of duty ultimately leads to something terrible or disasterous occuring.

In both plays this is shown by through the actions if multiple characters, whether minor or major. The authors of the plays chose to use this irony to show that when one decides to interfere with 'fate' or the gods decree that it will only end in misfortune. This misfortune can be given to the individual, to someone close to them, or the one they are trying to assist. This depiction of taking fate into your own hands exemplifies the theme that everyone has a set course in life and if a person is meant to do something it will occur no matter the actions of others. Though both plays take advantage of this idea, Oedipus and Wild Duck have differing results and approaches to the aid given.
Wild Duck illustrates how one man's choice to aid a friend from misfortune inflicted by his father, merely leads to more problems within that family. Gregers attempts to ease the suffering of his friends the Edkals, by giving advice and trying to reveal their pain. This ends badly in two respects, first this attempt breaks the bond between him and his own father. He no longer will live under his father's roof and he barely speaks to him. He holds a grudge against his father for betraying the Edkals during a business expedition, and will no longer trust the man. This hurts Gregers because deep down he is broken and finds it difficult to love and to open himself to others. This hinders his ability to adequately advise the Edkal family in their own misfortunes. Because he cannot properly help this causes great grief within the family. Before Gregers interfered they fought every once and a while but the bickering soon stopped and a loving environment was destroyed. With his meddling he creates confusion among to family members, and now they do not know how to act or what to think. Emotions become tense and it ends with more difficulties for the family to face. Ibsen uses this concept of trying to amend past wounds to demonstrate that what has happened is done. The past cannot be changed, and by trying to change the past one is trying to change fate. Fate cannot be altered or forced to cooperate, a person will experience certain things and when fate is tampered with it merely retaliates in greater force.
In Oedipus it is not fate alone that is the controlling force, it is the gods playing with people's lives. There are many examples of people trying to change fate and control the gods. First we see that the shepherd tries to stop Oedipus' fated death, by giving him to the king of Corinth. However this seemingly kind act turns out to be the worst fate for Oedipus to suffer, the curse given at his birth came true. All because the shepherd did not perform the task given him. Though it was the shepherd fate to not kill the baby, really it leads back to Jocasta and Laius trying to have Oedipus murdered in order to stop the curse. This brings the curse full circle and all the terrors proclaimed becomes reality. In another attempt to sway fate Oedipus runs away from his 'father' to insure he will not kill him. But during his travels he is attacked and murders a pack of men traveling. One of these men is King Laius, Oedipus' father, the first part of the curse is fulfilled. Later he travels to Thebes and becomes king, taking the wife of the former king. Bringing to pass the second part of the curse, the marriage to his mother. Now if the gods were not challenge then it is quiet possible that the curse would never have been fulfilled. Sophocles is stating, however, that when a person tries to take on too much power and challenges greater forces that it will always end in some terrible event.