The Method of Purification in Antigone

INTRODUCTION

It is first important to have knowledge about the circumstances and the situation of Greek dramas before trying to make comments or to criticize them. It is because Greek dramas are very different, almost in many aspects, from modern drama today. In Greek, dramas, especially tragedy, were played mostly during the festival of Dionysis, The God of Wine, which lasted four or five days yearly. During the festival, people of Greek, or more precisely Athenians, would come to some kind of open space and watched the tragedies played. At the end of the festival, an honorable trophy in the form of “olive crown” would be rewarded to play considered the best. It was in such condition that Antigone, a tragedy play by Sophocles, was first performed (Knox, 1964: 35).

Considering the circumstances, it is easy to understand why Greek dramas have a similar form, that is to rely fully on words spoken by actors or chorus. It is because Greek drama, first of all, is a “stage-drama”. Consequently, in Greek drama, plots and stories play the more significant rule compared to other aspects of modern drama such as actions or characters (Knox, 1964: 35).

Inspired by the tradition, Aristotle, a Greek philosopher who was also familiar with the Dionysis festival, then theorized those aspects of Greek drama, notably tragedies, as follows: tragedy is usually concerned with a person of great stature. He can be a king or a nobleman who falls because of hubris, pride, or destiny. The purpose of playing tragedy, relevant to the context of worship to Dionysis, was to purify the souls of the audience –and this is what is called purification or catharsis (Knox, 1964: 36).

Antigone, a play by Sophocles which won the olive crown when played in Athena, about 441 B.C., is a good example of how such poetic theories were put into practice.


THE SUMMARY OF ANTIGONE
Antigone tells a story of a young girl named Antigone. She was the daughter of Oedipus, the former king of Thebes. After the death of Oedipus, the crown of Thebes fell to Creon, Oedipus’ brother-in-law. The problem began when the other two sons of Oedipus, namely Eteocles and Polyneices, were treated differently by Creon after their death. Eteocles, who died in the battle for the glory of Thebes, was buried in honor, as a hero. But Polyneices, who died during his escape from exile, by Creon’s decree, hadn’t to be buried. His corpse had to remain in the place where he died, so that it might be a foodstuff for dogs, wolves or vultures.

Antigone couldn’t accept the decree. She felt that the corpse of Polyneices had to have the same honor as Eteocles. So, although Creon had already announced capital punishment for those who disobeyed the decree, Antigone resisted. One day, she quietly walked to the corpse of Polyneices and covered it with ground.

Antigone’s action was reported to Creon, who then sentenced her to death. Creon felt his decree had to come first, eventhough he realized that Antigone was his sister’s daughter, and more importantly, the bride of his son, Haemon. Antigone didn’t deny she had violated the decree. She just insisted that her choice was right. If giving an honor to the corpse of a brother was considered a crime and must be sentenced to death, said Antigone, she would accept it without regret. Antigone was finally hung in a deserted area by Creon’s guard.

The son of Creon, that is Haemon, couldn’t accept the death of his bride. He blamed his father for being so stubborn. He loved Antigone so much that he couldn’t live without her. Therefore, when Antigone was hung, Haemon committed suicide by stabbing his sword to his chest.

Actually, after Teiresias, the counselor of Thebes had uttered his concern about Creon’s punishment to Antigone, Creon changed his mind. He came to the place where Polyneices’ body laid with the intention to give him a decent funeral. He even intended to cancel his decree on Antigone. But it was too late. During his way to the area, Antigone and Haemon were already dead.

However, the suffering continued. When Eurydice, the wife of Creon, heard the death of her son, she decided to commit suicide by stabbing herself in the altar of God. Creon came back to his palace just to hear another death news. And her wife’s last words, reported to Creon by a servant, was a condemn to him. Creon, because of his stubbornness to his decree, finally lost his family.


ANALYSIS

From the summary above, it became clear that death was always an inherent part of tragedy plays. In fact, almost in all Greek dramas, tragedy was always associated by deaths. The only differences among them were only the causes and the methods of deaths, while the purpose, still suitable to Aristotle’s concept in Poetics, was the same, that is to bring purification to the audience. The question then may arise: how could such play bring purification?

Before I try to answer the question, first, it is important to notice that Antigone, in some cases, is not very different from the other two plays of Sophocles, that is Oedipus Rex and Oedipus at Colonus. In fact, the three plays were often called “The Theban plays” or “The Oedipus Trilogy” (Knox, 1964: 36). But of course, it would be erroneous to say that Antigone was a continuation of the two plays, since Antigone was written by Sophocles some fifteen years before Oedipus Rex and a fully thirty-six years before Oedipus at Colonus. So, when the three plays were called “The Oedipus Trilogy”, one must remember that the similarity among them was only the theme (Knox, 1964: 38).

As noted by Knox, the main concept in Sophocles’ tragedy is his view that the position of man is subordinate in the relation to the gods (Knox, 1964: 38). This view is clearly expressed in Antigone, especially by the utterance of the chorus. Here is an example:

Chorus
Happy the man whose life is uneventful
For once a family is cursed by God,
Disasters come like earhquake tremors, worse
With each succeding generation

It’s like when the sea is running rough
Under stormy winds from Thrace
The black ooze is stirred up from the seabed,
And louder and louder the waves crash on shore.

