First and foremost, I would like to apologize to all commenters for my late posting. The blog completely escaped my mind. With my first English class on Tuesday, I don’t really tend to think of it when contemplating homework due for Monday. I apologize for any inconvenience.
Most of the discussion in class has resolved around which of the characters in Antigone is the more likable. However, looking over the top choices -- Creon, Antigone, Ismene -- it is difficult to see a clear winner. We’ve got Creon, some crazed tyrant who has led himself to believe that he *is* the state. Antigone, a woman who is solely led by her own stubborn will and, while admirable in her own way, is so narrow-minded she shuns all who might disagree with her. And Ismene, a sister who cannot stand up for her own beliefs and is tossed aside by everyone when they see she is not willing to do what it takes. Were the house to be broken into at this very moment by a well-read robber and were he to put a gun to my head and thrust a copy of Sophocles’s Antigone into my hands and were he then to force me to choose the character I liked most or surrender my life to him…..………I’d choose Ismene. He’d then set the gun down and we’d have a lovely chat comparing and contrasting the differing themes of Oedipus Rex and Antigone over tea and scones. But I digress.
The odd thing is, it has become apparent that we don’t *need* to like the characters in a story. One can enjoy a piece of literature or drama without feeling any sympathy at all for any of the characters. Sure, it definitely *helps* if the reader can identify with the protagonist or even a secondary character but it seems not to be essential for a well-written work of literary genius. Another example of use of less than favourable characters is Emily Brontë ’s, Wuthering Heights. I mean, who *actually* likes Heathcliff or Catherine? But despite this, the novel is still a masterpiece of English literature.
Granted, it’s a rather odd thought. How can one commit to a piece of literature, spend so much time reading and analyzing it, and *not* dislike spending the time required to do so with such annoying characters? Yet, I can easily say in the same breath that I dislike every character found within Antigone and yet I thoroughly enjoy the play. It seems that themes trump characters. Not in every circumstance, of course. But when in the hands of an extremely skilled author or playwright, a handful of disagreeable characters can be molded into a fantastic, timeless story.
(Alright, 8 am on Monday morning isn’t bad! Plus, if there are any commenters who have forgotten, here’s an untouched blog entry!)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Okay, Tibi, I have to say (don't I always?) I loved every bit of the first paragraph, and especially the Ismene and the tea and the scones. Why didn’t you talk about her more? Instead you dived into ignorance (perhaps too strong of a word) or your usual absolutist attitude. I can just see us arguing about this and getting nowhere. I think that it is indispensible to any story to have strong characters that we like. A character may be a complete bastard or a Dark Lord if you will, but if the author shows us the intricacies of his character, the way Sophocles does in both his plays, I'll be damned if I can't understand and sympathies. There is something in that all three, Creon, Antigone, and Ismene - are a little bit right and a little bit wrong. It makes you, as the reader, torn in making the decision who is right and wrong because there are no clear delimitation of such things in real life. Everything is objective. I don't think that you would have enjoyed Antigone if the characters were flat and two dimensional. I guess that means that yes, you don’t have to like them, but no you do have at least a little sympathy. Otherwise what is the point? What is Sophocles doing with this play if not juxtaposing these characters against each other?
Well, Tibi, let me start by saying my post will NOT be as long as Teddie's, which is quite ridiculous and intimidating. I have to scroll down to read it all (super scary). Anyway, I enjoyed your blog entry very much, especially your English spelling of "unfavorable". I find it interesting that you cannot identify with any one character, as I had thought you would be drawn to the unabashed bravery of Antigone. I'm not sure if I support your "I hate all the characters but I love this book" theory. In any event, nice work. Hey, this entry was longer than I thought. Now for the final touch...
Hooray.
Sincerely,
Harrison Graham Kent
P.S. It's STILL shorter than Teddie's. My dear woman, I salute you.
Ms. Vidolova,
It seems you have misunderstood my post. As the writer, I would like to apologize for being unclear. As you made the distinction between liking a character and sympathizing with him/her, so do I. Of course I can sympathize with the characters! In fact, I would not have been able to enjoy the play did I *not* feel sympathy. Also where did you get the idea that I would prefer 2 Dimensional characters? I do believe I wrote a rather scathing paper earlier this year in which I accused Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice of being completely stocked with 2 Dimensional characters -- excluding Elizabeth and Darcy. At the core of it, I feel that we believe the same thing. To quote you: “yes, you don’t have to like them, but no you do have at least a little sympathy.” Basically, our disagreement stems from this sentence of mine: “One can enjoy a piece of literature or drama without feeling any sympathy at all for any of the characters.” Looking over it now, I realize I should have used a different phrase for that is definitely not what I meant. It seems that in my editing, I failed to catch that slip of the…… tongue? I take full responsibility for this argument and I hope we can realize that it seems we basically have the same ideas regarding this debate. (For the most part, at least.)
As to your comments regarding my “ignorance” and “usual absolutist attitude,” I would like to express my shock and disappointment that you thought such slanderous phrases were necessary.
-Matthew JP Tibi
Dear Mr. Tibi,
I feel that we may have come to an agreement as unlikely as that may seem. I have to admit, you are not ignorant about most things and least of all literature. You do have a tendency to say that things are a certain way absolutely like your decision on the perfect form of immortality or, or! claiming that James is annoying. Remember he is the one that would think it the height of dishonor to distrust his friends. And look at the nice comment Harry left me and to think I may have missed it!
Love,
Teddie
*Laughs*
Ms. Vidolova,
If you look at the way he treats Severus, he's rather annoying. We don't have much evidence regarding what he was like after he "deflated his head a bit." So, I can only judge to 5th year. (I'm not bringing fan fiction into this. =P Haha.) However, you must know I am also rather biased based on my disposition toward Severus and my love of Miss Lily Evans.
See you in class!
-Matthew JP Tibi
.....What was this post about again?
Tibi--very good post, even if the debate between yourself and Ms. V is partly lost on me (Severus? James?)
I do see your point about Antigone, however, even if describing her as "solely let by her own stubborn will" seems a bit narrow, leaving out her belief in her moral and family principles.
And I like what you say about WH. In fact, it makes me wonder if Bronte doesn't deliberately balance the self-driven nature of her two main characters by balancing them with young Cathy and Hareton, both of whom are more sympathetic and who overcome the bad hands life deals them through compassion and love.
Matthew,
I enjoyed your post very much, yet of fact you state is true; from my research at least is not. Otto Plath died in 1940, Sylvia was 8 years old then not ten. Thank you for your time.
Post a Comment