Alexandra Fournier
Professor Vincent
English 1406
February 18th, 2011 

Parallels that Clash:
The Two Tragic Heroes in Sophocles’ Antigone  

        In the world of mathematics, parallel lines are lines that appear similar and that never intersect. In Sophocles’ Antigone, Creon and Antigone, like parallel lines, appear similar in many ways –  their personalities greatly resemble one another and their storylines  run parallel to each other. (*)  As opposed to traditional parallel lines, however, Creon and Antigone are so alike that they clash. Because both characters are so similar, the age-old debate of deciding who is the tragic hero – Creon or Antigone? – is still unresolved. In terms of Aristotle’s classic definition of a tragic hero, Creon and Antigone both undergo a morally significant struggle that ends disastrously and both share the same tragic flaw. They differ, however, on the point of illumination and reversal of fortune. Therefore, they are both tragic heroes, but each a different kind.  

        In accordance with one of the first points of Aristotle’s definition of a tragic hero, Antigone and Creon both undergo a morally significant struggle that ends disastrously. Their struggles are the polar opposites of one another, for Antigone struggles for her family against the law, whereas Creon struggles for the law against his family. Antigone fights for her brother to be given a proper burial despite the fact that Polyneices betrayed their city.  For the simple fact that he is family, Antigone must bury him.  When Ismene questions Antigone about her plan, “Do you mean to bury him?  Against the city’s ordinance?” (44), Antigone responds passionately with, “But he is mine.  And yours.  Like it or not, he’s our brother/They’ll never catch me betraying him” (45-6). She feels as if her filial ties are far more binding than the law – she will thus never be “[caught]  betraying him” (46). Antigone’s rebellion against Creon’s law ends in disaster, however, for she takes her own life by the end of the play.  Creon, on the other hand, fights for his law to be upheld despite his ties to his family. Early in the play, we see Creon struggling against any personal attachments that could cloud his judgment as a ruler:

I believe that if anyone tries to run a city
On the basis of bad policies and holds his tongue
Because he’s afraid to say what is right,
That man is terrible.  So I have always thought.
But it’s even worse when he plays favorites,
Puts family or friends ahead of fatherland. (178-183)

        Since he is the new king of Thebes, Creon no doubt wants to appear an able ruler to the people and believes that if he “play favorites” (182) and lets personal matters dictate his priorities, he will be a “terrible” (181) man. Thus, when he learns of Antigone burying her brother and going against his law, Creon punishes her despite the fact that she is his niece and his son’s betrothed. His harsh ruling leads to disaster, however, for it leads to the death of not only Antigone, but also Creon’s son and wife. Therefore, both Antigone and Creon meet one of Aristotle’s criteria for a tragic hero –  throughout the play, they live through a struggle that tests them morally and which ultimately destroys them.         

        According to Aristotle, all tragic heroes are in possession of a tragic flaw  and not only do Creon and Antigone have one, but they share the same one: the stubborn inability to listen to or understand another point of view. Antigone and Creon’s inability to empathize is considered tragic because it leads to both of their ruin – Antigone to her death and Creon to the death of a promising reign and all those he holds dear. Antigone demonstrates her tragic flaw on several occasions,  for example, in her reaction to Ismene’s reasoning as to why they should not interfere with Creon’s order not to bury Polyneices:

ANTIGONE:  …  Go and be the way you choose to be.  I
Will bury him.  I will have a noble death
And lie with him, a dear sister with a dear brother.
Call it a crime of reverence, but I must be good to those
Who are below.  I will be there longer than with you.
That’s where I will lie.  You, keep to your choice:
Go on insulting what the gods hold dear.
ISMENE:  I am not insulting anyone.  By my very nature
I cannot possibly take arms against the city.
ANTIGONE:  Go on, make excuses.  I am on my way. (71-80)