Look now at the last sunlight that sustains
The one surviving root of Oedipus’ tree,--
The sword of death is drawn back to hack it down.
(Bowra, 1944: 47)


The context of this utterance was when the chorus heard Creon decreed capital punishment to Antigone for disobeying his orders. From the passage, we know that after learning that Antigone was about to face death, the chorus, who’s in the play were represented by old citizens of Thebes, suddenly reminded the audience about the similarity of Antigone’s fate with the fate of his father, Oedipus. Both of them, the chorus concluded, were cursed by God.

But here comes the interesting point. Although the chorus themselves told the audience that Antigone was cursed by God, Antigone herself didn’t think that God was the main root of her suffering. We would get such opinion after reading Antigone’s argument to Creon below:

Antigone
Sorry, who made this edict? Was it God?
Isn’t a man’ right to burial decreed
By divine justice? I don’t consider your
Pronouncements so important that they can
Just… overrule the unwritten laws of heaven.
You are a man, remember.
(Bowra, 1944: 43)

In Antigone’s opinion, it is clear that God has nothing to do with her fate. If she would have to face death because of her action, then, God is not the one to be blamed. It was Creon, the man, whom to be blamed, not God. From this point of view, of course, there is a kind of contradiction. If the fate of Antigone, according to the chorus, has been determined by God –through the curse— why Antigone blamed Creon?
In his An Introduction to Sophocles, Webster made an interesting comment about this. He said that in all Sophocles’ plays, it must be understood that the relation of God and human is problematic. In one side, God is often positioned as the only determinator, the cause of all fates, including tragic fate, which must be accepted without any doubt. But in the other side, God is still feared and respected. So, the positioning of God as the root of tragic fate doesn’t automatically imply bad judgment about Him (Webster, 1969: 12).

Such contradiction would become clearer at the end of the story. After the death of Antigone, Haemon and Eurydice, Creon felt very guilty. He never imagined that his decree would cost the lives of three people. He couldn’t bear the consequences that he prayed for death to come to him.

Creon
Nobody else to share the blame. Just me…
I killed you. I killed you my dear.
Servants, carry me in, away from al this.
I wish I weren’t alive.

Chorus
Try to forget. It is the only way.

Creon
I invite death. Do you only come uninvited?
Come and take me. I cannot bear to live.

Chorus
No time for such thoughts now. You’re still in charge.
You’ve got to see about these corpses, or
We’ll all be polluted.

Creon
I meant what I said

Chorus
No use in such prayers. You’ll get what’s destined.
(Bowra, 1944: 65)

It’s interesting to see that although Creon prayed for death, the chorus consistently said that it would be useless since he would get what was destined for him. But similar to Antigone, Creon didn’t blame God for his fate. He could only blame himself for being so stubborn. So, although his stubbornness was also destined by God, contradictly, Creon couldn’t blame God for it (Webster, 1969: 14).

To solve the contradiction, then one may remember that tragedy plays were performed on stage during the Dionysis festival, which its main context was a celebration to Dionysis so that the wine harvest would be better in the following year. Based on this context, it is of course impossible to expect Greek plays to represent some kind of rebellion against God, since raison d’ etre of the plays themselves was a devotion to Him. Therefore, it will be better to view this contradiction from another standing point.

As noted by Webster, one of the keys to understanding Sophocles’ plays is to pay careful attention to relation between God and human (Webster, 1969: 12). Not only because it is important, but more essentially, the comprehensive understanding of such relation would reveal the message, motive, and also the main purpose of the play itself. And in Webster’s opinion, the clearest aspect of relation of God and human in Sophocles’ plays was that man, in some ways, was forced to discover his own potentialities or his own status of divinity through tragic fate (Webster, 1969: 14).

In Antigone, such discovery was clearly represented. Both Antigone and Creon were persons with their own view of virtue. For Antigone, it was a virtue that she should give an honorable funeral to his brother. But for Creon, considering his status as the king of Thebes, the only virtue that seemed right was only to give honorable funeral to Eteocles, the hero, not to Polyneices, the runaway. Both of them insisted to their own point of view. Both of them also believed that it was their opinion which was right according to the rules of God. But since God didn’t show clearly which one of them was right, each of them had to follow his or her own way until the extreme point: death. Only after death comes, then the true virtue, the real rule of God, could be revealed (Webster, 1969: 15).

From this standpoint, it is clear that in Sophocles’ play, death didn’t function as a dramatic element. Its function is much more important than merely a dramatic event to evoke sadness. Death, the extreme cost of one’s discovery, has a very high status as the only possible way of revealing God’s virtue. That is why Webster said that in most Sophocles’ play, as if the veil of God was only lifted halfway, and man was expected to guess what lay behind it (Webster, 1969: 17). We can find such a conclusion from the last words of the chorus below:

Chorus
Who wants happiness? The main
Requirement is to be sensible.
This means not rebelling against
God’s law, for that is arrogance.
The greater your arrogance, the heavier God’s revenge.
And proud men in old age learn to be wise.
(Bowra, 1944: 65)

Chorus, who in Greek drama was usually positioned as the narrator and participated in each opinion of the actors, at the end of the play, finally revealed the true virtue of God: that Creon was wrong; that the main requirement to gain happiness from God is to be sensible. It is, of course, a simple thing to understand. But in reality, in order to be sensible is not as easy as it seems. The story of Creon is an example. Creon had to loose three lives of persons whom he loved much just to understand such a simple virtue. And that’s the tragedy (Webster, 1969: 19).

