BLIND OEDIPUS COMPLEX (a theory of sort) by Simpa Omoluabi

BLIND OEDIPUS COMPLEX

by

Simpa Omoluabi

I am making my statements in accordance to my earlier on work of poetry or poetic rendition and redefinition of the Oedipal myth, a long poem which I initially titled ‘OEDIPUS (The Prodigal Redefined), which was first published on simpaomoluabipoetry.blogspot.com in 2015, and from this long piece of poem I created a more shorter derivative titled ‘MOTHERFUCKER’ which alongside the original poem  ‘OEDIPUS (The Prodigal Redefined)’ were both later published together with some other poetic/dramatic compositions as a book titled ‘MOTHERFUCKER: THE GODS ARE TO BLAME’ published on amazon.com; the very title of this book stems from the first six lines and stanza 62 & 64 of the original poem ‘OEDIPUS (The Prodigal Redefined)’, the lines in these stanzas alludes to Ola Rotimi’s ‘THE GODS ARE NOT TO BLAME’ and the first six lines which are of stanzas 1 & 2 with the lines from stanzas 62 & 64 reads as follows: 

                      I

‘Oedipus is the revolutionary movement

‘gainst kings

And greedy lawmakers

                   II

Oedipus the gods are to blame

They cast you out

That imperialism shall not end‘- (‘Oedipus The Prodigal Redefined]’. 2015 August, Simpaomoluabipoetry.blogspot.com)

The lines from stanzas 62 & 64 reads:

                        LXII

‘It is forbidden you to have mama

You will make of your self

A motherfucker.

                   LXIV

Oedipus the prodigal

Says so be it I’ll e a motherfucker

For what’s mine’ – (‘Oedipus [The Prodigal Redefined]’. 2015 August, Simpaomoluabipoetry.blogspot.com)

This seemingly intricate introduction is meant to have you informed about my accordance to an earlier work which extends into this piece of writing which is concerned with the complex which is mythologized as blindness in the myth of Oedipus. In the Oedipal myth there are two cases of blindness; the first was the case of Tiresias, the blind priest who divined the oracle that led to the infanticidal actions taken against the infant i.e. Oedipus at infancy. In my long poem ‘OEDIPUS (The Prodigal Redefined’) and its derivative ‘MOTHERFUCKER’ I without having to mention the name of the blind priest Tiresias, expressed his allegorical nature as the various forms of priesthoods and clergies who intentionally or non-intentionally hoodwink and makes handicap the common individual or average individual to remain subject to his or her enslavement as against a revolutionary change, i.e. Tiresias  the blind priest as an allegory is the visionless spiritualist/clergy or the spiritualist/clergy with a bad vision as far as the general freedom from the common enslavement of the common individual or average individual in relation to the various authorities ruling by whatsoever form of governance as far as it is economically impoverishing to the ordinary or average human and is handicapping the ordinary or average human from exercising his or her human rights in terms of freedom of expression and speech. In this context a bad vision is not the same as visions of doom, a bad vision is that which is antithetical to a good vision which is that which spells hope for how to achieve the common good for the entirety of the ordinary man or average human in a given society. This is the Tiresias social condition in human nature which means the spiritualists/clergies with a bad vision that directly or indirectly encourages or collaborates with the oppressive authority to deny their subjects or citizenry of their human rights, this is the case as I have expressed in my poem in that Oedipus who was prince heir to the throne was denied his birthright from the very scratch of infancy, this interpretation is in accordance with the afore mentioned long poem in which in its stanza 10, it is rendered:

                        X

‘Through oracular binoculars

They saw the prince

In sympathy with the enslaved’ – (‘Oedipus [The Prodigal Redefined]’. 2015 August, Simpaomoluabipoetry.blogspot.com)

In other words it wasn’t the taboo of incest that was foreseen but as it is stated in the above quoted stanza, which was varyingly expressed in the poem and it’s the more shorter derivative titled ‘MOTHERFUCKER’ which was originally published under the title ‘Tribute to My Oedipal redefinition poem’ where in some of the lines I rendered stating:

‘The gods committed this unforgivable crime

Because they foresaw

That Oedipus shall start a revolution

Turning around the lives of the slaves and the poor

For equal human rights with queens and kings

And the gods committed the act of infanticide

Because they foresaw

Odewale shall become a revolutionary

Who shall turn around the lives of the slaves and the poor

For equal human rights with queens and kings.’ – (Tribute to My Oedipal redefinition poem. May, 2015 lyricsandsongspublishedbysimpa.blogspot.com)

The Tiresias social condition is in keeping with the Marxian dictum ‘religion is the opium of the masses’, and for reasons of clarity the common individual or average individual in this context I define as those persons who belong to the most prevalent economic class, for example in Nigeria, given this period in time the average individual or common individual are those whose financial power cannot afford up to a daily subsistence of $2.

The second case of blindness which is the primary essence of this paper is the blindness of king Oedipus, a blindness which was self-inflicted upon he king Oedipus becoming fully aware of who he was which plainly made clear he was involved in an incestuous marriage with his mother. At the tail end of my long poem ‘OEDIPUS (The Prodigal Redefined)’, precisely in stanza 82 where I rendered:

                        LXXXII

The blindness of Oedipus

Is final blackout

Of the visionary.  -  (‘Oedipus [The Prodigal Redefined]’. 2015 August, Simpaomoluabipoetry.blogspot.com)

The above lines were written in objective and faithful keeping in Oedipus allegorized as the revolutionary and visionary as against the allegorical ‘ bad vision of Tiresias’ which is the spiritualist/clergy concerned with all things taboo that advertently or inadvertently hampers a needed or the needed revolution. But the mythical blindness of Oedipus for a form of physio-psychological complex goes ways away from the simple blacking out of a visionary: going into this complex I purport that among handicaps who were not born handicapped and whom have taken to begging for alms as a set of handicaps it is less an onerous psychological task for the  handicaps that are completely blind to take to begging for alms than it is to begin begging for alms by one who is not handicapped by blindness, this I purport further purporting that I think the sense of loss of the power the sights besides that it is likely to be more gravely felt than the loss of any other body part for the average individual it also as a result of the loss of it as a sense organ of a certain form of sense that lessens burden of the decision of the sufferer to take to begging in contrast to other physiological forms of handicap; this is by no means meant to be a derogatory statement towards the blind. In the myth of Oedipus, Oedipus was firstly man-made handicapped by others in which he became impaired like a clubfoot which is the meaning of his name, and later on he became further handicapped with blindness, but this time around it was self-inflicted.

I here state that the self-infliction of blindness by Oedipus was done out of a resolute will to totally discard the place or necessity for shame having done something or become at firsthand complicit in an act or deed that by specific societal standards calls for shame. The neurological elements responsible for shame or shyness I state is primarily linked with the eyes, that is the ocular anatomy, which in other words the nerve impulses for shame is made from the eyes; basically  boldness as against shame or shyness require the individual to with the eyes behold the potential shame eliciting stimulus, whereby if shyness or shame prevails it demands or makes a response for an avoidance of eye contact, it is this eye contact Oedipus took away that he Oedipus  therefore loses the sense for shame and of shame which societal values has imposed on him to feel in relation to the taboo, but I here also take note that it also simultaneously plays in the light of this complex that it is the gravity of shame that compelled him, Oedipus, to inflict on himself the blindness in that he has forever put a stop to any form of arising boldness that may grow overtime that could make him to begin to grow boldfaced gradually eroding the weight of the shame thereby becoming able to behold the face of the shame eliciting stimulus in the nature of the society. I will here make reference to the Yoruba expression or word for shame, which is ‘oju ti’, which literally means ‘eyes shut’ or ‘eyes shutting’ or ‘eyes closing’, which if  one is to say of another, let us say whose name is Theresa, one would in Yoruba say; ‘Oju ti Theresa’, meaning eyes is shutting or closing in on Theresa, which is saying Theresa is feeling shame or feeling shy; the feeling of shame primarily stems from a  sensory receptor  which is in the eyes from which nerve impulses transmits to the neurological parts of the brain that interprets these ocular impulses and there by specific emissions are made that translates into various levels of awkwardness given the context of the situation. The Oedipal complex of shame in the myth of Oedipus simultaneously does two things which are that Oedipus by self-inflicting blindness shut his eyes against shame or shut his eyes for shame,: for shame, in that he Oedipus is not worthy of beholding the face of the people anymore, and against shame in that the primary sense that requires him to feel shame has been removed by making a complete discontact between himself and the eyes which is meant to first send nerve impulses needed to feel the effect of shame having effected a complete disabling of eye contact between him and the shame eliciting stimulus, for the best way to avoid eye contact is to shut the eyes completely at which from the word go there is contact made upon the eyes in relation to the shame or shyness eliciting stimulus for the removal of the eye by Oedipus was an actual attempt in complete disabling or removal of the sense of shame, for the removal of the ocular organ prevents reasons for nerve impulses or neurological messages to be sent to the nervous system for neurological emissions to be released which manifests as shame or shyness, but someone may want to say that shame is not only aroused upon eye contact, but I here say that it would be better defined as the awareness of shame in the absence of the context or presence of the shame eliciting stimulus, at this point I would state four necessary variables that is basically before someone who is having to struggle with a reason for shame and these are: (i) The reason for shame. (ii) The awareness of shame aroused without eye contact or in absence of the circumstance with the stimulus for shame. (iii)The circumstance or context or situation with the stimulus that serves to elicit the active expression of the feeling for shame that the individual is aware of. (iv)The ways to go about mitigating the amount of shame to be felt or the total avoidance of it.

