It seems foolish for the people to join their ruler in hoping yet to obtain a shred of evidence that will overturn all the prophecies to which reference has just been made and to whose realization all evidence seems to point. Rather than joining Oidipous in his skepticism, the Chorus might recognize the fit between the prophecies that make Laios, Iokaste, and Oidipous one family. Rather than joining Oidipous in his antipathy towards the gods, it might appreciate the fact that Apollo came when called, has for many years been at work to address the problem of Thebes’ pollution, and is now persevering with his project, even against great resistance. Encouraging Oidipous reflects poorly on the Theban populace; it suggests that they are either poor thinkers or lack the character to look a bad situation squarely in the eye. It therefore also reflects poorly on Oidipous, for it suggests that the town is affected by his limitations and infected by his predilections, especially his embrace of the assumptions that prophecy is unreliable and the inference that the gods themselves are not only malignant, but even “savage.” As it distances itself from the limitations made obvious by the Chorus’s encouragement of Oidipous, Athens might incline towards more equanimity in its response to apparently hostile prophecy, it might try considering that the gods, if harsh, are justly so and that the harshness of their justice is not an expression of savagery, but of concern for Athens’ wellbeing, and it might give thought to its encouragement for its own leadership’s attitudes about prophecy and the the gods. [Mpea] [Md] [Ad] [Mg] [Gt-a] [Mw]