From such point of view, then it is clear how a play like Antigone could bring purification to its audience. Watching the story of Creon, his stubbornness on his own “virtue”, and the cost he had to bear, presumably would give audience a sense of sadness, but at the same time, a sense of reveal. As deaths happened, Creon finally recognized that his action was mistaken, that he had been misguided by his arrogance, meaning that he had moved from ignorance to knowledge. But the recognition gained by Creon, tragically, hit him at same instant as the lost he felt from the death of the three persons. It was such slight movement from lost to recognition that would lead audience to purification, to the higher stage of mental awareness (Webster, 1969: 21). So, in short, we may say that the method of purification in Antigone, and I think it can also be applied in most Sophocles’ tragedy plays, derived from such slight mental movement. A simple mental movement which, in Webster’s words, needed the cost of three lives.

CONCLUSION
From the discussion above, it can be concluded that purification, the main purpose of Greek tragedy, was derived from the tragic fate that befell to actors and, at the same time, a mental awareness that accompanied it. Usually, the greater the tragedy, the greater the awareness would rise. If death happened to be the most common event of tragedy, it is because death is viewed as the greatest tragedy of all. And Antigone is a good example of such method.


BIBLIOGRAPHY
B. M. W. Knox, Studies in Sophoclean Tragedy (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1964).

C. M. Bowra, Sophoclean Tragedy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1944).

Webster, T. B. L., An Introduction to Sophocles, 2nd edition, [London: Cornell
University Press, 1969).


CREDITS:
*This paper arranged by Leny Nuzuliyanti for the subject "English Drama". The author formerly was student of English Department, Diponegoro University, graduated at 2006. The copy right of this paper are on the writer.

Read More......

Ghost, a Study of Plot in Practice

Introduction

We might not very familiar to Ghosts. They who are interested in drama may know the playwright more, Henrik Ibsen. This is due to Ghosts is not Ibsen's masterpiece. Ibsen himself is much more well know for his other works, those are A Doll's House or A Wild Duck.

Ibsen as a famous playwright is hardly forgotten in every single study of realism in drama. Realism itself as a school of literary has its own long history. An idea of realism came at the triumph of romanticism, namely at the beginning of 18th century. The social condition at that time was getting worse since Napoleon Bonaparte fell in 1815. People lost the spirit of liberty, equality and fraternity (Brockett, 19- : 287).

The condition is much worse at the time of Industrial Revolution as the milestone of the many discoveries that change people life in the further. Machines changed the labor. The labor lost their jobs. Furthermore, jobless lead to poverty; and poverty rose the criminal.

Then, an idea came that is such condition was only able to be solved by observation, prediction, and control of society (Brockett, 19- : 287). This is stated by August Comte. The philosophy a la Comte, in the further, is known as positivism. Comte argued that sociology is the highest knowledge to repair the social condition. Observation and experiment are the best trial (Sumardjo, 1993 : 79). Comte, then, is known as the father-founder of Sociology.

Charles Darwin is a man who is much influenced by Comte. Two main idea of Darwin are all forms of life have developed gradually from a common ancestry; and the evolution of species is explained by the "survival of the fittest" (Brockett, 19- : 288). Darwin wrote his idea in The Origin of Species which was published in 1859. Darwin, then, is known as Father of Evolution Theory.

The Origin of Species brought a new perspective to people. First, the genetic and the surrounding are the two main factors that determine the human existence. Both can explain either the behavior or nature of human. Thus, a criminal cannot be supposed to be wrong, but his surrounding can. Rehabilitate someone's behavior means recovery of his surrounding.

Secondly, the evolution theory and survival of fittest attack the religion and God's existence. Thirdly, human is supposed to be equal to the things because they are bound to the natural law. Human can be the object of study (Sumardjo, 1993 : 79-80).
It seemed that Ibsen is not an exception as the part of society who is influenced by Darwin. It is vividly drawn in his works of the second period of his career as a playwright Ibsen might agree to the concept of genetically heredity and blame the society. Grounded on this explanation, Ghosts (1881) is a good instance.


ANALYSIS

Ghosts is interesting either to be followed or to be learned. The aspects of Ghosts are much more vivid than the other Ibsen's drama. Plot is one aspect which clearly drawn.

Ibsen wrote Ghosts as a well-made play. Eugene Scribe (1791-1861) is a famous playwright who much influences Ibsen. Ibsen directed more than twenty Scribe plays in Norway before he launched his own powerfully influential dramas (Holman, 1983: 464). One effect that Ibsen got from Scribe is well-made play pattern. Ghosts is one sample of Ibsen's well-made play.

A plot based on a withheld secret that, being revealed at the climax, produces a favorable reversal for the hero is the first requirement of drama to be categorized as a well-made play (Holman, 1983: 464). There's nothing too important which reveals in the first scene of Ghosts. A part of introduction of the story belongs to this scene.

The drama, which consists of three scenes, is opened with a chat of Regine and her stepfather, Jacob Engstrand. There's nothing too important of their chat. Both are introduced as the minor characters. Engstrand leaves Regine at the time Pastor Manders comes. Regine does not reveal for longer when she has to tell her hostess that there's a guess for her.

