Mad King Ludwig II was an eccentric individual whose legacy is intertwined with the history of art and architecture, as he commissioned the construction of several extravagant fantasy castles, the most famous being Neuschwanstein.

In 1869, "Ludwig oversaw the laying of the cornerstone for Neuschwanstein Castle on a breathtaking mountaintop site overlooking his childhood home, the castle his father had built at Hohenschwangau." The walls of Neuschwanstein are adorned with murals depicting scenes from many of Richard Wagner's operas.

King Ludwig was an ardent fan of the famous composer Richard Wagner and professed his love to him stating " An earthly being cannot match up to a divine spirit", the king wrote to Wagner, "But it can love; it can venerate. You are my first love , my only love, and always will be".

Wagner's extravagant demands were always met by King Ludwig and he prospered because of it. He was able to complete his life's work, "The Ring Cycle," and he made plans to present it in a one of a kind theater built especially for his use.

The Written Words of Richard Wagner

Much to the surprise of gigantic Lord of the Rings fans, the original Ring was written and performed by Richard Wagner in the opera house in Bayreuth. J.R. Tolkien used every character, troll, and prop in the series of books as well as the movie. The works of Richard Wagner, which took him a great part of his life, were initially ripped from his fingers so I am curious to see what J.R. Tolkien would have been able to write without the the entire story already written for him by Wagner.

The corruption that continued behind the walls of the castle initially led to the mysterious disappearance of King Ludwig.

"On June 13, around 6:00 pm, Ludwig asked Gudden to accompany him on a walk
along the shore of Lake Starnberg. Gudden agreed, and told the guards not to follow them. The two men never returned. At 11:30 that night, searchers found both the king and Gudden dead, floating in the shallow water near the shore. Ludwig's death was officially ruled a suicide by drowning, but this has been questioned. Ludwig  was known to be a strong swimmer, the water was less than waist-deep where his body was found, and the official autopsy report indicated that no water was found in his lungs."

All pictures compliments of Flickr.

Also check out these historical pieces:

Grand Historia Photography: Six Powerful and Emotional Acts of Disaster and Death

15 Extravagantly Photographical Tales of Versailles in France

Afghanistan: Hidden Treasures From One of the World’s Richest Countries in Cultural Heritage

Eight Miraculously Distinctive Architectural Designs of Churches in Italy: From Byzantine to Baroque

Hamlet is usually seen as a philosophical character. He is always spilling out ideas throughout his soliloquies that can be classified as existentialist or skeptical at best. One of the classic examples in of his relativist ideas is seen in the quote “There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so” (Weller, Hamlet, Act II, scene II). What makes the skeptics and the scholars equally passionate is his view towards death and its evolution.

In the beginning of the play, we can see his outright obsession with death. Despite the fact that even his friends were afraid of the ghost, Hamlet decides to speak to the ghost and then follows the ghost when it beckons to him. The only line that even hinted to his hesitation to follow the ghost is seen when he says “Angels and ministers of grace defend us” (Weller, Hamlet, Act I, Scene 1V). But even that cannot be seen as a sign of being afraid since Hamlet fearlessly talked to the ghost and then followed it - something no man would do in his right mind. This is just a sign of what is troubling his thoughts, as Marcellus said in Act I, “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”

Then later when he organizes the play to expose his uncle's guilt and then receives the proof he needed, we see a Hamlet deeply troubled. Thus begins his contemplation of suicide when he realizes the magnitude of his troubles. To be or not to be soliloquy deals with this contemplation of suicide. Hamlet is asking which is more preferable, to suffer in one's own mind or take a stand against a sea of troubles. He realizes that the situation he is in now is forcing his hand to act - he either must remain quiet or forget all that happened and thus suffer or must work to expose and kill his uncle.