In my positing that the primary impulses for shame is situated in the eyes showing the complex of it in the light of the myth of Oedipus upon the removal of the eyes in psykhoanalysis this  is the discontacting of the ocular/sensory receptors from the neurological mechanisms for shame, in all objectivity Oedipus by his self-infliction of blindness did two opposing things in simultaneity which is he Oedipus either  totally shut his eyes against shame or shut his eyes for shame, and for whichever of the two reasons it implies that (i) if it is for not to feel shame or for to feel less shameful he thereby attempted a total neuropsychological discontact between the stimulus/stimuli for shame and the ocular/sensory receptor that are meant to send nerve impulses that would cause him to expressing his feeling of shame  and this is in anticipation of the context or situation or circumstance that in which the full effect of the shame or shyness would manifest. For example; one of the benefits that comes with truly dark sunglasses or sunshades is that it helps an individual who has anticipated a shame or shyness eliciting stimulus or stimuli in that on coming into such a situation or context the dark sunglasses or sunshades having created a level of ocular discontact or disabling of eye-contact it reduces the level of nerve impulses for shame transmitted by the ocular/stimulus receptor which reduces the amount of neurological emission that would have been emitted in the absence of the sunglasses or sunshades whose usage had reduced the level of eye contact with the shame or shyness eliciting stimulus or stimuli. The dark sunglasses or sunshades is a synecdoche for various things with which the individual could totally of partially establish an ocular discontact with the shame or shyness eliciting stimulus, and these act of discontact which if partial I call the ‘sunglass or sunshade discontact’  and if total I call the ‘Blind Oedipus eye contact’, whatever form they take in anticipation firstly they  cognitively and neurologically create or establish the discontact based on anticipation and evaluation of the situation by the individual in this struggle of the complex of shame respective to the varying reasons for shame and varying shame or shyness eliciting stimulus for to reduce or totally avoid the nerve impulses  sent by the ocular/sensory receptors that would cause the entire process for the neurological emissions for the feeling shame to be expressed.

The ‘Blind Oedipus complex’ encapsulates lots of varying everyday instances; for example in an instance of dutch courage, the substance of alcohol must have stimulated the emission of specific hormones that creates a discontact that inhibits the level or amount of nerve impulses  that would have been ocularly transmitted to the neurons to bring about the neurological emissions that would have elicited shame or shyness in the dutch courageous individual. Another example is that of a person who is nervous when he or she has to come to stand for to give an address or speech before an audience, and I am talking about the advisory instance when the person involved is adviced to pick a face from the crowd of faces and concentrate on this face and then seemingly ignore the other faces, in this instance for to reduce the nervousness of the feelings of shame or shyness which in the light of my positing this act taking by the speaker is the discontact or disabling of eye-contact which I term ‘sunglass or sunshade discontact’ which is a level of partial discontact between the ocular receptors and the shame or syness eliciting stimulus for the reduction in ocular nerve impulses transmitted to the nervous system which would check on the level or amount of neurological emissions made for reasons of shame or shyness on the3 part of the subject feeling shame. Basically given the various everyday instances which we can make reference to, and that for any reason for shame the ‘Blind Oedipus Complex eye contact’ is the utmost that would be desired by anyone which is the total avoidance or obliteration of the feeling for shame, and the individual trying to attain the ‘Blind Oedipus Complex eye contact’ requires the a processing of presence of four variables which I have earlier on mentioned and I here somewhat elaborately repeat for clarity: 