Mrs. Alving meets her guess. They talk about many things. At least, there are three main important things of their talk. First, there are some clue that there are any mistaken in the orphanage construction which is held by Pastor Manders. Second, the real feeling between Pastor Manders and Mrs. Alving is retold. Third, hoe actually Mrs. Alving lived during her husband still alive is retold as well.

The clue that there's a secret will be told at the climax reveals at the end of the scene. Here, the suspense is started. At once the second requirement as a well-made play, a steadily mounting suspense depending on rising action, exactly timed entrances, mistaken identity, witholding of information from characters, misplaced letters and documents, and a battle of wits between hero and villain (Holman, 1983: 464), is fulfilled.

Witholding of information from characters is pattern which Ibsen used. It is not too difficult to know, actually who is the key speaker who knows everything. Mrs. Alving mention ghosts and Pastor Manders does not continue his utterance, as if he is afraid of the truth of his own guess. Thus, it is clear that the key speaker must be Mrs. Alving.

[The noise of a chair being overturned is heard from the dining room - at the same time REGINE's voice.]
REG.'S VOICE. [In a sharp whisper] Osvald! - Are you mad? - Let me go!
…
MRS. ALV. [Hoarsely] Ghosts - Those two in the conversatory - Ghosts - They've come to mylife again
MAN. What do you mean? Regine -- ? Is she --?

Thus, the first scene has an endless ending.

The explanation of Ghosts which Mrs. Alving mention reveals at the beginning of the following scene. In the other room that Mr. Alving supposed to be much more save, she told pastor Manders the past of her family. Mr. Alving, during his live has an affair with their maid, Johanna. Regine was born as the result of the affair.

It is impossible for Mr. Alving to marry Johanna. The society will see them badly. Thus, to give a father for Regine, Johanna married Jacob Engstrand. Johanna, then, died. Mrs. Alving herself cannot refuse Regine in her turn to be her maid as her mother did.

They who supposed this act to be the climax will get despair. This is only an explanation to the following acts. In other words, the telling of this big secret is only a part of Ibsen's trial in rising the suspense.

The climax is in the talk between Mrs. Alving and her son as Pastor Manders leaves. There are some important things which Osvald tells his mother. Firstly, Osvald told her that, actually, he is suffered from syphilis. Neither Mrs. Alving nor Osvald can deals this truth. Even more, there is such a confession that syphilis which is Osvald suffered from is just inherited. Mrs. Alving must received that her trial to avoid Osvald from his father's bad influences is useless.

Osvald, in his despair, still has a little hope to recover himself. Somebody whom he wishes would help him is his joy of life, Regine (Mother! The one thing that could save me is Regine!). Mrs. Alving is surprised for the second time. Although she herself does not wish it, but finally she tells Osvald everything. It is impossible for Osvald and Regine to get married because they are half-brothers.

The climax, as the third requirement of a well-made play, is strongly bounded to the two previous requirements. A climax culminating in an obligatory scene (scene a faire) in which the withheld secret is revealed and the reversal of the hero's fortunes achieved (Holman, 1983: 464).

The secret that is hidden since at the beginning is known. This, surely, become a favorable reversal for Osvald. At least, Osvald confesses that the syphilis he is suffered from is inherited from his father (You see - my illness is heredity - it - [touches his forehead and speaks very quietly] It is centered - here). Then, Osvald does not think the origin of his illness too much. Osvald tries thinking how to recover himself from his illness.

Osvald's wish of getting married with Regine, which cannot be realized, is not a catastrophe. In the other hand, it saves Osvald from being despair for the second times due to marry his own stepsister.

Finally, a logical denouement as the last requirement of a well-made play is fulfilled in the third scene. For instance, the construction of the orphanage which grounded on a "false money" and held by a "false man" is fired. It is not too surprising if the false management of the construction is finally known. More over, it is supposed to be something too usual when two people who firstly allied for a bad purpose then blame each other -even attack- for the mistaken.

MAN. [Standing still] That's what you claim - but I could swear I never went near the lights!
ENG. But I saw you with my own eyes, Sir - I saw you snuff one of the candles and throw the bit of wick right into a pile of shavings!

Osvald, being despair due to, first, he must confess that his illness is inherited from his father; and second, his wish to live with his joy of life cannot be realized, at the end, chooses his own way. Osvald wants to end his life with his mother's help -a willing of euthanasia- is only something too common.

CLOSING
How Ibsen works arranging Ghosts as a well-made play cannot be supposed to be an easy work due to some reason. Firstly, Ibsen takes controversial issues -up to now- those are inherited sin and euthanasia. Secondly, Ibsen must fulfill the requirement of well-made play in a three-act structure of drama. And Ibsen can keep it tightly. Ghosts, then, is a play which is interesting either to be followed or studied, however.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brockett, Oscar G.,The Theatre: An Introduction, 2nd edition ( )
Holman, C. Hugh, A Handbook to Literature (Indiana: Bobbs-Merrill Educational Publishing, 1980)
Sumardjo, Jakob, Ikhtisar Teater Barat, (Bandung: Penerbit Angkasa, 1993)

*This paper arranged by Leny Nuzuliyanti for the subject "English Drama". The author formerly was student of English Department, Diponegoro University, graduated at 2006. The copy right of this paper are on the writer.

Read More......

