In Socrates' Oedipus the King, the character of Jocasta plays a central role in the plot. The way we consider Jocasta, the mother and then, unknowingly, the wife of Oedipus, is an integral part of the progression of the story and the way we judge the different characters in a play. By choosing to tell the story of Oedipus Rex through the eyes of Jocasta herself, as opposed to the third-person point of view employed in the original play, Ruth Eisenberg establishes an alternative point of view from which Jocasta can be seen, presenting her more as a victim of circumstances and the punishment of the gods, as opposed to complicit in the penance transmitted to Oedipus. Using strong diction, vivid symbols, and passionate emotions, Eisenberg is able to establish Jocasta as a victim who does not have the power to alter her fate, contrary to Socrates' interpretation of Jocasta as more of an instigator of Oedipus' fate, but nevertheless little more than a pawn in the game of the gods. Mainly through the degree to which each author delves into Jocasta's character, we can see two contrasting perspectives on who Jocasta really is. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay In Eisenberg's poem, Jocasta, we get a much deeper look into Jocasta's psyche and particularly her relationship with Laius. Jocasta throughout the poem expresses that she had no control over her life and was forced to listen to the whims of others instead of making her own decisions. From the twelfth line, when Jocasta says that she is "fifteen years old and she is afraid to resist", we begin to see her as a victim of Laius. Laius does not treat her as a human but as an object, something subject to his will and his fantasies. By describing Laius as having “icy eyes” (18) and as a “deceitful man” (50/51), we as readers begin to see the picture of a resentful marriage. The cold nature of Laius contrasts with the warmth of Aphrodite that runs through Jocasta and the fire that burns within her for Oedipus. While in King Oedipus there was no sign of negative feelings on Jocasta's part towards Laius, Eisenberg firmly contrasts Jocasta with Laius. As a result, the same woman who, in Socrates' original play, seemed in tune with the corruption and sadness that Laius brought upon Oedipus is, in Eisenberg's poem, in complete opposition to Laius, a beacon of light apparent against the dark hatred that Laius carried with him. In doing so, Eisenberg places Jocasta and Oedipus in the same boat, both as victims who had no say in their independent destinies. Socrates established Jocasta and Oedipus as two very distinct and unrelated characters, with one of them, Jocasta, being on the side of the gods, simply part of Oedipus' punishment. Although there are signs that Socrates saw some sympathy for Jocasta, as she begs Oedipus not to question his origins throughout the play, Socrates does not attempt to delve deeper into his character at all. It is part of a whole in the plan of the gods and nothing more. However, in Eisenberg's play, Jocasta is seen completely differently, standing up to Laius and the gods, denouncing their tyranny. By saying that the gods "blinded me to his [Oedipus'] scars, his age, any resemblance to Laius" (286/287), she rightly calls out the gods for what they did to her, describing their actions as nothing more than “heavenly whim” (311). Jocasta takes control of her life in Eisenberg's poem, shaking her fist at the gods (283/284) and ultimately,.