Kennedy 1 Scott Kennedy Sophocles Seminar Bruce Heiden

Mind in Antigone

This paper will examine the theme of mind in Antigone. I will examine through close reading how terms associated with mental and cognitive processes such as and as well as their derivative forms function throughout the play and develop the theme throughout the play. I will also examine the terms in the play associated with diminished or a lack of mind such as , , etc. and their derivative forms. I will argue that this theme reveals the dangers of excessive thinking and rationalization throughout the play without listening to others or considering the gods. In analyzing this process, I will discuss the play by scene order rather than by character considering the play by scene more clearly illustrates how the theme develops.

In the opening scene of the play, the theme of mind first appears in Ismenes attempts to dissuade Antigone from burying the body (lines 49-68). Ismene uses the imperative think to urge Antigone to reconsider her plans on a rationalized basis. Ismene presents the terrible deaths of their family arguing that theirs will be far worse now that they are all that is left before touching upon how as women that are naturally meant to fight men and how the rule of those stronger than themselves compels them to submit. Her words are rooted in fear of death and physical submission of the body, which causes her Ismene to rationalize seeing her brothers corpse remain unburied. Doing anything more than submitting to Creons decree and asking her

Kennedy 2 relatives for forgiveness would be nonsensical ( ). It is through this rationalization that Ismene is able to stop herself from going any further unlike Antigone. She speaks of a kind of rational constraint to the citys government and ideas about how to act.

In contrast, Antigone throughout this scene has no comments involving , , or related terms. Instead, it is almost as if she presents burying her brother as a no-brainer. It is just what one does for his/her family honoring the gods in doing so. Her loyalty is far more to those below than Creon or his decree even if that means suffering a noble death (lines 69-77, 96-97). The divide between these two approaches of rationality and no-brainer loyalty to ones family and the dead is perhaps best summed up in Ismenes final lines in the scene. Antigone goes irrationally to bury her brother, though perhaps correctly dear to her loved ones ( , , , , lines 98-99). In essence, Ismene is getting at the irrationality of Antigones actions from her perspective of fear and physical constraint, though there is also the contrast of righteousness of her actions for her family. These lines evoke what will be one of the major issues with rationality in the play and just how far one can push it before it breaks down when confront by things like the family which for Antigone need no rationality.

The next scene also presents an interesting perspective on the mind when the chorus enters on the scene. In their narrative of Polyneices and the other sixs attack on Thebes, they portray Adrastus, the Argive leader, as an eagle flying over the city staining himself with the blood of the Thebans. They portray their boasts one of the Seven against Thebes with the boasts of a great

Kennedy 3 tongue and a frenzied assault upon the city, though now that the enemy army has departed they may celebrate despite the loss of their two princes Eteocles and Polyneices. It is a picture of craziness and anarchy brought about by the feud of the two brothers, which has just returned to peace. However, subsequent events will only reveal the very fragility of that peace as the order and rationality that return are themselves shaken up subsequently.

As a solution to this anarchy, Creons new decree seeks to create a new order on a rationalized basis of loyalty to the polis moving away from the family that had caused all the previous destruction (lines 175-190). In his reference to the impossibility of knowing a mans , , and before he is versed in government and the laws, Creon formulates a kind of test for the rational basis he seeks to establish, which Antigone will subsequently test. In formulating this test, he takes for granted and as self evident making , the way a man rationalizes using his , the basis for his new law.1 His conception of the way a man correctly rationalizes is implicitly linked to how the body and emotions operate on man. He sees things like fear pulling a ruler aside from the correct way of thinking as well as similarly later sexual pleasure in his discussion with Haemon (lines 648-651). His rational basis is also based on the idea that one can choose who is dear to a person and conflates friendship and family with this term. If that person were to threaten the city, then they would be an enemy and no .2

It is in terms of this rationality that Creon defines the city and also distinguishes between the two brothers, who the chorus had talked about as brothers without making any distinction between

1 2

Bernadete (1971a) 172 (section 12.4) Ibid., 172 (section 12.6)

Kennedy 4 their loyalties to the city. He defines Eteocles as well thinking toward the city and hence worthy of burial, while Polyneices becomes hard thinking and hence unworthy of burial (lines 207-212). The chorus largely accepts this rationale granting him the power to rule over their living bodies as well as the dead. The idea that anybody would see a principle or idea worth dying for simply does not occur to them. They do not see it almost as even thinkable that anyone would want to disobey this order and hence be so stupid as to die (lines 219-221).