Julius Caesar: A man's gotta do....

by William Shakespeare
Genre: Play, 1599
Content: Five acts, 2,591 lines, approx. 19,000 words

This play ought to be called Brutus, since the central theme concerns that man's decision to join an assassination conspiracy and the repercussions of his action. Caesar is dispensed with by the halfway point.

However, Julius Caesar's assumption of the Roman dictatorship after the civil war fought against his former triumvirate partner Pompey and his victories in battle celebrated in the first scene of Shakespeare's play make him the most famous historical character of this period. In the play, the republican conspirators fear he will also allow himself to be crowned king. This fear may seem strange to us, since Caesar already had supreme power, but a kingship would usher in imperial power with an hereditary leadership, as opposed to the existing system in which the nobility chose who would rule. You can see that political terms such as "republican" had a slightly different meaning in those days.

But if Brutus, Cassius and the gang killed Caesar to remove a tyrant and to preserve what they considered democracy, then why are they the bad guys in Julius Caesar?

The plot of the play, like the storylines for Shakespeare's other Roman tragedies, was taken from Plutarch's Parallel Lives, written over a hundred years after the assassination, during the height of the imperial power that did indeed succeed the republic — at a time when Caesar and his heirs were greatly admired. Also Shakespeare was writing in England during another greatly admired British monarchy. Sometimes, it seems the only thing Shakespeare considered worse than a bad monarch was the killing of a bad monarch.

And Brutus is not shown in as dim a light as his co-conspirators. He agonizes over the decision to murder Caesar. Both his good intentions and his political naivety are take advantage of by Mark Antony, who turns the tables against Brutus and Cassius. (Writing of Brutus's internal conflicts may have been practice for Shakespeare's creation of his next and greatest protagonist, the haunted Hamlet.) Rather than being portrayed as a bad man, Brutus for Shakespeare is a good man who did a bad thing for good reasons. He is moreover surrounded by characters of less honour. The conspirers Decius and Cassius are deceivers, both of others and of themselves. Mark Anthony is cunning and power-hungry. Only Brutus remains a completely sympathetic character and upon his death he is eulogized by Antony as the "noblest Roman of them all". (Of course, Antony had previously eulogized Caesar as the "noblest man that ever lived".)

All in all, Julius Caesar is morally a somewhat confusing play. Which may be Shakespeare's point. Morality is a shifting battlefield. In this, the play is a precursor to Macbeth, but in that later drama the confusion of fair and foul is eventually put right. The protagonist Macbeth is also a more typical Shakespearean tragic figure in that a fatal flaw — overweening ambition — brings him down. Brutus has no such driving character flaw. His downfall comes about because he didn't have Antony killed when he could have and because he trusted others. He'd make a good study for one of those modern pop-psychology books with titles like Why Good People Do Stupid Things.

It's also mildly interesting that many of the phrases from Julius Caesar that have become well-known are rather meaningless out of context:

"Beware the ides of March"
"Et tu, Brute"
"Cry 'Havoc!' and let slip the dogs of war"
"Not that I lov'd Caesar less, but that I lov'd Rome more"
"Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears"
"I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him"

Of greater application are:

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves"
"There is a tide in the affairs of men Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune"
"The evil that men do lives after them; The good is oft interred with their bones"

The latter was said by Antony deceptively of Caesar, but applies more truthfully to Brutus. But perhaps the most telling statement is that of Antony at the end concerning his opponent:

His life was gentle; and the elements
So mix'd in him that Nature might stand up
And say to all the world 'This was a man!'

For me, this is Shakespeare's ultimate message in Julius Caesar. However, confused and contradictory is human nature, it is what we are and overall it is a wondrous thing. For all his terrible mistakes, Brutus is someone we can look up to as an epitome of humanity.

Don't worry, Antony gets his deserts in the sequel, Antony and Cleopatra.

Read More......

Macbeth: The Scottish play rewrites history

by William Shakespeare
Genre: Drama, Play c. 1606
Five acts,
2,349 lines,
approx. 16,500 words

Macbeth was actually king of Scotland for seventeen years, though you would never get this from Shakespeare's most popular play. Historians consider Macbeth and his wife to have been relatively good and decent rulers, far from the guilt-ridden tyrants of Macbeth. But the factually true story would have made far less effective drama and told us fewer truths about human nature.

It's also strangely appropriate that the play should misrepresent history so drastically, for its central theme is the reversal of good and bad.

Just look at the many dark and tumultuous expressions remembered from Macbeth:

Fair is foul, and foul is fair.

Like a rat without a tail, I'll do, I'll do, and I'll do.

Nothing in his life became him like the leaving it.

Is this a dagger which I see before me...or art thou but a dagger of the mind?

There's daggers in men's smiles.

Double, double toil and trouble.

By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes.

Out, damned spot!

Not to mention the great and famous monologue of the despairing king in the last act:

To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life ’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Macbeth may be Shakespeare's bleakest tragedy, unrelentingly dark, without those moments of comic relief or frivolity found in Hamlet or King Lear. The dense plot runs thusly:

Three witches, or "weird sisters", are visited by Macbeth and Banquo, who on behalf of Scottish king Duncan have just defeated rebel forces. The witches prophesy Macbeth will become thane of Cawdor and then king. They also predict Banquo's heirs will someday rule Scotland. Immediately after the predictions, the men receive news the king has made Macbeth thane of Cawdor. Encouraged by the prophecy, Lady Macbeth convinces Macbeth to murder the king while he is visiting their castle. Some guards are set up to take the blame for the murder and Macbeth is named king.