Hamlet's dilemma is the pain of life that he must endure or the uncertainty of death. We see that Hamlet is dissatisfied with life and lists many things that trouble him but he is not sure what death will bring him. He is thinking that the experience of death itself maybe worse than life itself. Hamlet knows that the church explicitly forbids suicide because then your soul will be in eternal damnation. Thus the famous quote from the bible, “the wages of sin is death.” For Hamlet, death is an undiscovered country where no traveler returns. It is a one way ticket where there are no take-backs - a possibility that life might be bad but death could be worse.

Hamlet's mind begins to unravel further as he tries to comprehend death. In Act IV, Scene III, we see a hamlet that is mentally disturbed. When asked of death, he explains it in the most crude and unfashionable way. He says that we are all destined for death, to be eaten by maggots. Your worm is the only emperor of your diet. Meaning you are eating someone else's death body because the worms broke down that dead body and how you will just fatten yourself up for the worms. This shows a completion alienation of Hamlet from his earlier self, a new stage in his personal development or rather his devolution. He is talking of death itself as nothing to be too mindful of, a natural process that he describes in the most dehumanizing way. When his friends Guildenstern and Rosencrantz were killed, there was no mourning for them from Hamlet - just that they were simply getting in his way (Weller, Act V, Scene II). A dehumanizing and numbing effect that has enveloped Hamlet's sensitiveness, a sign for his passionate madness. This is shown when Hamlet did not kill his uncle Claudius while in confession because he wanted to not only kill the man but to “damn his soul as well” (Detmold, pg. 127).

Later in Act V, we see a completely transformed Hamlet who is hardened about his feelings and who has made peace with the universe. In Act V, Scene II, Hamlet says “If it be not now, yet it will come. The readiness is all.” He is talking about his death, that he has accepted his fate. His reasoning is that death will come to everyone; it is just a matter of being ready for it. If it is indeed his destiny to die in a duel with Laertes, then so be it. Here we see a Hamlet that is beyond contemplation of his death or the afterlife. We see someone who simply accepted the reality has it is and is now moving on with his plans for revenge. His fear is death is no longer a obstacle because he has already taken many lives and he has made the reasoning that no matter what exists in the afterlife, he will continue to exist. We see a man who has completely come to terms with his own mortality and has surrendered his life to where fate or death takes him.

To be or not to be soliloquy of Hamlet is just a small marker in the long road of his devolution into madness and a dehumanized soul. His obsessions and contemplation of death leads to his resigning himself to his fate, whatever that may be. Throughout the play, his questioning mentality about the nature of death gets changed to a point where at the end; he simply has no more objections to the very notion of death itself. Even when his friend Horatio tries to tell him of the dangers to his life, Hamlet is unconcerned. However, if we can speculate, we can be sure that the Hamlet from Scene I would have certainly objected to what Hamlet from Scene V has done. This shows the breakdown of rationality and a man who has come to terms with life, the universe and his own mortality.

 

One of the chorus' roles in the play is to change the plot and affect the main characters' thoughts and actions. The chorus urges moderation for Oedipus and tries to steer him in the right direction. While Tiresias and Oedipus are fighting the chorus tries to stop them and solve the problem, "If we may make a suggestion-both his words and yours, Oedipus, seem to have been spoken in anger. This sort of talk is not what we need-what we must think of is how to solve the problem set by the god's oracle." (27). Although the chorus gives good advice throughout the play, Oedipus does not listen, but tries to prove Tiresias wrong and evade his fate by proving he did not kill Laius. One of the roles of the chorus is to try to help Oedipus, but he does not listen.

While Oedipus is changing throughout the play as more of his past is revealed to him, the chorus changes in the same ways. In the beginning of the play, the chorus disagrees with Oedipus and tries to persuade him otherwise, but he pursues his fate. Near the end of the play when Oedipus learns his fate and gouges out his eyes, the chorus feels pity for him, because he pursued his fate, found it, and learned he lived a very terrible life, "O suffering dreadful for mankind to see, most dreadful of all I ever saw...I pity you." (95). The chorus also changes in that they feel bad for Oedipus and are relieved that he finally found his fate, "And Oedipus-poor wretched Oedipus- has he now some rest from pain?" (94).

