The play Antigone presents a duality concept that is represented by Antigone and Creon. Both are extreme characters and hold absolute principles that eventually lead to their collision. Antigone supports adherence to the laws of the gods while Creon is in support of the laws of the state.
This paper will evaluate the morality of either Antigone’s position or Creon’s support for civil obedience.
Antigone’s brother Polynices fought to take the throne from his brother Eteocles leading to their deaths. As a decree, Eteocles was provided a decent burial while Polynices was subjected to rot to death. Antigone protested Creon’s decree in lieu of observance of the laws of the gods. Both Antigone and Creon stood firm in their decisions leading to a tragic end for both characters.
Antigone was right to protest Creon’s decree. In order to clearly evaluate the accuracy of position, it is imperative to identify the underlying motivation for one’s position. In Creon’s case, he stood firm in his decision as he does not want to appear as a weak king, a situation that may cause civil disobedience. He also wants to be feared and revered thereby imposing harsh consequences for anyone who goes against his orders, including his niece.
On the other hand, Antigone stood her principle belief that the law of the gods override those of man. Her primary motivation is to please the gods and avoid their punishment, which befalls on Creon, the tragic end of being left alone. Antigone’s situation is also reflected in Pentheus’ and Dionysus’ case that also has a similar ending as Pentheus, a mortal, is not able to compete with Dionysus as the former eventually becomes mad.
All in all, the play provides insight in consequences of extreme pride in the case of Creon.