Fearing the second part of the prophecy, Macbeth also orders the murder of his friend Banquo and his son Fleance, but Fleance escapes. Macbeth is haunted by the ghost of Banquo. Consulting the witches again, he is told to beware Macduff, but also that no one born of woman has power to harm him and that he never will be defeated until Birnam Wood comes to Dunsinane (his castle). Macduff joins Duncan's son Malcolm to form an army in England to fight Macbeth. While Macduff is away, Macbeth attacks Macduff's castle and has Lady Macduff and her children killed. Lady Macbeth goes mad with guilt and dies. The Malcolm-Macduff army advance on Dunsinane, using branches of Birnam Wood as camouflage. Macduff, who was born by Caesarian section (and thus not "born of woman") kills Macbeth. Malcolm becomes king.

It is also understood that Banquo's heirs eventually become rulers. This prediction may have been included in the play because the patron of Shakespeare's company, King James I of England, was considered a descendant of Banquo.

Some think Macbeth as we know it, Shakespeare's shortest tragedy, is actually an abridged version of a longer play.

The play has a reputation in the theatre for bringing bad luck. It is often referred to as "the Scottish play" to avoid speaking the cursed word "Macbeth", as any fan of the Blackadder TV series knows.

Several film versions have been made of Macbeth, as well as operas by Verdi (1847-65) and Bloch (1910).

Source: http://www.editoreric.com/greatlit/books/Macbeth.html

Read More......

Murder in the Cathedral: Undramatic poetry

by T.S. Eliot
genre: Drama, 1935

Murder in the Cathedral is not much of a play. Only two acts with an interlude—a sermon really—between them.

Not much stage action: England's archbishop, Thomas Becket returns to England in spite of the opposition of his former friend, King Henry, who wants the religious power wielded for his own political gains. Becket resists the temptation to capitulate and is slain by four knights, carrying out Henry's unspoken wishes.

It's written in irregularly metred verse, mostly four beats to the line, with sporadic rhyming. A chorus of Canterbury women moan and wail in the background, supposedly representing the hopes and fears of the common folk.

The characters of Eliot's most studied drama are not really individuals but representatives of positions in a moral argument. Becket, who ponders the nature of martyrdom and questions his own motives, is the only one who seems an individual, but he is too good for the real world. Apart from his momentary doubt over the "last temptation", he is too obviously venerated to be sympathetic to anyone who is not already an intense Christian. Despite the meditative tone to the whole work, the only point I found of any intellectual interest was the possibility raised by Becket himself that even the desire to be a saint might itself be selfish.

Murder in the Cathedral is supposed to be the showcase of Eliot's attempt to revive poetic drama. But it comes across as less a work for the stage as a long dramatic poem, and even that's exaggerating the dramatic aspect.

As for the verse itself, if you're familiar with Eliot's poetry you'll soon tire of finding the same images of decaying civilization and the impure material world here. Skulls, bones, rats, broken columns, the horror, the horror, ho hum. All leading to a pathetic prayer for divine mercy at the end. It seems appropriate that the reactionary Eliot goes back to medieval times to find his religious inspiration.

For a number of years, Murder in the Cathedral was one of the few plays, besides Shakespeare's, taught in the schools. I understand it is no longer in such favour. For that mercy, kids can give thanks.

Source: www.editoreric.com

Read More......

The Method of Purification in Antigone

INTRODUCTION

It is first important to have knowledge about the circumstances and the situation of Greek dramas before trying to make comments or to criticize them. It is because Greek dramas are very different, almost in many aspects, from modern drama today. In Greek, dramas, especially tragedy, were played mostly during the festival of Dionysis, The God of Wine, which lasted four or five days yearly. During the festival, people of Greek, or more precisely Athenians, would come to some kind of open space and watched the tragedies played. At the end of the festival, an honorable trophy in the form of “olive crown” would be rewarded to play considered the best. It was in such condition that Antigone, a tragedy play by Sophocles, was first performed (Knox, 1964: 35).

Considering the circumstances, it is easy to understand why Greek dramas have a similar form, that is to rely fully on words spoken by actors or chorus. It is because Greek drama, first of all, is a “stage-drama”. Consequently, in Greek drama, plots and stories play the more significant rule compared to other aspects of modern drama such as actions or characters (Knox, 1964: 35).
Inspired by the tradition, Aristotle, a Greek philosopher who was also familiar with the Dionysis festival, then theorized those aspects of Greek drama, notably tragedies, as follows: tragedy is usually concerned with a person of great stature. He can be a king or a nobleman who falls because of hubris, pride, or destiny. The purpose of playing tragedy, relevant to the context of worship to Dionysis, was to purify the souls of the audience –and this is what is called purification or catharsis (Knox, 1964: 36).

Antigone, a play by Sophocles which won the olive crown when played in Athena, about 441 B.C., is a good example of how such poetic theories were put into practice.