The chorus also acts to evoke emotion from the audience, and to intensify these emotions. Since the chorus is starving, poor, and plagued, they evoke a feeling of pity from the audience. They also evoke hatred or anger towards Oedipus and intensify the audience's dislike of him because he is the ruler of a kingdom whose people are living in terrible conditions, "There is no way to count the pains we suffer. All our people are sick. There is no sword of thought which will protect us. The fruits of our famous land do not ripen. Our women cannot ease their labor pains by giving birth...The city is dying, the deaths cannot be counted." (12).

The chorus plays a large part in shaping the plot of this play, and evoking emotion from the audience. They change alongside the tragic hero, cause the audience to dislike him, and try to help Oedipus to do the right thing.

The theme of sight vs. blindness is a very prevalent theme in Oedipus the King. The two most affected characters by this main theme are Oedipus, the king, and Tiresias, the blind seer. Oedipus is affected because while he is not literally blind, he is blinded by ambition to find the killer of Laius, and blind to what is happening around him. Tiresias, who is actually blind, is a prophet and understands what is happening around him. Oedipus does not understand what is happening around him, but can see, while Tiresias is the opposite.

Oedipus, whose eyes are fully functional, does not see how corrupt the life he has been living is. Tiresias, a seer, tells him his destiny, and he fails to see that it is the truth. Tiresias also says, "You do not see the evil in which you live." (25). Oedipus questions Tiresias and calls him a liar, "You have no power or truth. You are blind, your ears and mind as well as eyes." (25). Oedipus and all of the other characters in the play who can see with their eyes, are blind to their current circumstances and cannot see the truth.

Tiresias, who is blind, but knows the truth, is the only person in the play who can figuratively "see." When Tiresias gives Oedipus his prophecy, Oedipus is flabbergasted and ignores what Tiresias says, "Say what you like. It will all be meaningless." (25). Oedipus accuses Tiresias of making up his prophecy, showing how blind to the circumstances he is, "Was it Creon, or you, that invented this story?" (26). Tiresias, the blind man, sees and understands the circumstances of the kingdom Oedipus is living in, while Oedipus, who can see and lives there, does not.

The theme of sight vs. blindness also creates a very ironic situation in the play. Tiresias, a blind seer, sees and reveals the truth to Oedipus, who can see, but does not understand what is happening around him. Tiresias provides a very clear example of this ironic situation in saying, "I am what I am-a fool to you, so it seems, but the parents who brought you into the world thought me sensible enough." (29). Tiresias is a prophet and he speaks the truth, so most people believe him, but Oedipus does not because he is blind to the world around him. The irony Tiresias is involved in is one in which a blind man reveals the truth to a man who can see.

In the play Oedipus The King people who can physically see are blind to the truth and what is happening around them. People who are physically blind can see the truth.

In a dimly-lit chamber a handsome youth paces back and forth. Silently, he contemplates his fate. The illegitimate son of the Duke of Gloucester regrets his brother's preponderance, and he resolves to gain what he thinks is his own.

Edmund is one of the most startling characters of Shakespeare's creation. The young man's first scene is quite pitiful; however, this pity soon turns into disgust when Edmund reveals his plan of action. To gain what he wants, Edmund, from his own self-will, decides to get rid of his brother, Edgar. He succeeds in writing a letter in his brother's hand, which betrays Edgar as wanting to kill Gloucester; thus, “Edmund the base/ Shall to the legitimate.” (I, ii)

Evil feeds on itself, as Edmund nears his goal. Being in line for the dukedom is not enough, for he wishes to become the Duke of Gloucester as soon as he can; accordingly, he takes on the view of which he falsely accused his brother. He says to his father,

I have heard him oft maintain
it to be fit, that, sons of perfect
age, and fathers declining, the father
should be as ward to the son, and
the son manage his revenue (I, ii)

The opportunity presents itself when Gloucester places trust in his son. Edmund takes advantage of this, and in one sordid act betrays both his father and the invading French army. He, then, in a calm voice is able to say, “The younger rises when the old doth fall.” (III, iii)

