Antigone and Oedipus as Tragic Figures - Essay Example

Antigone and Oedipus as Tragic Figures The conception of tragic heroes has changed significantly since Aristotle first laid down the rules for defining tragedy in his Poetics. In its origins in ancient Greek drama, a tragic hero could only be a member of royalty and almost always male. By Shakespeare's day the gender mattered slightly less, though bloodlines still retained a high level of import. Today's tragic hero can be male or female, come from any stratum of society, can hold any job, literally be anyone. Along with these admirable amendments to the rules, however, have come other differences in defining that a tragic hero is. In contemporary popular drama, by which is typically meant film, the tragic hero-or heroine-has generally been downgraded to mean the "good guy" who dies in the end. It wasn't until Shakespeare's day, in fact, a tragic hero was expected to die at the end. Today, the character's death is almost the only aspect that makes him tragic. An example of how completely the idea of a tragic hero has devolved can be made by pointing to the example of the character Jack in the movie Titanic, who has been unofficially declared a tragic hero by the millions of fans of that particular film. A comparison of the qualities of that character with any of the classic definitions of a tragic hero clearly shows the divide that has been wrought over the years. That divide had, of course, been widening since long before the film was made, but nonetheless the question raised is whether a true classic tragic hero could be realized in drama in the 20th century and into the new millennium. Aristotle lists Sophocles' Oedipus Rex as an example of perfection in creating a tragedy, and indeed the character of Oedipus himself is almost synonymous with tragedy. Oedipus lives in a cosmological universe governed by a force that knows the route of his fate but has no control over it; Antigone lives in a universe governed by a force that controls her fate but doesn't know the route it will take. Oedipus is a tragic hero who meets the qualifications set down by Aristotle in line with traditional Greek philosophic cosmology of gods and predetermination, whereas the Antigone of Anouilh represents a new breed of tragic hero based more on contemporary philosophic notions of the struggle of the individual in the face of overwhelming societal ideology. Aristotle's Poetics provides the foundation upon which all tragic drama is built upon, even retroactively, since those tragedies written before Aristotle lay down the rules are held up in comparison to what Aristotle demanded in order to judge their merits. This work is a perfect example of how the environment in which one writes manages what one thinks. Aristotle claims that tragedy is "an imitation of persons who are above the common level" (36). This view that tragic circumstances could only befall those of a high societal rank continued even through Shakespeare who, though he may have written a tragedy about two star-crossed lovers who were not kings or royalty, nevertheless were members of royal houses. It is the democratization of tragedy that separates Sophocles from Anouilh, for even though Anouilh is presenting the story of royal characters his manner of presenting it works as a linking device that connects the classical tragedy to the modern tragedy. Aristotle's demand for a tragic character is that his downfall based on his failing, the misunderstood "tragic flaw" so often erroneously attributed to him. Aristotle rather explains that the hero's downfall should come about not as a result of "vice or depravity, but by some error or frailty" (33). This error or "flaw" possessed by Oedipus was described by Aristotle as pride or hubris, yet a careful reading of the play leads one to question whether his error really wasn't something much less regal. Yes, Oedipus is filled with pride, but what really brings out his downfall seems less concerned with self-righteousness than simple procrastination. Oedipus early on feels concern about his parentage, concern to the point that all his doubts "rankled always, for the story / crept about widely" (Sophocles 786-787). Oedipus is presented with a vision of his future that vile to behold. A man whose flaw was hubris would have turned his back upon the Oracle and face his future secure in the knowledge that he controlled his destiny. Oedipus does that do that, however. He flees, attempting to run away from a problem he knows will come to fruition until some point in the future. Hence, procrastination in delving into the mysteries of his birth result in the tragedy of Oedipus, not pride. And why did Oedipus procrastinate so Because the Oracle in infallible. In the ancient Greek cosmology as presented in this play, one cannot escape one's fate that has been designated by the gods no matter how much one tries, and therein lies the tragedy. What makes Oedipus a tragic character is his repeated insistence on attempting to escape what he already knows will occur: he will kill his father and marry his mother, and from that unholy union will spring forth more tragedy. It is the path that Oedipus follows in arriving at his destiny that is truly tragic for had he faced up and accepted his fate, as does Antigone, more tragedy could have been avoided. In addition, the tragedy of Oedipus also meets the qualifications that Aristotle demands for the ending to result