THE SUMMARY OF ANTIGONE
Antigone tells a story of a young girl named Antigone. She was the daughter of Oedipus, the former king of Thebes. After the death of Oedipus, the crown of Thebes fell to Creon, Oedipus’ brother-in-law. The problem began when the other two sons of Oedipus, namely Eteocles and Polyneices, were treated differently by Creon after their death. Eteocles, who died in the battle for the glory of Thebes, was buried in honor, as a hero. But Polyneices, who died during his escape from exile, by Creon’s decree, hadn’t to be buried. His corpse had to remain in the place where he died, so that it might be a foodstuff for dogs, wolves or vultures.

Antigone couldn’t accept the decree. She felt that the corpse of Polyneices had to have the same honor as Eteocles. So, although Creon had already announced capital punishment for those who disobeyed the decree, Antigone resisted. One day, she quietly walked to the corpse of Polyneices and covered it with ground.

Antigone’s action was reported to Creon, who then sentenced her to death. Creon felt his decree had to come first, eventhough he realized that Antigone was his sister’s daughter, and more importantly, the bride of his son, Haemon. Antigone didn’t deny she had violated the decree. She just insisted that her choice was right. If giving an honor to the corpse of a brother was considered a crime and must be sentenced to death, said Antigone, she would accept it without regret. Antigone was finally hung in a deserted area by Creon’s guard.

The son of Creon, that is Haemon, couldn’t accept the death of his bride. He blamed his father for being so stubborn. He loved Antigone so much that he couldn’t live without her. Therefore, when Antigone was hung, Haemon committed suicide by stabbing his sword to his chest.
Actually, after Teiresias, the counselor of Thebes had uttered his concern about Creon’s punishment to Antigone, Creon changed his mind. He came to the place where Polyneices’ body laid with the intention to give him a decent funeral. He even intended to cancel his decree on Antigone. But it was too late. During his way to the area, Antigone and Haemon were already dead.

However, the suffering continued. When Eurydice, the wife of Creon, heard the death of her son, she decided to commit suicide by stabbing herself in the altar of God. Creon came back to his palace just to hear another death news. And her wife’s last words, reported to Creon by a servant, was a condemn to him. Creon, because of his stubbornness to his decree, finally lost his family.


ANALYSIS
From the summary above, it became clear that death was always an inherent part of tragedy plays. In fact, almost in all Greek dramas, tragedy was always associated by deaths. The only differences among them were only the causes and the methods of deaths, while the purpose, still suitable to Aristotle’s concept in Poetics, was the same, that is to bring purification to the audience. The question then may arise: how could such play bring purification?
Before I try to answer the question, first, it is important to notice that Antigone, in some cases, is not very different from the other two plays of Sophocles, that is Oedipus Rex and Oedipus at Colonus. In fact, the three plays were often called “The Theban plays” or “The Oedipus Trilogy” (Knox, 1964: 36). But of course, it would be erroneous to say that Antigone was a continuation of the two plays, since Antigone was written by Sophocles some fifteen years before Oedipus Rex and a fully thirty-six years before Oedipus at Colonus. So, when the three plays were called “The Oedipus Trilogy”, one must remember that the similarity among them was only the theme (Knox, 1964: 38).

As noted by Knox, the main concept in Sophocles’ tragedy is his view that the position of man is subordinate in the relation to the gods (Knox, 1964: 38). This view is clearly expressed in Antigone, especially by the utterance of the chorus. Here is an example:

Chorus
Happy the man whose life is uneventful
For once a family is cursed by God,
Disasters come like earhquake tremors, worse
With each succeding generation

It’s like when the sea is running rough
Under stormy winds from Thrace
The black ooze is stirred up from the seabed,
And louder and louder the waves crash on shore.

Look now at the last sunlight that sustains
The one surviving root of Oedipus’ tree,--
The sword of death is drawn back to hack it down.
(Bowra, 1944: 47)


The context of this utterance was when the chorus heard Creon decreed capital punishment to Antigone for disobeying his orders. From the passage, we know that after learning that Antigone was about to face death, the chorus, who’s in the play were represented by old citizens of Thebes, suddenly reminded the audience about the similarity of Antigone’s fate with the fate of his father, Oedipus. Both of them, the chorus concluded, were cursed by God.
But here comes the interesting point. Although the chorus themselves told the audience that Antigone was cursed by God, Antigone herself didn’t think that God was the main root of her suffering. We would get such opinion after reading Antigone’s argument to Creon below:

Antigone
Sorry, who made this edict? Was it God?
Isn’t a man’ right to burial decreed
By divine justice? I don’t consider your
Pronouncements so important that they can
Just… overrule the unwritten laws of heaven.
You are a man, remember.
(Bowra, 1944: 43)

In Antigone’s opinion, it is clear that God has nothing to do with her fate. If she would have to face death because of her action, then, God is not the one to be blamed. It was Creon, the man, whom to be blamed, not God. From this point of view, of course, there is a kind of contradiction. If the fate of Antigone, according to the chorus, has been determined by God –through the curse— why Antigone blamed Creon?

In his An Introduction to Sophocles, Webster made an interesting comment about this. He said that in all Sophocles’ plays, it must be understood that the relation of God and human is problematic. In one side, God is often positioned as the only determinator, the cause of all fates, including tragic fate, which must be accepted without any doubt. But in the other side, God is still feared and respected. So, the positioning of God as the root of tragic fate doesn’t automatically imply bad judgment about Him (Webster, 1969: 12).