1.      Reason for the feeling of shame. 

2.      The arousal of the awareness of the feeling for shame without eye contact or in the absence of the context/situation and the shame eliciting stimulus or stimuli.

3.      Awareness and evaluation of the context and situation together with the stimulus or stimuli for the reason to feel shame in which the expression of the feeling for or of shame is actively expressed, on which actively expressed tells can tell the human presence(s) observing if the individual is feeling shame or feeling shy. In the awareness and evaluation of the context and situation by the individual it must be noted that the situation could present itself and the stimulus for it may not be there e.g. a gathering which requires certain expected presences, and the presence of some of the participants or members might be discomfiting to the individual(s) personally concerned with shame in that context, so therefore the possibility of those persons who in that context would be the shame eliciting stimulus may for some reason not be there, so thereby we can have a situation  for the reason of shame and the absence of the stimulus/stimuli for shame.  This absence of stimulus is also a form of sunglass or sunshade discontact or a Blind Oedipus eye contact, and of course the entire situation and the shame eliciting stimulus or stimuli can be done away with given certain reasons for shame, that is saying the entire context can be done away with. A context is different from the situation, in that a context for shame requires the presence of the shame eliciting stimulus/stimuli in the anticipated situation.

4.      The initiative of the sunglass or sunshade discontact or the Blind Oedipus eye contact for to check against the feeling of shame; In certain cases the the sunglass or sunshade discontact or the blind Oedipus eye contact has to be repeated and then there are certain cases given the  reason(s) for shame a permanent sunglass or sunshade discontact or Blind Oedipus eye contact would be sought to be established to forever reduce the level of the awareness of shame or totally eradicate it, for example; when a man is embroiled in a scandal and the issue or case proceeds or gets to  litigation, the individual as a litigant in the court of law looks forward to be vindicated as best as possible, and if he wins the case at the end of the day, that is having been vindicated, given the effectiveness of the vindication the vindication for him could either be a sunglass or sunshade discontact or a Blind Oedipus eye contact.