in catharsis. Everything is changed at the end of the play, especially Oedipus. He is redeemed by his tragedy and there is a hint of promise that individuals viewing the play can achieve the same redemption. Jean Anouilh's Antigone also attempts to escape fate, but her fate is not the singular, individualized fate of Oedipus; Anouilh recreates Antigone's story to make her a symbol of universal fate, to make her tragedy universal and in line with contemporary philosophic thought. Oedipus comes face to face with his fate from the Oracle at Delphi, or at least the fate on which the tragedy hinges. Antigone isn't told her fate, but she, just as everyone else does, knows her fate as well. Berlin writes that by transferring Antigone's story to modern times he "reduces the mystery, stifles the interrogative mood, and changes tragedy to something else, call it drama, call it tragicomedy" (23). In fact, there is not mystery in the original story. Tragedy should possess no mystery at all; one of the trademarks of the genre is the cold, dreadful, foreboding knowledge that events can't be changed and the determined conclusion will always happen. It is also unfair to claim that this version is less than a tragedy. If anything it is more of a tragedy; Antigone is made even more tragic in Anouilh's retelling. It is not by oversight that Anouilh does not include the Teiresias section of the original play and dismisses the importance of the gods. Anouilh realizes that tragedy for people in the modern world isn't determined by the forces of gods, but by the forces of people like Creon. The play is an excellent example of how tragedy has been transformed from the ancient Greek conception to the modern one in which tragedy is determined not by "individual will that disturbed settled social orders but of limitations of individual will itself" (Rivkin and Ryan 240). Anouilh's play takes place not in the ritualized and strictly ordered Greek world of the original or in which Oedipus lives, but in the modern world were gods have disappeared and heads of state are behind the forces determining the fates of individuals. The world inhabited by the modern Antigone is one filled with deception and clashes of interest such as the gods ordained in works by the ancient Greeks; the power, corruption and lies which lead inexorably to tragedy for those living today are cultivated by living, breathing human beings. In essence, then, Anouilh has turned the tragedy of Antigone into an exemplar of that most common of 20th century themes, the individual going up against the all-powerful state and the hopelessness of the situation. Anouilh retains enough of the original Greek drama in his modern updating to provide a sense of anachronism that works to the overall effect by reminding the reader that even though he has heard this story before, it's not the same as it was, not set in ancient Greece but in modern times. This effect produces a disorientation in the reader that reflects the intent of linking classic tragedy to modern tragedy and illustrating the difference. And what exactly is the difference Classical tragedy allowed for catharsis, for the gods to set things back to right; modern tragedy is based on the fact that things probably won't be set right by those not in the power. Antigone's tragedy is not that she dies in the end; Creon will die as well, as will Haemon and every other character. Death isn't tragedy, it's certainty. Antigone is a tragic figure because of her powerlessness to change the course of events. Even more to the point, she is tragic not because it is predestined that she will be unable to change the course of events-her fate has not been sealed beforehand by the gods-but because the forces of history has stripped her of individual power. No character flaw prevents Antigone from escaping tragedy and that is the essence of its modern form. Error or frailty is no longer considered vital in condemning a sole to a tragic end; it merely takes an unfortunate birth. In what might be considered a paradoxical notion that seems more at home in ancient Greece than in modern society, one could even say that tragic figures are born today, not made. Both Oedipus and Antigone can be considered tragic characters, but achieve this status in different ways. Oedipus is a classic-perhaps the classic-tragic figure as defined by Aristotle. But Oedipus is removed from modern audiences, by his royal status and his ability to achieve catharsis. Antigone makes the case that catharsis is impossible in the modern world; redemption is almost if not completely impossible for the mass of modern society. Oedipus is unable to exercise free will because his fate has been determined. In contrast, it is exactly Antigone's ability to exercise free will that precipitates the tragic occurrences. By making this the case, Anouilh reflects the often tragic events realized in recent history by those at the mercy of great power who have dared to exercise free will. Ancient tragedy was concerned with the individual in rebellion against the forces of fate; modern tragedy is concerned with the individual in rebelling against the forces of society. Anouilh, J. Antigone London: Methuen Publishing Ltd., 2001 Aristotle Poetics. Normand Berlin, The Secret Cause. Boston: Univ. of Massachusetts Press, 1983 Rivkin, J. and Ryan, M. "Starting with Zero" Literary Theory: An Anthology. Malden: Blackwell Publishers,19998 Sophocles, Oedipus Rex. Read More