The most heinous decision of Edmund occurs during his debut as the new Duke of Gloucester. Even though Albany wishes to make amends with Lear and Cordelia, Edmund resolves that they shall, “Shall never see his pardon” (V, i). He wants all power for himself and will spare nothing to get it. As soon as the King and his daughter are captured, he makes sure that his “writ/ Is on the life of Lear and of Cordelia.” (V, iii)

Edmund is arguably the blackest of all Shakespeare's characters. The strangest of all is that at the apex of Edmund's life, while fighting his brother, he realizes his mistake: in his own words, “The wheel has come full circle” (ibid.). This small glimmer of light shows that he is not all black. Even in the vilest person, there is still some good.

As the idea of fate is brought forth by Oedipus going to the Oracle, it is clear that Oedipus believes in the idea of fate but feels more strongly in himself than in the idea of fate. Upon realizing that what the Oracle has said is coming true, the truth of what has happened has still not struck home, he will not abandon his faith in himself but will see himself out to the end. To the very end of this play, Oedipus is still insisting that he is the one who has blinded himself, that he will accept his exile, that he is fully prepared to accept the self-destructive consequences of what he has done. I have observed that one key to Oedipus's character is that he will not compromise. He must see life through on his own terms, no matter what the cost. He is prepared to acknowledge no authority outside his own will. Hence, if he is to be satisfied the world must answer to him. As his situation gets more complicated and things do not work out as he has imagined they might, Oedipus does not adapt, change, and learn. He becomes more and more determined to see the problem through on his own terms; he becomes increasingly inflexible. Having accepted the responsibility for saving Thebes, he will on his own see the matter through, without compromise, without lies, without deceit. Anyone who suggests that he proceed differently is simply an obstacle who must be overcome. That attitude, as we know, leads to the most horrific conclusions.

The use of many types of irony such as verbal, dramatic, and situational ad to the complexity of the book. For example, when Oedipus says: ?

So will I fight on the gods? side,
And on the side of the slain man!
But my curse be on the one who did this, whether he is alone
Or conceals his share in it with others.
Let him be free of no misery if he share my house
Or sit at my hearth and I have knowledge of it.
On myself may it fall, as I have called it down!

Oedipus makes this statement about the killer of King Lauis, cursing the killer not knowing he was the killer. This is an example of dramatic irony. Another example of irony is that when towards the end Oedipus gouges his eyes out and becomes blind. This is an example of irony because Oedipus has been blind or ignorant to all the circumstances and happenings around him. He is blind to the fact that everything the Oracle has said. The gouging of his eyes is symbolic of him being figuratively ?blind.?

There are several points in the play where Oedipus acts with reason. The first such point occurs when he is asked by his followers to help save Thebes. He acts with reason when he immediately decides to heed to their demands and find help for them. However, he may also have been deciding to do this through passion. His need for his land to be perfectly normal might have prompted this immediate decision. Reason also occurs through the character of Oedipus himself. He has a heroic confidence in his own abilities, and he has good reason for such confidence, both from his own sense of past achievements and from the very high regard everyone has of those achievements. Reason also occurs through the character of Oedipus himself. He has a heroic confidence in his own abilities, and he has good reason for such confidence, both from his own sense of past achievements and from the very high regard everyone has of those achievements. He is conscious of himself as a great man. He feels he can achieve anything.

The reoccurring theme that we can deny fate and go our own way and make our own path, and that we keep trying even though it doesn?t work out, shows that Sophocles believes in fate. I believe that Sophocles shows this by having Oedipus fail in the end. If Sophocles believed that we could do it alone he would have had Oedipus prevail over all circumstances. I also think that Sophocles believes in reason rather than making choices without thinking. When Sophocles wrote the novel, Oedipus the King, he used a irritated tone to describe how society tries to change their fate, he achieved this by using many types of irony, and I believe that Sophocles effectively achieved his goal.