Surely Teiresias is not literally smiling; Oidipous wrongly ascribes to him a malevolent attitude. [Mpea] Oidipous is right only to the extent that Teiresias is no longer assuring Oidipous that he is acting in his best interest. Rather, he seems to have shifted his focus to asserting the validity of his own speech; he has become defensive and may no longer be observing the restrictions the god presumably placed upon his speech. Yet, given the care he earlier displayed towards observing the god’s restrictions on him, one must consider the possibility that the god himself is now changing gears. If so, it must be in response to Oidipous’s increasingly open disrespect for the seer. As increases his display of disrespect, so increases the degree of humiliation to which the god is prepared to subject Oidipous. [Aj] The justice in the god’s response is complex but palpable: ascribing malevolence to the seer, Oidipous disregards the god and provokes the god’s assertion of his powers and even of his concern for mortal wellbeing. [Mpe] [Mw] Paradoxically, in order to demonstrate the precision of his justice—his punishment for disregarding him—Apollo must increase Oidipous’s humiliation, which he does by flaunting Oidipous’s errors: his false assumption, impious attitudes, and self-delusion. [Apc] This suggests that the anticipated moment of revelation may now be at hand, but no matter what Teiresias reveals, Oidipous seems to be in no state to take it seriously. [Md] [Mpe] Communication even between mortals is clearly a two-way street; for it to succeed both parties must adopt an appropriate attitude. Communication between god and mortal is even more needful of a carefully cultured respect. [Dnc] [Dnt]