Man Vs God Essay, Research Paper
Conflict is a necessary component in any literary work. Conflict is brought
approximately when two opposing forces come to clasps with each other. In Sophicle? s
Antigone, both external and internal struggles arise when the will of an
single opposes the will of the bulk. Throughout the Grecian calamity,
either side of the struggle is clearly represented by a individual character with a
strong belief. Each character? s strong beliefs are tested and challenged
throughout Antigone, finally ensuing in one character abandoning his or her
belief, uncovering both his ain true nature and the nature of his or her belief.
The cardinal struggle presented in Antigone, the Torahs of adult male versus those of
the Gods, is normally found in many Grecian calamities. A specific character
represents each side of the struggle ; while Antigone is a devout follower of the
Torahs of the Gods, Creon and his cohorts represent the chesty Torahs of adult male. The
opposing forces come to clasps when Antigone, in conformity to the Gods? jurisprudence
saying that? Death longs for the same rites for all, ? efforts to bury her
brother, Polynices ( Sophicles 35 ) . This action is a misdemeanor of Creon? s? announcement
. . . forbid [ ing ] the metropolis to ennoble him with a entombment, mourn at all? ( Sophicles
24 ) . This rear of barrel of reverent jurisprudence is Creon? s manner of penalizing Polynices for being
a treasonist in a recent war. Even though Creon is king, Antigone believes so
strongly in the authorization of the Gods that she refuses? to interrupt [ their Torahs ] ,
/ non out of fright of [ Creon? s ] wounded pride? ( Sophicles 33 ) . Creon? s
haughtiness is clearly manifested in his attitude towards the Gods? authorization.
He refers to his ain edict as an order from? the high throne of judgement? ( Sophicles
47 ) . Antigone, nevertheless, is low, and acknowledges that Creon? s orders do non
correspond with, nor do they overrule? that Justice, brooding with the Gods /
beneath the Earth? ( Sophicles 33 ) .
One side must finally give when two opposing forces clang with one
another. In Sophicle? s Antigone, the Gods prevail over adult male, as is common in
Grecian calamities in which adult male versus the Gods is the cardinal subject. Antigone
battles to the acrimonious terminal, even after Creon sentences her to decease, for? [ her ]
fear for the Gods? ( Sophicles 50 ) . She, in fact, seems to to the full accept
her martyrdom, as she believes that it? is the pleasance of the Gods? she is
so dedicated to ( Sophicles 49 ) . For Antigone, ? to run into. . . day of reckoning. . . is
cherished small hurting, ? when compared to denyi
ng her brother a entombment and
bewraying the Gods, which? would hold been agony? ( Sophicles 33 ) . Creon,
nevertheless, does non recognize his misdoing until after he has carried out Antigone? s
sentence. He is loath to acknowledge that he? cognize [ s ] [ he ] can? t defile the
Gods & # 8212 ; / no person has the power? ( 54 ) . It is merely after? catastrophes sent by
the Gods, ? such as the decease of his married woman and boy, that he to the full realizes the
magnitude of his hubris towards the Gods and it? s effects. It is after
these calamities that Creon relinquishes his beliefs and acknowledges that? the
guilt is all [ his ] ? ( Sophicles 63 ) . The chorus summarizes Creon? s ultimate
realisation in holding that? the mighty words of the proud are paid in full
with mighty blows of destiny, and at long last, those blows will learn us wisdom?
( Sophicles 65 ) . It is so true that Creon gained wisdom from his errors,
merely wholly excessively late.
Upon Creon? s alteration of bosom, the nature of his beliefs is revealed. This
alteration reveals that his beliefs were non genuinely evil, merely unwise. He
acknowledges this when his boy is found dead, stating? [ his ] ain stupidity?
was the cause of his decease ( Sophicles 62 ) . The bad luck that befall Creon as a
consequence of his haughtiness, reveals a profound truth ; ? that of all the ailments
afflicting work forces the worst is deficiency of judgement? ( Sophicles 61 ) . Creon? s
farther confessions refering his hapless judgement, declaring his obstinate actions
to hold been? so mindless, so insane, ? back up the thought that Creon? s
beliefs were non evil, merely unwise ( Sophicles 62 ) . Simply put, the nature of his
beliefs was non deadly or corrupt, merely human.
This strain of struggle, the will of human nature versus that which is
acknowledged as moral and unsloped, is surely still relevant to readers in the
20th century, as it will be to readers of farther coevalss, everlastingly.
This struggle can be seen in about any facet of modern life. It is seen today
in the current presidential election. One can see, with a small foresight, that
each campaigner? s every bit strong will to go president could consequence the
multitudes in an inauspicious manner. The possibility of engagement of legal tests
refering the election could sabotage the effectivity of the electoral
procedure and consequence United States citizen? s freedom to take. This modern
illustration of how the will of an person can make struggle and adversely
consequence the multitudes supports the thought that conflicts similar to those presented in
Antigone are still present today.