Such contradiction would become clearer at the end of the story. After the death of Antigone, Haemon and Eurydice, Creon felt very guilty. He never imagined that his decree would cost the lives of three people. He couldn’t bear the consequences that he prayed for death to come to him.

Creon
Nobody else to share the blame. Just me…
I killed you. I killed you my dear.
Servants, carry me in, away from al this.
I wish I weren’t alive.

Chorus
Try to forget. It is the only way.

Creon
I invite death. Do you only come uninvited?
Come and take me. I cannot bear to live.

Chorus
No time for such thoughts now. You’re still in charge.
You’ve got to see about these corpses, or
We’ll all be polluted.

Creon
I meant what I said

Chorus
No use in such prayers. You’ll get what’s destined.
(Bowra, 1944: 65)

It’s interesting to see that although Creon prayed for death, the chorus consistently said that it would be useless since he would get what was destined for him. But similar to Antigone, Creon didn’t blame God for his fate. He could only blame himself for being so stubborn. So, although his stubbornness was also destined by God, contradictly, Creon couldn’t blame God for it (Webster, 1969: 14).

To solve the contradiction, then one may remember that tragedy plays were performed on stage during the Dionysis festival, which its main context was a celebration to Dionysis so that the wine harvest would be better in the following year. Based on this context, it is of course impossible to expect Greek plays to represent some kind of rebellion against God, since raison d’ etre of the plays themselves was a devotion to Him. Therefore, it will be better to view this contradiction from another standing point.

As noted by Webster, one of the keys to understanding Sophocles’ plays is to pay careful attention to relation between God and human (Webster, 1969: 12). Not only because it is important, but more essentially, the comprehensive understanding of such relation would reveal the message, motive, and also the main purpose of the play itself. And in Webster’s opinion, the clearest aspect of relation of God and human in Sophocles’ plays was that man, in some ways, was forced to discover his own potentialities or his own status of divinity through tragic fate (Webster, 1969: 14).

In Antigone, such discovery was clearly represented. Both Antigone and Creon were persons with their own view of virtue. For Antigone, it was a virtue that she should give an honorable funeral to his brother. But for Creon, considering his status as the king of Thebes, the only virtue that seemed right was only to give honorable funeral to Eteocles, the hero, not to Polyneices, the runaway. Both of them insisted to their own point of view. Both of them also believed that it was their opinion which was right according to the rules of God. But since God didn’t show clearly which one of them was right, each of them had to follow his or her own way until the extreme point: death. Only after death comes, then the true virtue, the real rule of God, could be revealed (Webster, 1969: 15).

From this standpoint, it is clear that in Sophocles’ play, death didn’t function as a dramatic element. Its function is much more important than merely a dramatic event to evoke sadness. Death, the extreme cost of one’s discovery, has a very high status as the only possible way of revealing God’s virtue. That is why Webster said that in most Sophocles’ play, as if the veil of God was only lifted halfway, and man was expected to guess what lay behind it (Webster, 1969: 17). We can find such a conclusion from the last words of the chorus below:

Chorus
Who wants happiness? The main
Requirement is to be sensible.
This means not rebelling against
God’s law, for that is arrogance.
The greater your arrogance, the heavier God’s revenge.
And proud men in old age learn to be wise.
(Bowra, 1944: 65)

Chorus, who in Greek drama was usually positioned as the narrator and participated in each opinion of the actors, at the end of the play, finally revealed the true virtue of God: that Creon was wrong; that the main requirement to gain happiness from God is to be sensible. It is, of course, a simple thing to understand. But in reality, in order to be sensible is not as easy as it seems. The story of Creon is an example. Creon had to loose three lives of persons whom he loved much just to understand such a simple virtue. And that’s the tragedy (Webster, 1969: 19).
From such point of view, then it is clear how a play like Antigone could bring purification to its audience. Watching the story of Creon, his stubbornness on his own “virtue”, and the cost he had to bear, presumably would give audience a sense of sadness, but at the same time, a sense of reveal. As deaths happened, Creon finally recognized that his action was mistaken, that he had been misguided by his arrogance, meaning that he had moved from ignorance to knowledge. But the recognition gained by Creon, tragically, hit him at same instant as the lost he felt from the death of the three persons. It was such slight movement from lost to recognition that would lead audience to purification, to the higher stage of mental awareness (Webster, 1969: 21). So, in short, we may say that the method of purification in Antigone, and I think it can also be applied in most Sophocles’ tragedy plays, derived from such slight mental movement. A simple mental movement which, in Webster’s words, needed the cost of three lives.

CONCLUSION
From the discussion above, it can be concluded that purification, the main purpose of Greek tragedy, was derived from the tragic fate that befell to actors and, at the same time, a mental awareness that accompanied it. Usually, the greater the tragedy, the greater the awareness would rise. If death happened to be the most common event of tragedy, it is because death is viewed as the greatest tragedy of all. And Antigone is a good example of such method.


BIBLIOGRAPHY
B. M. W. Knox, Studies in Sophoclean Tragedy (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1964).

C. M. Bowra, Sophoclean Tragedy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1944).

Webster, T. B. L., An Introduction to Sophocles, 2nd edition, [London: Cornell
University Press, 1969).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*This article is writen by Leny Nuzuliyanti, alumni of English Department Student of Diponegoro University, Semarang, Indonesia. The copy right of this article is on the writer. You have to mention "the source" (the writer and this site) for any publication.

Read More......