Sunday, February 3, 2008

Poor Greeks

In Sopchocles’s Antigone, yet again we are shown how our favorite Greek heroes and heroines suffer from their horribly tragic flaws. Through examining Creon’s and Antigone’s pitiful downfalls, we can only hope to learn from their unfortunate mistakes and pass this knowledge down to future generations. From what I have gathered after careful examination of the ancient text, I have concluded that it is important that we listen to whatever Teiresias says. But since Teiresias actually isn’t real, or at least he is dead, the real message here could be that we should listen to what other people have to say. In the story, Creon, Antigone, and Haemon all face less than favorable outcomes because they did not fully account for each other’s valid arguments. Creon and Antigone are both very different characters with very different motives. Creon adheres to the law of man and kingdom and in stark contrast Antigone follows her heart and the law of God. Their stubborn personalities would not allow them to seriously look at each other’s opposing arguments and to come to some sort of common agreement. If only Creon and Antigone could have found a way to set aside their pride and negotiate, they could have both avoided their tragic downfalls.
As the king of Thebes, Creon is the complete autocrat and leader who must personify the power and dignity of the state himself. Creon is the state. He represents the strength and stability in the kingdom. He possesses the unquestioned right to rule as he pleases and in any effort to uphold the stability of the kingdom. Though it may seem as if he is being cruel by leaving Polyneices to rot, the king must adhere to the laws of his state. If Creon did otherwise, it would seem as if he was a weak man who cared more for his blood than for his own people. Once Polyneices lead an army against Thebes, he became a traitor no matter what his past connection to the royal family. Creon must deny the enemy’s right to a decent burial although it is his own nephew. The king cannot have favorites and make exceptions at the cost of threatening the stability of his rule and kingdom. Once Antigone chose to defy Creon’s edict, she became a threat to the stability in Thebes and was arrested. If Creon simply allowed her to bury her brother, then it would appear that his laws meant nothing and could be easily broken. Up to this point, Creon’s actions are understandable as he is the king and must uphold the law of man. However, his treatment for Antigone is gruesome and the situation could have been handled a lot easier if he had only tried to negotiate with his niece.
In contrast to Creon, Antigone champions the laws of God above the laws of man. Antigone’s struggle to bury her traitorous brother draws attention to the difference between divine law and human law. To her, it is her obligation to bury Polynices no matter what his crimes. She follows her heart and believes that Creon’s edicts cannot override the laws of God and of morality. Creon coldly sees her argument as foolishly passionate and imprisons her. To Creon, his laws are the ultimate authority and are always right. Creon is just following his own laws. He is too proud and stubborn to notice that his decision is not morally just. Creon is not even affected by his own son’s pleas for mercy. Yet the king’s ultimate mistake is in Antigone’s punishment. Although Creon was full of pride and ambition at the start, by the conclusion Creon suffers the wrath of the gods, and ends in his own self-destruction.
If Creon and Antigone could have reached a compromise instead of taking the extreme sides of the argument, they could have easily prevented their fates. Creon was ultimately right in denying Polynices a public burial but he did not have to deny Antigone the decency to mourn her brother’s loss. If only he had allowed her to bury her brother in secret or out of the state, then this whole play could have been avoided. There would not have been a conflict, but then we wouldn’t have learned a valuable lesson. Both the opposing forces can never come to an easy agreement that makes a happy ending, because that doesn’t sell books as well. In the end, Sopchocles wanted to make money and teach us things at the same time. It must have worked since the play has been around a long time.

2 comments:

Dave said...

WW-
Once again you astound me with with your clarity of comprehension and expression. It is a shame that Teiresias is indeed absent/not here, for I feel that we could all benefit from his advice.

LCC said...

W--you touch on a couple of key problems in the play. You say he play shows the importance of keeping an open mind and listening, but also that Creon must rule as he sees fit and remain true to the laws in order to be a strong ruler. Seems to me that those two don't always go together. And would the compromise you suggest really solve the whole problem or just make him a hypocrite, pretending to uphold the law while finding a way to let Antigone break it in secret?

Any way you look at it, it's a tough problem in governance.