He frames the story that he is about to tell as an injustice that was done him, for he was made to suffer a fate (τύχη) out of keeping with the seriousness (σποδῆ) of his concern. The audience will infer that Oidipous believes that the fate with which a man meets should be in direct proportion to the seriousness of his commitment. The audience can immediately judge this complaint in light of the terrible fate that it knows to be lying in store for him. If fate hinged on seriousness or commitment, then Oidipous would indeed seem bound to suffer a terrible injustice, for he has shown an extraordinary commitment to his city and his parents. Turning the proposition around, however, if Oidipous deserves the fate he is about to receive, then it cannot hinge, as he thinks, entirely on the seriousness of his commitment. The audience will begin to filter his judgment. It knows that no matter what the nature of the incident he is about to relate, if his fate really comes from the gods, as the audience knows to be the case, then the process by which that fate unfolds should not be unjust. Indeed, it would be impious to charge the gods with meting out a fate that is out of keeping with the demands of justice. It might be thought, however, that Oidipous is not necessarily blaming the gods; he might simply be complaining that life is unfair. If that were the case, however, his assumption that “fate” is not meted out by gods is impious and therefore possibly meriting correction. Oidipous’s error in this regard might thus even push the audience to anticipate that, contrary to Oidipous’s own view, the incident that he is about to relate should not be ascribed to chance or misfortune; it should be understood to have been a god’s work: appropriate and just. [Md] [Mpei] [Aj]