William Shakespeare’s King Lear and Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex are two classic pieces of literature that are worth studying. This essay will discuss how free will and destiny function in the two plays. First, the plays will be introduced and analyzed separately to provide a basis for contrast and comparison. Once the foundation is established, more advanced ideas will be discussed, such as the concept of evil and literal and figurative sight. Oedipus Rex will be discussed first. The role of destiny is very obvious is this play. The plot is built around destiny; when Oedipus hears that his destiny is to murder his father and marry his mother, he sets out to confirm this prediction and then prevent it. In his attempt to avoid his fate, he unwittingly commits the very acts that were predicted. The actual logistics of the offense are quite impressive. Both Oedipus and his parents work independently of each other to avoid the outcome, and their actions tragically work together to make it possible. The reader is slapped in the face with the core of the theme, which is that the fate of man is inevitable. Since Oedipus was fated to commit these crimes, he cannot do otherwise. The role of fate and free will is much more complex in Shakespeare’s King Lear. A quick perusal of the plot gives a story of good and evil characters exercising their own free wills. King Lear foolishly divides up his kingdom to his two deceitful, older daughters and ignores Cordelia, his honest, dutiful daughter. The older daughters have evil plans to overthrow their father. There is a similar subplot involving the Earl of Gloucester. His illegitimate son, Edmund, is jealous of Gloucester’s legitimate son, Edgar. Edmund tricks Edgar into running away and fools Gloucester into believing Edgar was going to kill his father. Towards the beginning of the play, Lear and Gloucester trust these evil parties. However, as the plot unfolds, Lear and Gloucester learn through turmoil that Cordelia and Edgar are the ones worthy of their trust and admiration. There are also elements of destiny in King Lear. When Gloucester hears Edmund’s story about Edgar’s alleged plans of murder, the Earl blames it on the recent eclipse: “These late eclipses in the sun and moon portend no good to us: though the wisdom of nature can reason it thus and thus, yet nature finds itself scourged by the sequent effects” (I, ii, 112-127) [pp. 55-56]. But as soon as he leaves, Edmund speaks his mind on the subject of predestined fate. He says, “This is the excellent foppery of the world, that, when we are sick in fortune,--often the surfeit of our own behaviour,--we make guilty of our disasters the sun, the moon, and the stars; as if we were villains on necessity; fools by heavenly compulsion; knaves, thieves, and treachers by spherical pre-dominance; drunkards, liars, and adulterers by an enforced obedience of planetary influence; and all that we are evil in, by a divine thrusting on: an admirable evasion of whoremaster man, to lay his goatish disposition to the charge of a star!” (I, ii, 128-131) [pp. 56] Given how easy Edmund fools Gloucester in the same scene, it seems that Shakespeare is encouraging the audience to see Edmund’s view as the more intelligent and reasonable compared to Gloucester’s belief. However, the author’s true views are questioned again in the last act. After the failure of Edmund’s plot to disgrace his brother, Edgar says the gods are just, and Edmund agrees, “The wheel is come full circle.” (V, iii, 246) Evil is dependent on free will; it cannot exist in a completely predestined world. While the definitions of evil vary, a general description of an evil character is one that deviates from moral standards, is mischievous, or intends to harm others. If one is not in control of one’s actions, intent is not an issue; one simply acts as fate dictates. This reduces mankind to pre-programmed, biological robots. Oedipus murders his father and marries his mother. While that sounds evil, we know that Oedipus did not intend to do it; it was outside of his control. In fact, because he acted admirably within the bounds of his predicted fate, he is generally considered to be a hero. While Edmund and the older daughters from King Lear appear evil, could their actions be completely dictated by destiny? Do the daughters truly love their father but are pawns in the bigger picture? Did the eclipse drive them to do their dastardly deeds? If their actions are indeed controlled by fate, they are not necessarily evil. It is also possible that all the characters in both plays had free will. Oedipus did not intend to do what was predicted, but he did choose to kill some people and get married. It would be an amazing coincidence if it happened by chance, but it is possible. The actions of Edmund and the older daughters are popularly thought to be of their own volition. Is it silly to think otherwise? The concept of sight is important in each play. In Oedipus Rex, if Oedipus could have seen the entire situation, he might have been able to avoid his fate. If his parents could have seen what would happen in the future, they may have been able to prevent it. However, each party could only see their piece of the puzzle until it was too late to stop it from happening. This limited sight makes it impossible for any of the characters to make the proper judgments. In King Lear, Lear and Gloucester have a different problem. They both have the opportunity to see the truth but on some level they refuse. Lear would rather hear lavish compliments than the less glamorous truth. Gloucester is very oblivious to the situation; when he asks about Edgar, "But where is he?" Edmund replies, instead of responding to the question, "Look, sir, I bleed" (II, I, 43-4). Gloucester is blind to not notice that at all! However, by the end of the play, both Lear and Gloucester can see the truth. Lear sees that Cordelia is his only faithful daughter, and Gloucester discovers Edmund’s wicked plans. Ironically, it is not until after Gloucester can no longer physically see that he can see Edmund’s true character. In Oedipus Rex, the characters were unable to make the best decisions because they lacked all the information. That is not the case in King Lear; Lear and Gloucester had all the clues in front of them but decided instead to see what they wanted to see. They are responsible for their poor judgment. The functions of free will and destiny in King Lear and Oedipus Rex are quite interesting. Many elements of our lives are dependent on our free will. How many faiths rely on man’s free will? Religion may lose importance in a predestined world, because without free will there is no choice between good and evil. The view that the world in Oedipus Rex is truly fated and King Lear’s characters have free will is backed up by the judgments made by the characters. Oedipus does everything possible to avoid his fate but fails. King Lear and Gloucester bring their fate upon themselves by ignoring the truth. Living in a world with free will comes with the responsibility of making good judgments.