Antigones Passage

I was reading and struck upon a passage in Steiner that was quite interesting to me. In congruence with the 5 conflicts that we’ve been discussing, it hits upon the conflict between gods and mortals. On page 275, the interpretations of Creon’s political views, and their effects on his actions, come into question. Steiner reads “Has Creon discovered in the bleak clairvoyance of his rage the abyss of non-relation between mortal and divine? Does he now realize, if only in a barren flash of insight, that his desecration of Polynieces corpse was a meaningless gesture because a man’s fate in respect of the transcendent cannot be determined via ritual or the denial of ritual?”. This is one interpretation of the rigidity by which Creon appears bound to the laws of man. We do see that his view contrast with Antigone’s reverence for the god and their laws, but how extreme is it really? Steiner offers, on page 276, that Creon’s outcry on line 1284 can read as “signifying that no sacrifice can appease all-devouring Hades”. Maybe as much as he would like to believe in the laws of the gods, he knows that no act or deed can remedy his dark fate. Yet it seems that this view wouldn’t make sense until the actual death of Antigone, Haemon, and Eurydice. Because until that point he wasn’t planning on the death of his wife and son as well, so the only tragic-fated one was Antigone. At that point he could still go off of the excuse that he must stick by his laws in order to keep the state afloat. But then again, if at that point he actually did find the rule of the gods inconsequential, the act of the burial or desecration, as well as the death of Antigone, would have been of no consequence. Therefore there would have been no tragedy.—It seems integral to the construction of the play that the true views of these characters are so ambiguous. We think we understand the role that Creon’s political observances play, and we try to understand that because it is our nature to desperately want to characterize people, but any other interpretation can change their entire meaning and his intentions completely.

It seems like a line that a lot of people struggle with. The line of faith, that is. What is the value in giving yourself whole-heartedly to a god head; performing rituals; believing in something that may not have tangible effects on your life? You can find meaning in anything if you search hard enough, see signs anywhere. But you also have to be reasonable in what you find. Or you can simply live by the laws of man, which are wholly tangible and applicable, and only question your fate and your practices when some course of events prompts you to do so.