Power, Fate, and Gender Roles Through the Eyes of Sophocles 

The Golden Age was a distinctive period that brought up innovations of architecture, art, philosophy, and literature, all of which turned Greece into what it is today. By examining the work of famous playwright Sophocles, one can envision what life was like in Athens, Greece. In the stories of Antigone, Oedipus the King, and Electra by Sophocles, the two tales entwine themes of power, fate, heroism, and gender roles to display the intricacies of Greek society during his time. The common characteristics of the main characters fit into these themes which help determine what Sophocles’ intent was for each character to justify their denouements. Sophocles uses power and authority as a double-edged sword to criticize the downfall of the kings in these stories by using greed and manipulation to desensitize their morality. He draws in fate and the meaning of heroism to determine whether these characters deserve the consequences they are given. By examining power, fate, and heroism, the role of women allows for a different assessment of these themes as Sophocles creates a conversation of social normalities, hierarchy, and their influence on a patriarchal world.

The forces of power and morality shift in King Oedipus and King Creon provide an offsetting comparison to how Antigone and Electra deal with their grasp of power. The illusion of control and how that drives characters towards desensitization towards morality enables the audience to determine whether the characters choose to do good, do evil, or become a tragic hero. King Oedipus and King Creon are prime examples of how power can be corruptive. Oedipus’ forceful determination to skew his fate using the authority and resources he has eventually led to his downfall. Because of his power and status as king, he ignored his advisors and close friends when they tried to help him. When he finally comes to the realization of what he has done, he goes through great lengths in executing his punishment for himself. Kitto, a renowned classical scholar and author of Greek Tragedy, says, “Of course it draws a strong portrait of Oedipus; but after all, this Oedipus was invented by Sophocles, so that the question is: Why did Sophocles want an Oedipus who goes to this length in tyrannical hybris?” (Kitto 178.) Oedipus’ role as neither a hero nor a villain leaves the audience with a distasteful vision of his morals. However, his punishment for himself proves to be an act of heroism. He defeats his dishonorable side to free himself from the guilt he faces once he figures out the fulfillment of the prophecy. So why did he go to such great lengths to punish himself? He went through great lengths to ensure the prophecy did not come true, went to great lengths to remove himself from the identity he was fated to have, and now he went through one final act of redemption to equalize his conscience. For that, his error of judgment leading to his destruction enables the conclusion that he is the tragic hero in this play.

As for King Creon, his sense of responsibility to his state and social order outweigh his empathy for his niece in Antigone. He believed justice is best served by forbidding the proper burial of Polyneices, which directly disrespects the gods' sacred tradition. His authority over Thebes challenged the jurisdiction of the gods, leaving him to face their wrath. Throughout the story, he is depicted as the villain to Antigone’s heroism. However, upon understanding his duties and how his job forced him to shift his priorities to the state, it becomes easier to understand why he is ignorant of Antigone’s pleas. Kitto claims, “If Antigone is more interesting than a mere antithesis to Creon, he is more than the stubborn fool who kills her. Sophocles was interested in his fate. He is, if not cruel at least insensitive; like a tyrant, he is quick to suspect, and he does not know how to yield. But he has his own honesty, his own justification, and his own sense of responsibility.” (Kitto 130) Sophocles blurred the line on what was considered “right”. Was it right to follow the rules of the state? Or was it right to overlook the mistakes of his niece? Both have irrevocable consequences. The chaos he would receive from his people over the rigidity of the law was something he chose to avoid which resulted in Antigone getting what the state thought she deserved.

The illusion of power is prominent through Creon’s decisions. Because of his status, he had multiple options to consider for Antigone. His status allowed him to ban a proper burial since no one else could veto his decision. Albeit, the gods had their method of “veto” by punishing Creon harshly in the end, which entirely dismissed his authority. Even though this facade of power rules over him, his actions during this time reveal a complex character that is a fitting opponent to Antigone. Kitto says, “But even without performance, we may note that Creon’s part is half as long again as Antigone’s, a point which is less mechanical than it sounds, and that it is the more dynamic part.” (Kitto 127) Creon’s fate becomes true once it is revealed what the outcome of his decision was. The defiance (and later deaths) of Antigone, Haemon, the disapproval Thebes and Teiresias, and the death of his family members all prove to be his worst punishment. His ill-fated judgment and eventual clarity of consciousness designate him as a tragic hero as well. The overwhelming responsibility that comes with this power ultimately leads to both of their downfalls, but the women who dared to take their power come out strong and successful in the end.

The main female characters Antigone and Electra are strong examples of what could go right when you use the power you have genuinely. Both women are stubborn in the way of devoting themselves to the principles of justice and morality and come out strong in a society built on patriarchy. In the play Antigone, Antigone is fierce in her protection of her brother and is willing to break the law to align with her morals. She takes power from King Creon when she disobeys his command. In doing so, she follows her destined path of righteousness to provide a proper burial for Polyneices. The same drive to make amendments without compromising their integrity can be said for Electra. In the play Electra, Electra’s reverence for justice and honor leads her to commit the controversial act of co-conspiring the murder of her mother. The chorus in this story is made up of Mycenaean women who share words of sympathy for Electra’s suffering, which contribute to the audiences’ sentiment towards a matter controversial back in their time. The chorus frequently talks to her, asking her similar questions such as, “Electra, child of a pitiless mother, why are you so wasting your life in unceasing grief and despair?” (Sophocles 121-3) The chorus pressures her to stop mourning since it would anger Aegisthus, which upholds their society’s sexist beliefs of women being weaker than men. In the end, however, both women come to prove their society’s stereotypes wrong and emerge as heroes. Electra is considered an anti-hero since she is driven by vengeance and hatred to get what she wants. Antigone is deemed a classical hero because of her nobility to fulfill the sacred rite of a proper burial. When considering the importance of heroism in an old Greek play, one can also question how fate can change the power of a person with their understanding of “heroism” and why that affects the way people are viewed and understood. The investigation of the influence of fate and how it affects the decisions made by each character can determine how these particular themes overlap and work together. The influence of fate and the understanding of how certain characters wrestle with their grasp of control within their lives and the role that the Oracle plays in Greek culture becomes a significant functionality in each play.