Nevertheless, Creons rationale faces its first test and begins to show cracks when the guard enters on stage presenting the burial of Polyneices. The guards discussion of how his was urging him to do one thing and then another reveals just how not self evident the is. In the discussion that follows the guard also points out the distinction between the or and the body when Creon expresses his pain at the news. The guard is eager to make clear to Creon that his mind and the ears are different, though Creon persists in his thinking.

The scene also presents the first opportunity for testing Creons rationale and the agency of the gods. When the Chorus hears the news of Polyneices burial, he is shaken up and tells Creon that his conscience () had been advising him for a long time throughout the messengers speech that a god could have caused this development (lines 278-279). However, Creon responds with Agamemnon-like anger telling the Chorus that he is being irrational and senile to boot ( ). This aspect of Creons response is important because he will similarly classify Antigone, Ismene, and Haemon as irrational for different reasons subsequently when they oppose his . However, in this instance, it is important because Creon denies that gods might be responsible for burying the body. Instead, he presents a rationalization for act

Kennedy 5 that denies the agency of the gods, who would not have helped Polyneices who would have dishonored them when he destroyed the city. Instead, Creon rationalizes that men who are disloyal to him and consequently the city bribed someone or the guards into doing so (lines 289301). For this reason, Creon envisions money as one of the things that can cause a mans naturally good to become bad and threaten his city.3

The first choral ode following this scene presents an interesting celebration of Creons rational approach through a celebration of man and his greatness. For example, they describe how man captures empty-minded () birds, beasts, and sea life with nets that he has very well thought out. In essence, the Chorus may be referring in a general way to the metaphor of the eagle they referred to before and how mans contrivances like Creons overcome birds. Their comments, that man has learned (speech, wind-like thought, and civilizing passions) to escape living at the mercy of the inhospitable hills and rain, also serve to create a divide between man and animals. Animals lived out in those conditions and hence this is how man has escaped them (lines 342-361). They also posit they power of mans and , which give him the capacity to create cities and avoid disease, as a way to celebrate the rationale instituted by Creon. However, they say man can use these attributes for good or bad whether he follows the laws of the land and the justice of the gods or not.

This last idea of how man uses his is important because this is largely how Creons is put to the test in the next scene. When the guards bring Antigone on stage, both the Chorus and Creon are taken aback because of how they could not have imagined anyone would
3

Bernadete (1971a) 183 (section 19.4)

Kennedy 6 break the law and oppose Creons rationale. The Chorus phrases its disbelief in a question of whether the guards caught her in folly () (lines 381-383). In Creons own response, he does not want to believe Antigone would have transgressed his law either at first disbelieving the guard and then trying to rationalize that Antigone might not have known about his decree.

However, the test has begun. The guards first words to Creon signify this when he tells Creon that nothing is unswearable for mortals and that afterthought proves ones judgment to be wrong ( ). The guard is essentially positing here that Creons

position that was self evident is mistaken because changing events like these can destabilize that very judgment. Antigones response to Creon as well as challenges his and its resultant law by saying that Creons law does not have the power to overrule the vaguely defined unwritten laws of the gods and that she was not going to suffer the punishment of the gods for that . It does not pain her to die, but it would have pained her to see her brother unburied. In essence, Antigone is saying that Creons rationalization was wrong because it did not take into account the higher laws of the gods, while countering Creons notion of the indivisibility of the mind and body because her death gives her body no pain. While she might seem stupid () to Creon for this reason, Antigone charges Creon with the same implying his incorrect rationalization of the laws of the gods and the mind and body. It is as if the Chorus and Creon did not expect to find human rationality so deeply wrapped up in things that cannot be so easily rationalized like family or the divine.4

While Antigone never directly talks about her own and in the course of the play, Creons response is to rationalizes her behavior to her own hard mind (
4

Bernadete (1975a) 193 (section 23.1)

Kennedy 7 ) and thinking too greatly. He sees her as something to be broken like brittle iron (lines 473-479). Instead of listening to Antigone, Creon finds reasons not to listen to her because she does not yield and did not obey her nature as a woman not to fight men like Ismene said was right in her prior rationalizations. Creon still sees the great divide between the two brothers and cannot rationalize that Antigone would defend one over another, who opposed each other as friend and foe rather than family (lines 516-523).