        Antigone does not understand and does not attempt to understand Ismene’s reasoning – instead she dismisses it and calls Ismene’s words “excuses” (80). Perhaps if Antigone had listened to some of Ismene’s advice to be careful, she would not have suffered such a tragic death. Creon is very much the same as Antigone in that he continually misunderstands and misinterprets others’ words when they are not in direct agreement with his beliefs. In the middle of a frustrating conversation with his father, Haemon exclaims, “Talk, talk, talk!  Why don’t you ever want to listen?” (757). It is this particular line that illustrates both Creon’s and Antigone’s tragic flaw: both talk at length about what they believe to be right, but neither of them take the time to actually listen to anyone else. As Theodore Ziolkowski aptly remarks in The Mirror of Justice: Literary Reflections of Legal Crises:  “Both uncle and niece display the same unreasonable, stubborn resolve” (152). Antigone says to Creon later in the play, “Your words disgust me, I hope they always will/And I’m sure you are disgusted by what I say” (500-501) and therein lies their problem, their undoing, their tragic flaw – their words never reach the other because they cannot and will not listen. 

        Creon and Antigone diverge on  the path of tragic heroes on possibly the most important factor of a tragic hero: the illumination and reversal.  Though Creon continues down the path of an Aristotelian tragic hero, Antigone veers off and goes down the path of a Sophoclean tragic hero. Creon and Antigone are both, in fact, tragic heroes – both meet the first and second criteria of Aristotle’s definition of a tragic hero. The sole point they differ on in Aristotle’s definition of a tragic hero is the recognition of their tragic flaw – Creon alone realizes too late that he has made a mistake;  Antigone, however, never believes that she is wrong and never renounces her tragic flaw. Because of this difference between them, Creon is thus classified as the typical Aristotelian tragic hero and Antigone as the Sophoclean tragic hero. A Sophoclean tragic hero is, as Bernard Knox writes:  

        Immovable once his decision is taken, deaf to appeals and persuasion, to reproof and threat, unterrified by physical violence, even by the ultimate violence of death itself, more stubborn as his isolation increases until he has no one to speak to but the unfeeling landscape, bitter at the disrespect and mockery the world levels at what it regards as failure, the hero … welcomes the death that is the predictable end of his intransigence.            (44)

        This description of a Sophoclean tragic hero perfectly fits Antigone – she never sees the error of her ways and never changes her mind. She is thus tragic, in typical Sophoclean fashion, because she bravely walks to meet her doom without ever bending to the will of others – she dies for what she believes is right. Creon, on the other hand , recognizes that imprisoning Antigone and refusing the burial of her brother was wrong (his moment of illumination) and he decides to mend the damage he has done (his moment of reversal). It is hard for Creon to change his mind for it “goes against [his] heart” (1105), but he realizes the error of his ways and attempts to right his wrongs. The element of illumination and reversal classifies Creon as an Aristotelian tragic hero. Therefore, even though Creon and Antigone differ on the points of illumination and reversal, they are still both considered tragic heroes. 

        The twisted way in which Creon and Antigone’s personalities and decisions mirror each other is a testament to Sophocles’ genius; in creating two characters that are so alike and yet strikingly different, Sophocles crafts two storylines that cannot survive without the other. In The Mirror of Justice: Literary Reflections of Legal Crises, Ziolkowski cites Walter Jens who writes: “‘Antigone’s fate provides the foil for Creon and, in turn, Creon’s fate becomes evident only against the background of Antigone’s destiny’” (152). Creon and Antigone are each other’s antagonists and, as Jens suggests, they need each other in order for the plot to move forward. Their morally significant struggles feed off of each other, their tragic flaw is the same, and though they do not both experience an illumination and reversal, it is of no consequence; the fact that Antigone does not have a reversal and Creon does simply adds to the ways they balance each other out as tragic heroes. George Steiner once suggested that “‘Creon and Antigone’ would be a more just title” (177) and, since both characters complement each other perfectly, this title would be far more just. Like parallel lines that run forever without meeting, Creon and Antigone are both fiercely independent creatures; their storylines, however, clash and are undeniably interdependent. One simply could not be a tragic hero without the other.   

Works Cited: