This paper examines Sophocles' Antigone and Oedipus the King through the lens of Aristotle's requirements for the tragic hero, arguing that Antigone qualifies as a tragic heroine despite scholarly debate favoring Creon. The paper outlines Aristotle's distinction between noble and flawed characters, then applies these criteria to Oedipus, Creon, and Antigone in turn. While Oedipus represents the archetypal Aristotelian tragic hero — noble, flawed by hubris, and brought to ruin — Antigone's tragedy is shown to be subtler: her self-sufficiency constitutes her flaw, and her suffering lies in rejection and desolation rather than dramatic reversal alone. The paper concludes that Antigone's downfall and ultimate search for peace in death confirm her status as a genuine tragic heroine.
The paper exemplifies comparative literary analysis anchored in a theoretical framework. By first summarizing Aristotle's tragic hero criteria and then testing each character against those criteria in sequence, the writer models how to use a critical lens systematically rather than selectively. This prevents the argument from feeling impressionistic and gives the conclusion logical force.
The essay opens with an overview of the argument and a promise to summarize Aristotle's criteria before applying them. It then moves through nobility of character, the comparative failure of Creon, the nature of hubris in both protagonists, and finally the theme of suffering and justice. The conclusion synthesizes these threads to confirm Antigone's status as tragic heroine. This funnel structure — from theory to character analysis to thematic resolution — is well-suited to comparative literary essays at the undergraduate level.
Sophocles' plays Antigone and Oedipus the King could be described as the epitome of Greek tragedy in terms of Aristotelian requirements. In particular, Oedipus presents the most recognizable image of tragedy. Antigone, in turn, does not provide as clear a case for Aristotelian tragedy. Some critics have argued in favor of Creon as the tragic character in that play, while others have offered compelling arguments for Antigone's status as tragic heroine. The argument presented here is also in favor of Antigone as tragic heroine, with comparisons to Oedipus offered as supporting evidence. To accomplish this, Aristotle's requirements of the tragic hero will first be summarized, followed by a discussion of the two plays and their respective heroes.
According to Larry A. Brown, Aristotle makes a distinction between tragedy and comedy in terms of the former centering on noble characters and the latter on characters of a less noble nature. Brown emphasizes the importance of properly understanding the concept of the "noble" character. This does not necessarily refer to noble birth, but more importantly to moral character.
The criterion of nobility is an important one when applied to the plays in question. Initially, Oedipus does not believe himself to be of noble birth. However, the nobility of his character propelled him to kingship, despite his troubled past and the fact that he murdered the rightful king. Through his actions as king, he proves himself noble to the citizens of the city. In the opening scene of the play, the citizens recognize him as royal and noble, hailing him as "First in the common accidents of life, and first in visitations of the Gods." Oedipus is not only regarded as noble in the eyes of his subordinates but also as particularly favored by the gods.
Antigone, as Oedipus' daughter, is also of noble blood. Her nobility, however, extends far beyond her bloodline. Patricia M. Lines goes as far as stating that "Antigone's brilliance is so dazzling that we overlook her flaw. After all, she has formulated a great and noble truth and maintains it with courage. She asserts God's law over man's law."
Throughout the play, Antigone maintains the courage of her convictions, even to the point of death. Charles Segal (p. 152) notes that she is noble enough "to defend a valid and necessary aspect of civilization, the rights of the family and the proper treatment of the dead." By standing up to Creon and insisting upon the burial of her brother, Antigone surpasses the new king in representing the values of her society, as a truly noble person — by both birth and nature — should.
Creon, in turn, has inherited kingship in the wake of Oedipus' tragedy. He is noble by birth, but far from it in character. Segal (p. 152) notes that Creon opposes the very values he should be defending, as Antigone does. The gods require a certain treatment of the dead; Creon, however, takes divine law into his own hands and thereby offends what should be his own sense of nobility.
When measured against Aristotelian criteria for the tragic hero, Creon fails to qualify. He is of noble birth but enters the play as an already-flawed character. Crucially, this flaw is not tragic in the Aristotelian sense. Rather, it is a primary determinant of his actions. The true tragic hero is driven by a desire to act nobly, and the hero's fall becomes tragic precisely because a flaw temporarily overrides that nobility. Such a fall is tragic because the audience identifies with a hero who is both noble and human — and this identification depends on witnessing the hero's fall from a position of genuine virtue.
This description fits Antigone far better than it fits Creon. Creon is primarily flawed, while both Antigone and Oedipus are primarily noble. Both are concerned with upholding what is best for the people and family in their charge, as well as the principles that govern them.
Those who argue against Antigone as tragic hero point out that she appears as a perfectly noble character throughout the play. As noted above, this nobility seems to overshadow any possibility of a flaw. One might argue, however, that her flaw is far more subtle than that of Oedipus.
In conclusion, one might maintain that Antigone's hubris and downfall are no less present than those of Oedipus, even if they are more subtle. She is a far superior candidate for tragic heroism than Creon. Antigone begins as a noble and royal character, and her downfall occurs as a direct result of her attempt to act nobly — just as Oedipus' does. She may therefore rightly be viewed as the tragic hero of Sophocles' play.
You’re 54% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.