When Isemene enters on the scene, Creon continues his rationalizations. Previously, Creon had noticed her before coming out to see Antigone and seen her frenzy and lack of control over her wits and attributed it to her passion ( ) as what betrayed her (491-493). However, now that the two sisters wish to die, Creon rationalizes that it must be because the two of them are irrational ()Antigone by nature and Ismene just recently (lines 561-562). He does not understand the situation between these two family members and is instead very much still set on his division between friends and enemies of the state. Ismenes reply and his response are emblematic of this way in which his thinking remains unchanged. Ismene says that people lose whatever mind is growing inside them when they fare miserably ( , , , .). Creon, however, responds that Ismene lost it when she chose to do evil with evil people ( , ). In this instance, Creon associates the loss of the mind with evil people in terms of his city-based rationality. It is beyond his range of understanding to see why anyone would choose death if not defending the state or for money. Someone, who opposes his conception of the state willing to die for principle like Antigone or love like Ismene, simply does not register in his rationale.5
5

Winnington-Ingram (1980) 127

Kennedy 8

The choral ode that succeeds this dialogue is a confused interweaving of ideas about Creons rationale and could almost be applied equally to both Creon and Antigone. For example, the chorus discusses how the chopper of the nether gods, irrationality of speech, and the Erinys of the wits is spread out over the last root of the house of Oedipus (lines 594-603). However, the chorus importantly does not specify who they mean. The chopper of the nether gods could refer to Creon for his disregard for them and the irrationality of his approach. It could equally mean Antigone, whom Creon has characterized thus far as irrational and out of her mind. The picture of confusion continues when one examines the natural world in the ode. Perhaps in contrast to the prior choral ode where man was powerful through his speech, thought, and contrivances, now the destruction of the Labdacid house is like the confusion of the winds and seas (lines 585-593). Where mans windy thought were not part of what helped him escape the wild world and live in cities, while his contrivances helped him pass the sea, the wind and the sea rage here. This may well imply a greater divine force at work causing the destruction almost outside the control of man.

However, the Choruss discussion of how hope could be gain for one person, but deception of empty minded desires for another who does not realize it until he scalds his foot in hot fire is a way in which they negate the possibility of knowing what the right way to think or act is. Instead, their mention of the saying that bad things seem good to the person whose the god is driving towards disaster only attributes the agency for this process to the gods, which is distinctly different from their previous thoughts on how revering the justice of the gods and the laws of the land could make a man use his correctly. Instead, it as though the moral

Kennedy 9 ambiguity of the situation that has just unfolded between Creon and Antigone has led them to withdraw judgment of how a man can properly use his wits and leave their comments ambiguous that the gods are responsible for whether a man uses them properly for good or bad.

The following scene with his son Haemon shows how far Creon goes in the wrong direction alienating his family through his determination to cling to his . When Haemon visits him, he fears that his son is crazed () over the fate of his bride (lines 632-634). Like his view earlier of the indivisibility of the mind and body, Creon sees the pleasure a woman gives as something that makes a man lose his mind. The mind corrupting power of a woman Creon considers in accordance with his previous views as something that could lead a son away from becoming like his father and maintaining the distinction between his friends and enemies (lines 639-649). Later in his speech, Creon likewise maintains his ability to choose those are dear to him when he says that if his relatives cause disorder, then they will be outside of his family (lines 659-660). However, whereas before Creon had envisioned himself as the captain of a ship, he takes it slightly a step forward towards tyranny when he speaks of the division of the ruler and the people refusing to let a subject command him or overrule his commands small, just, and the opposite (lines 663-667). He remains firmly in his belief that obedience to his saves the many bodies of the citizens and that men must never be inferior to women (lines 675-679).

While the Chorus accepts Creons attributing sensibleness to his words (lines 681-682), Haemon presents a different line of thought about the mind. Unlike Creon who tries to avoid the agency of the gods in favor of a more rationalized basis, Haemon states simply that the gods grow wits in men. By opening this line, Haemon attributes the wits of men growing wise to the

Kennedy 10 gods and not a man like Creon, whom he alleges lacks the nature to see when he is wrong (lines 683-689). This is a line of thought which creates an opening for him to talk about Creons wrong way of thinking because it implies Creons fallibility and alleges the higher moral basis of the gods as being responsible for mans wits. In the Ode to Man, the chorus did not specify where mans wits come from so that they might be an inborn natural part of man, but Haemon attributes them to the gods and gives them an etiology outside of Creons very physically based rationality. In his subsequent words, he hits upon how the city thinks Creons actions toward Antigone were wrong using the city as a basis to argue convincingly with his fathers focus on the polis. For example, he makes the argument that a person, who thinks he alone is right, has a superior tongue, or has a correct spirit, results in them being found empty or bereft (, lines 705-709). In essence, Haemon is trying to make the point to Creon that his rationality is going too far because it is ignoring the very city that it is suppose to serve.