At a subconscious level the human mind without directly thinking of it is aware that the primary organ that gives away that one is feeling shame or shy is the eye and in turn it is one of  the organs that affirms boldness, actually the organ that can easily connote boldness in the absence of verbal or psychomotor actions, in the practical instance of the individual having worn a pair of sunglasses he or she by the cognitive process involved has had the cognitive faculties and the nervous system informed that the primary organ that gives away or reveal the feeling of shame or shyness has been concealed from been noticed or revealed so there by emboldening the very organ which is the eye:  this whole process between the ocular/sensory receptor and the brain and  the nervous system is firstly a back and forth move between the ocular/sensory receptor and the portion of the brain which is the mindful aspect of cognition that has been programmed as a stored  conceptualization  conditioned in memory to a given context for shame, in that context upon the ocular/sensory receptor making presentation  of the potential shame stimulus the mindful aspect of cognition in the nervous system in turn interprets the message which is sent back or transmitted back to the ocular/sensory receptor if it is to stay calm or be disturbed, if it is the former, that is if to be calm or relatively calm the ocular/sensory receptor by its neurons would then inhibit nerve impulses or action potentials to be sent to the autonomic nervous system in predetermination of  the level of release neurologic al emissions for the expressing or giving off of the feeling of shame; but if it is the later, that is having received a message(s) that there is reason and it is a context for to feel shame or shyness following the same process to the autonomic nervous system it would make release for much neurological emissions that would get the individual to begin to behave awkwardly and becoming discomfit. Another aspect to it is when in an unforeseen context, say a boy or a girl who encounters someone who he or she finds attractive and given that in such a context she is always embarrassed by this feeling due to certain reasons, this very reasons which are reasons for the feeling of shame has been cognitively imprinted in the aspect of brain mindful of a programmed cognition conditioned in the memory, so on encountering this shame eliciting stimulus the process runs as I have earlier on stated, which is the ocular/sensory receptor firstly sending the message of the potential shame eliciting stimulus and the aspect of the brain mindful aspect of cognition that has been programmed and conditioned to this context then interprets it and transmits back that there is a reason or some for shame at which the ocular/sensory receptor and at this point the eyes as the primary organ expressing or giving signs of the feeling for shame begins  to go through a process of  avoidance or disabling of eye contact with the stimulus, at this point depending on ongoing cognition process for the reason of shame the ocular/sensory receptors would in turn by it level of nerve impulses message the autonomic nervous system which causes neurological emissions that would account for how the individual awkwardly behaves or not or how discomfited the individual shows him or herself.  In analogy we can use the tongue to clarify this process, now not the tongue as an organ for speech making but as organ for eating, for the tongue before eating the individual  through other senses like sense of smell and sense of sight could be made aware of kinds of delicacies cooking or victuals available without having to taste it first, which also goes for the eyes, in that without eye contact the individual could be made aware of the context that would make for the  feeling of shame through other means such as hearing, or the seeing of objects associated with the stimulus/stimuli or even through smell, so in this respect using the tongue as an analogy we have . (i.)The stimulus of food or victual that goes in to the mouth (ii). The information is sent to the part of the brain or nervous system concerned with the interpretation of stimulus that comes upon the tongue (iii)( It is then interpreted and transmitted back to the taste buds as taste, either as sweet or bitter or sour etc. This three step process also goes for the eye and the aspect concerned with interpreting the stimulus or stimuli that encounters the eye.

1 A stimulus firstly encounters the eye

2 The eye in all respect transmits a potential shame eliciting stimulus to the aspects of the brain or nervous system responsible for interpreting all such stimulus/stimuli  

3 The brain then interprets the stimulus and then sends back to the ocular/sensory receptor if there is a reason to feel shame or if there is no reason to feel shame or if there is little or relative reason to feel shame, but this  is all based on the cognitive processes as I have explained with the afore examples., where by the ocular/sensory receptors send the nerve impulses that triggers the autonomic  nervous system that that makes for the level of neurological emissions to determine the level of the feeling of shame.

Having used the terms nerve impulse and action potential interchangeably given the nature of the sense of shame, I state that I think the real nature of the neurotransmitter I think is a graded potential instead of action potential or nerve impulse which I have used all along to make simple the postulation I present. A grade potential is; ‘A depolarization or hyperpolarisation of a neuron that varies in amplitude according to the intensity of the stimulation and that does not produce a conventional nerve impulse or action potential but itself conducted passively along the axonas a nerve signal declining with time and distance. Some cells with very short axons, including rods, cones, and bipolar cells, show only graded potentials and function without conventional nerve impulses’, (Andrew M. Colman. 2001 A Dictionary of Psychology. Oxford). The point about this explanation of graded potentials in relation to the above mentioned cells that ‘show only graded potentials and function without conventional nerve impulses’ in relation to the concerns of this paper is that the cells rod, cone and bipolar cell is that all cells are well found in the eye.

In all sincerity this theory ‘Blind Oedipus Complex’ inadvertently points to the fact that a substance or substances can be created and specifically tailored to inhibitingly affect the ocular nerve impulses that make for messages that would stimulate neurological workings through the neurons making for neurological emissions that gives off that a fellow or individual is feeling or expressing the sense of shame, and in the advent of such shame inhibiting drugs or substance(s) we would have to question how safe is such a substance or drug for the eyes in terms of doses and prescription uses and the inevitable possibility of addiction to such substances specifically tailored to inhibit the ocular nerve impulses for the feeling or expressing of the sense of shame as has been stated by this theory the theory of ‘Blind Oedipus Complex’ which postulates the eye is the sense organ for shame, and in respect to the Oedipal myth Oedipus by self-infliction of blindness took away the eyes, the sense organ of shame. Or at the very least the Oedipal mythmakers were saying the eye is the sense organ for the sense of shame.