From this, we can see one of Creon’s main failings – he is incapable of valuing city inhabitants for their intrinsic humanity rather than just their civic productivity. This is proven in his remark to Haemon regarding Antigone – he tells his son to simply “Spit her out, like a mortal enemy let the girl go” (lines 728-9). He feels that because he sees her life as worthless, his son automatically will too – he is denying the love his son holds for Antigone, and giving him no respect for having these feelings. Here we are also beginning to witness Creon’s lapse into tyranny – he is prepared to murder Antigone in front of Haemon – his own son – simply to vent his anger. We had hints of his tyrannical side in his attitude towards the sentry – he would have had him killed just for the purpose of punishing someone if the sentry had not found the real culprit. But the inhumanity towards his own flesh and blood is what clinches our opinion. Him bellowing “The city is the kings – that’s the law!” (line 825) at Haemon also presents an image of a somewhat power-crazed individual.
We are beginning to see how Creon’s lack of judgement affects his actions towards others. He lacks respect for the gods, which is shown by comments such as;
“You’ll never bury that body in the grave,
not even if Zeus’s eagles rip the corpse
and wing their rotten pickings off to the throne of god!” (lines 1151-1153)
This would have been especially poignant to an Athenian audience, who would realise that such irreverence would surely end in tragedy. Compared to Antigone’s complete reverence to her gods, Creon’s attitude is all the more unsettling. Although Antigone dies unsaved by the gods, her will to punish the perpetrators of her plight - “if these men are wrong, let them suffer”(line 1019) - is carried out, so proving Creon’s guilt in the eyes of the gods.
Creon sees the city as a ship – which was a common image in Athenian patriotism – which the passengers must care for in order to live successfully. But, as Nussbaum points out, Creon ignores the tension between “the individual ends of the sailors and the overall good of the ship”. As this image develops, the sailors become something separable from the ship, whose ends and activities come apart from those of his “useful and even necessary conveyance”. This leads Nussbaum to deem Creon’s view as “strange”, which is congruent for us with his other ideas and opinions.
Creon is denying the complexity of the city as a whole. Antigone and himself are both guilty of a “ruthless simplification” of their world of values. Antigone draws a circle a round her family which brands all others enemies to the family unit, while Creon sees human value only in relation to civic well being. As Nussbaum suggests, a plan that makes the city the supreme good cannot easily deny the intrinsic value of the religious ideas that are held by its occupants. This is what Creon is doing when he sentences Antigone to death for burying her brother. As we can see, Creon holds an “impoverished conception” of the city, which Haemon recognises, and tells his father he is fit only to rule a “desert island” (line 826).
Creon becomes overtaken by his own feelings and views, and this is proven in his reaction to Tiresias’ prophecy – he tells the old seer that he “lusts for injustice!” (line 1176). But Creon sensibly realises Tiresias is telling the truth, as he has “never lied to Thebes before” (line 1217) before. Gone now is the tyrant – Creon is frightened of these “dark destroyers” (line 1194) that lay in wait for him, and is prepared to do anything to remedy the situation – “What should I do? Tell me…..I’ll obey” (line 1223). He deliberates somewhat – questioning what it will do to his pride to go back on his word - which is an effective contrast to his earlier drastic and unfaltering decision making, and indicates to us his changing character. He is prepared to personally reverse what he has done – “I shackled her, I’ll set her free myself” (line 1234-5).
Then comes the climax of the tragedy – Haemon kills himself on discovering Antigone’s suicide, and Eurydice does the same on hearing the news of her sons death. Suddenly, Creon has lost everything, and as he admits “the guilt is all mine” (line 1441). We know he has brought this fate upon himself, but we cannot deny our sympathy for him when he speaks the lines;
“Take me away, quickly, out of sight.
I don’t even exist – I’m no-one. Nothing” (lines 1445-6)
As we can see, the change in Creon is marked and obvious. Antigone remains the same throughout the play – her loyalties and opinions, whether they are wrong or right – do not change, even as she faces death. She loses her life, but she has suffered in no way like Creon does. Creon has to be said to deserve his fate – he has hurt others in his attempt to rule as only he sees fit, whereas Antigone has hurt no-one, and has only tried to do good by her loved ones. We could say then that Creon was only trying to do good by his city – but this cannot be an excuse to mistreat anyone.
The following comment by the Messenger summarises Creon’s position;
“Take Creon:
there was a man to rouse your envy once,
as I see it. He saved the realm from enemies,
taking power, he alone, the lord of the fatherland,
he set us true on course – he flourished like a tree
with the noble line of sons he bred and reared…
and now it’s lost, all gone.” (lines 1278-84)
Creon must be acknowledged for his achievements, and he was once a wise, capable ruler. Men would once have been jealous of his position, but following his dramatic descent to his final tragic state; no man would now envy him.
This tragedy is what had to occur to save the city from Creon’s tyranny. We witnessed his character worsening as the play progressed, and it became evident that a drastic turn of events would be required to halt his behaviour. Creon needed to learn the value of humanity and love, and he also needed to regain his respect for the gods and the feelings of others. As a king, it is essential he exerts control over his city, but he had to do so with an improved method of judgement and a more realistic set of values, but he could only realise this through the shock of the death of those close to him, especially as they were pushed to take their own lives. This forces him to recognise the “bonds he has not himself chosen” – like familial ties – which Nussbaum believes he was unable to do up until this point of the play.
R. Fagles describes Creon as “sustained by nothing except his tyrannical insistence on his own will….and his outrageous refusal to be defeated by a woman”. Creon seems to have a problem with women in particular defying him, and warns the leader “never be rated inferior to a woman, never” (lines 760-1). This is another factor which was unhelpful in allowing him to rule fairly and equally, but was not an untypical view in Sophocles time.
Creon’s actions from start to finish lead to tragedy for all involved, most notably for himself. The Antigone as a whole can be seen as a lesson to Creon – a lesson to a ruler who was becoming dangerously immersed in his own misjudged views and conceptions, and who needed a sharp shock to prevent further decline of his character. Although he wishes only to hide “and never have to see another sunrise” (line 1450) again at the end of the play, we hope he will later emerge a reformed and improved man for his experiences.
The Antigone is an opportunity for us to witness a total change in the character of a strong ruler. At the same time as following the sad but admirable journey of the “rebel and martyr”, Antigone, towards death, we are able to watch tragedy re-educate and reform a man whose resolve we at first believed could never be broken. Through this double journey we are saddened and shocked, but at the same time we are given hope for humanity in the change in Creon; it may take suffering to induce this alteration, but it is possible. As the closing lines declare – “those blows will teach us wisdom” (line 1470), and this is proven in the changing character of Creon in the Antigone.
from Greek Tragedy: A Literary Study, by H.D.F Kitto, Methuen and Co, London 1939, p.129
from On Aristotle and Greek Tragedy, by John Jones, Chatto and Windus, London 1962, p.200
all line quotes will be from Sophocles; The Three Theban Plays, ed. by Robert Fagles, Penguin, London 1984
from The Fragility of Goodness, by Martha Nussbaum, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1986, p.56
The Fragility of Goodness, p.57
The Fragility of Goodness, p.57
The Fragility of Goodness, p.59
The Fragility of Goodness, p.59
The Fragility of Goodness, p.63
The Fragility of Goodness, p.60
The Fragility of Goodness, p.57
from the introductory notes to Sophocles: The Theban Plays, p.43
from the introductory notes to Sophocles: The Theban Plays, p.38