Nevertheless, rather than listening and accepting the possibility his could be mistaken, Creon resorts to rationalizing. Just as age develops the , Creon does not believe a young man with an undeveloped mind by nature can teach him how to use his own mind (lines 726727). Importantly, he omits that old men to are subject to nature and does not let his sons arguments based on the city sway him if he believes he is acting in the interests of the city. In fact, Creon reveals more clearly the tyranny and isolation of the polis and community from his when he asks Haemon if the city must order him what to do when Antigone is causing disorder. The problem with this is that as Haemon says the city is with Antigone, so Creon is in very essence pulling away from the community through his rationality rather than being part of it. For example, Creon does not believe he should have to rule the city for anyone but himself

Kennedy 11 because the city belongs to him.6 Instead of being on the ship of state with the citizens in his initial speech, Creon here raises up his own above the wishes of the people, which creates the very problem of what disorder is Creon trying to prevent besides what he alone labels as it.

Creons subsequent insults to Haemon in the stichomythia likewise take his way of thinking to the extreme. Whereas Haemon approaches Creon as a son concerned for his father who he feels is trampling over the honors of the gods, Creon instead rationalizes Haemons response as exactly the mind destroying power of love that he feared. Haemon has lost his mind over Antigone and hence what he has to say are insults and arguments in her favor ( , lines 753-754). It should not go without notice that when Haemon leaves he describes Creon as not thinking right and instead leaves him to his madness with those friends who will listen (lines 755, 762-765). In essence, Haemon portrayal of Creon as mad shows the way in which Creon has alienated his family alienated and the city, but it is also important for the vocabulary it uses. His choice of almost implies a certain divine inspiration behind his madness, which Creon will later attribute his mistakes to after his fall. Nevertheless, Creon shows a lack of concern for his son who leaves in what appears an angry passion instead rationalizing him like Antigone as thinking greater than a man with his pride. This is significant because Creon is essentially using the idea of pride based on his own mind rather than any other basis for defining things like thinking greater than oneself.

The choral ode that follows this argument presents another choral ode with reference to a character with undertones of being directed at Creon. The choral ode is addressed to the power of
6

Bernadete (1975b) 39 (section 49.2)

Kennedy 12 Eros and Aphrodite, whose invincible power drives men into almost a divine madness (lines 781790). It is Eros who has stirred up the quarrel between Haemon and Creon in the Chorus mind warping their just toward injustice. This comment is two pronged because the Chorus already fears not only for Haemons angry mind acting in this mania, but also because it may have a double meaning for Creon. Creons persistence in blaming the sexual desire of Eros for his sons defense of Antigone may be what is seen as destroying minds, but Creon through his actions has provoked the power of love.7 It is worth noting that the Chorus reference to desire sitting beside the laws () might imply what is so wrong about Creons : it disregarded the divine power of love. The fact that Chorus feels dragged outside of the laws watching Antigone be hauled on stage to her bridal chamber of death would suggest this interpretation, since they feel like they are transgressing the laws watching a bride be taken to her death rather to Eros and the marriage bed (lines 796-805).

Antigones second to last speech before her departure to the cave is significant because it sums up her own views throughout the play. Instead of relying on some kind of law which is based on her grown and developed , her law relies on the family. Without her mother or father, no future brother of hers could be grown to replace Polyneices hence justifying her unwed death for burying Polyneices in the eyes of those who think well ( ) (lines 904-915). As she has done throughout the play, Antigone does not comment on her own , but rather how her actions are right in the eyes of those thinking well. Rather than imposing her own individual upon others like Creon for the community, she instead relies on the family and the validation of the community for her action (for example, lines 508-509). This may well demonstrate how it is that Creon comes to be isolated in his thought because he took the
7

Winnington-Ingram (1980) 96-97

Kennedy 13 inclination of his own to create law to bind the city, but neglected higher concepts like the family or love that the city and community live by.

The arrival of Teiresias subsequently presents a different kind of challenge to Creons in that whereas Creon has alienated his family through it, now he alienates the gods whose omens Teiresias presents. After Teiresias enters, he tells the king to follow his advice and Creon acknowledges that in the past he did not stand apart from Teiresias (lines 991-995). Essentially, this scene acknowledges that Creon kept his own in line with Teiresias in the past, though that is not to say he acknowledges any great superiority of the prophets, but simply that their two did not disagree in the past. However, now according to Teiresias, he stands upon the edge of a razor and Teiresias alleges that it is Creons with which the city is sick. Essentially, Teiresias advice to Creon is straightforward. He should think that all men make mistakes and in recognizing them and correcting them a man is not without counsel. This process can heal the city. However, it is interesting that Teiresias phrases it this way because in this way Creons own words are reversed upon him. Earlier, he alleged to Haemon that he would kill Antigone because she had a malady causing her to spread disorder in the city. Instead, Creons way of thinking is the disease afflicting the city, though he has the opportunity to use cures to disease man has discovered in the Ode to Man by admitting he made a mistake and following the will of the gods. The portrayal of the birds suggests this as well. Whereas in that same choral ode, men had had power over the birds, now the birds are in confusion making it impossible for Teiresias to interpret the will of the gods (lines 998-1022).

