Author: abano76334@gapps.uwcsea.edu.sg

Considering our recent texts of interest: the Greek play Antigone by Sophocles, the French play Antigone as well by Jean Anouillh and Home Fire by Kamila Shamsie; each of the texts can be compared and contrasted in a variety of ways.

One interesting point to focus on is the contexts in which each of the texts were produced and how they impacted the ultimate messages conveyed by the writers. For example, Sophocles wrote the original Antigone in 441 BC in ancient Greece during a period, ‘bookended by turmoil, from wars to revolts’ according to Court Theatre. Essentially, during this period, there was skepticism regarding the rule of potentially authoritarian leaders causing the political instability. This informed Sophocles’ depiction of Creon in his original playwright as an exploration of the psyche behind cruel leaders with a desire to establish grand control and create chaos.

On the other hand, Anouillh premiered his retelling of Antigone in 1944 around the time of the second world war. Anouillh’s intention behind his interpretation of Antigone was centered more on the French resistance against fascist leaders like Hitler; interestingly, the equivalent of the fascist leader in Anouillh’s Antigone, Creon, is depicted as more rational and less of a tyrant than in Sophocles’ version which is fascinating given the similar focus on exploration of almost dictatorships.

And then, in Shamsie’s version, there is grounding in the contemporary 21st century context exploring a more specific setting regarding British-Pakistanis. Shamsie is critical again of Karamat Lone who is a mirror of other depictions of Creon, but instead explores this through the lens of race and religious relations.

Returning again to Anouillh’s retelling as well, unlike in Shamsie and Sophocles’ depictions, he makes Antigone seem more foolish and naive unlike with Sophocles and Shamsie who portray the central character as a martyr and heroic figure. This comes back to the literary intentions of Anouillh given his historical context to somewhat critique those going against the French resistance unlike Sophocles and Shamsie who are more skeptical of the people in the positions of power causing instability and turmoil.

Coming to the idea of femininity, I find it interesting how in Sophocles’ version, women are matriarchal in the sense that the men feel their power over them whereas in Anouillh’s retelling, the women are painted less in this light. Shamsie’s retelling also adds an interesting spin to the narrative by exploring the implications of Aneeka’s relation to Eamonn in a contemporary world where women face slut-shaming. Shamsie’s incorporation of different text types within the novel like newspaper extracts powerfully calls forward the modern day connotations that sometimes are relevant to womanhood.

Through studying both Antigone and Home Fire, I have come to understand that a lot is lost but also preserved between retellings. Specifically, I would say that ultimately, the core values and meanings within the text were kept such as the theme of loyalty to the state vs. family. I do think that Shamsie changed certain meanings and impacts within the text through differently developed characterisations within Home Fire. Most notably, with Karamat Lone and his parallels to Creon. I find it interesting how at the end of Antigone, Sophocles explores the guilt and shame that Creon feels about the fate of his son and wife. Creon takes accountability for his wrongdoing; although too late. However in Home Fire, Shamsie made the creative decision to end the novel with just the death of Eamonn and Aneeka. There is no mention past this moment of Lone’s reaction to the death. The effect of this choice was to me, a less nuanced character and also less understanding for Lone. Creon’s final guilt humanises him and portrays him as just another flawed individual with a greater magnitude of mistakes. Lone does have a moment of self realization too wherein he agrees to attend to Eamonn and attempt to make amends upon realising his mistakes. However, I believe that the shock of realizing the true consequences of his actions through witnessing the death of his own son would have been an even more humanizing moment like in Antigone with Creon. The element of karma would have made Home Fire seem more like a fable or cautionary tale as with Antigone.

Although, both characters do ultimately share the same wholly unshakeable and disgreeable stance throughout the novel. Both men remain firm in their choice to prevent any proper burial for Parvaiz/Polynices but also don’t put a stop to their sons to running off to Aneeka/Antigone; eventually resulting in the respective deaths. This is exemplified by comparing two extracts from Antigone and Home Fire. Both texts show Karamat/Creon acting stubborn and therefore, having to pay for the costs of their actions.

Another interesting point to consider is the increased emphasis on feminist themes within Antigone with some references as well in Home Fire. It is fascinating to recognize Sophocles’ acknowledgment of gender roles and the role of a woman in society through Antigone even in 441 BCE. This is particularly notable in the ways in which Creon speaks about Antigone to Haemon as someone of whom he should not be into the ‘traps’ of given her womanhood and societal inferiority in the traditional context. Karamat Lone does degrade Aneeka as well to a degree in Home Fire but more in the context of modern-day shaming. In criticizing Eamonn for his loyalty to Aneeka, he asks him to not, “develop a spine.” insinuating that Eamonn is weak at the knees of Aneeka. Lone also asks Eamonn, “Did she give you your first really great blow job, Eamonn? Is that what this is about? Because trust me, there are better ones out there.” essentially degrading Aneeka and her sexuality in the process. The impact of Shamsie’s written dialogue between Karamat Lone and Eamonn is a more modern, contextualized view of feminism.