Kennedy 14 Creon rejects Teiresias counsel as not thinking right , which brings great harm (lines 1050-1051). Instead, how Creon refuses to listen to Teiresias words and acknowledge the agency of the gods is by rationalizing reasons for why he will not obey the prophet. For example, he will not see a trade made on his mind by the prophet since he seems to views this act of trading very much like money before as something that replaces good minds with disgraceful ones (lines 1063, 295-299). This moment is effectively the point at which Creons refusal to acknowledge his mistake and change his way of thinking reaches its critical point.

However, ironically this is also the moment that Creon feels his mind upset and yields in his discussions with the Chorus after Teiresias has left (line 1095). As Seth Bernadete has pointed out, his somewhat unwilling admission may well be prompted by the fact that the Chorus showed him alone (and not the city) their loyaltyalbeit conflicted loyaltyup until this point. However, now they urge him upon his way with an injunction to hurry because swift avengers of the gods are quick to cut off those who think badly ( , lines 1104-1105). This statement reveals that the divide, which Creon imposed between those will-minded to the city and those badly minded toward, is no longer relevant in the mind of the Chorus. Instead, it is the of their leader Creon, which has shown irreverence for the gods and may well have divine wrath visited upon it.

However, Creon has not perhaps completely yielded. The messengers description of Creon confronting Haemon with his hands on Antigone presents a picture of how Creons own impudence is responsible for the loss of his son Haemon. The terms he uses imply a double entendre between him and his son, who his questions about what Haemon has done and what

Kennedy 15 was his state of mind ( ) might have implied to Haemon his father had not yielded and that his father was accusing him of killing Antigone.8 The result of these questions is Haemons changed aspect glaring with wild eyes implying Haemons beast-like aspect. His attempt to kill his father also implies his beast like aspect because of how other fourth century authors viewed the act of parricide as animallike. This moment is the reversal of mans great accomplishments with his speech, swift thought, and civilizing passions in the Ode to Man, as the beast and the human blur each others boundaries as a result of forces that cause irrationality such as love.9

When Creon returns on stage, he acknowledges his mistake in his very first words. He cries, Alas for the mistakes of my insensate mind, hard, and fraught with death. (lines 1261-1264). In essence, Creon now sees the error of how he used his to rule the city and destroy his family. His subsequent words that it was a god with a great weight who struck him in the head and shook him to cruel ways is illustrative of his undoing (lines 1272-1274). Whereas, he had previously refused to acknowledge divine agency and sought a rationalization for the actions of others in consequence, now it is his own mind that divine agency has visited itself upon like Haemon alleged.

The final words of the Chorus to close the play are significant because they encapsulate the themes of the play: Good sense is by far the chief part of happiness. We must not be impious towards the gods. Great words of boasters are punished with great blows and teach them good sense as they grow old (1347-1353). While they do not add much to the play because most of

8 9

Bernadete (1971c) 179-180 (section 61.5) Segal (1981) 159

Kennedy 16 the characters probably would have agreed with them, they do present one of the great problems of the play: how to rationalize. The theme of mind within the play presents a complicated picture of human rationality. In the wake of the confusion and craziness of war, Creon sought to create a new order of rationality of loyalty toward the city, but he did so excessively. Without taking into account irrational concepts like the gods, love, or family, Creon created a rationality that only he could support only to find at the end that he himself was irrationally led on by a god to his destruction.

Works Cited

Kennedy 17 Bernadete, Seth A. (1975a) A Reading of Sophocles Antigone I. Interpretation 4.3: 148-196 (sections 1.1-23.1) ------------------------(1975b) A Reading of Sophocles Antigone II. Interpretation 5.1: 1-55 (sections 24.1-46.11) ------------------------(1975c) A Reading of Sophocles Antigone III. Interpretation 5.2: 148-184 (sections 47.1-65.1) Segal, Charles (1981) Tragedy and Civilization: An Interpretation of Sophocles. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA. Winnington-Ingram, R.P. (1980) Sophocles: An Interpreation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.