What do you think?
Rate this book
Sophocles I: Antigone, Oedipus the King, Oedipus at Colonus
Paperback
Published January 1, 2013
4 people are currently reading
48 people want to read
About the author
Sophocles
2,616 books2,678 followersSophocles (497/496 BC-406/405 BC), (Greek:
Σοφοκλής
; German:
Sophokles
, Russian:
Софокл
, French:
Sophocle
) was an ancient Greek tragedian, known as one of three from whom at least one play has survived in full. His first plays were written later than, or contemporary with, those of Aeschylus; and earlier than, or contemporary with, those of Euripides. Sophocles wrote over 120 plays, but only seven have survived in a complete form: Ajax, Antigone, Women of Trachis, Oedipus Rex, Electra, Philoctetes, and Oedipus at Colonus. For almost fifty years, Sophocles was the most celebrated playwright in the dramatic competitions of the city-state of Athens which took place during the religious festivals of the Lenaea and the Dionysia. He competed in thirty competitions, won twenty-four, and was never judged lower than second place. Aeschylus won thirteen competitions, and was sometimes defeated by Sophocles; Euripides won four.
The most famous tragedies of Sophocles feature Oedipus and Antigone: they are generally known as the Theban plays, though each was part of a different tetralogy (the other members of which are now lost). Sophocles influenced the development of drama, most importantly by adding a third actor (attributed to Sophocles by Aristotle; to Aeschylus by Themistius), thereby reducing the importance of the chorus in the presentation of the plot. He also developed his characters to a greater extent than earlier playwrights.
The most famous tragedies of Sophocles feature Oedipus and Antigone: they are generally known as the Theban plays, though each was part of a different tetralogy (the other members of which are now lost). Sophocles influenced the development of drama, most importantly by adding a third actor (attributed to Sophocles by Aristotle; to Aeschylus by Themistius), thereby reducing the importance of the chorus in the presentation of the plot. He also developed his characters to a greater extent than earlier playwrights.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
August 3, 2025
Here is your essay with corrected grammar and spelling, while preserving your tone and style:
Sophocles Antigone Oedipus the King Oedipus at Colonus
This is an excellent translation of three of the seven remaining (out of 120) known plays by Sophocles. The translation shows the nuance and poetry of the playwright without ever being formal. Sophocles didn’t write these three plays as a trilogy or even to be performed together, but they do work together—forming three chapters of the Oedipus story. This collection presents the plays in the order they were written, not the timeline of the story. The “last” play in the timeline, Antigone, is first, followed by the first and second. Although not intended by Sophocles, seeing the ending and having it in mind adds an extra layer of pathos and tragedy (not that these plays need more!). In addition to common characters and stories, there are common themes throughout:
1. The arrogance of power. Those with power—Oedipus, Creon, Oedipus’ two sons—are not bad. The two kings, in particular, are presented as effective rulers. Yet each becomes a tyrant by refusing to take advice from others or heed the signs that the audience knows are there. This results in a downward spiral where the characters become more isolated and are finally defeated by their own stubbornness (e.g., tragic flaw). The tragic irony is that in Oedipus we see the king refuse Creon’s counsel, whereas later Creon refuses the advice of his advisors. The plays also show the impact on society of the tyrant leader who punishes those who offer counsel he doesn’t like—with disastrous effects on both him and those doing the reporting.
2. The battle between the laws of the land/order and the justice of the gods/individual choice. This theme is most prominent in Antigone but is present throughout. Creon’s fall in Antigone comes from his insistence on his law instead of following the gods’ law (natural law?).
3. Blindness—blind to our faults, blind to the fact that we are blind—acting as if we know. Is truth or knowing better than being ignorant and moving on?
Antigone
The earliest, and to my thinking, most successful of the three plays (although all are great). Putting content aside, the play is a delight to read, with the verbal battles between Antigone and King Creon being worthy of Shakespeare (or Lion in Winter) for their sheer entertainment. It’s easy to put each character in a box—Antigone, the angry protector of her family and of human dignity. This dignity is given by the gods, who require us to give the dead a proper burial—regardless of man-made law or their offenses on earth. Creon—the king who needs to restore order out of the ultimate disorder of Oedipus’ rule (marrying your mother, killing your father, etc.)—must enforce earthly justice. In the end, the “natural” law of the gods prevails.
But as is so often the case with ancient literature, there is more nuance than meets the eye. There is the motivation of the main characters. Antigone wants to follow the custom of the gods by burying her family’s dead—regardless of the King’s decree and at the cost of her life. But is she also motivated by family pride? And as the “battle” wears on, Antigone insists on following the custom regardless of the impact of this decision (her sister will be banished, for example). Creon sounds more reasonable at first—citing the need for order, to punish those who rebelled versus those who supported the state. He is a man of action who judges people by their actions, not intent:
“you cannot learn of any man the soul, the mind, in the intent until he shows his practice of the government and laws.” (l.175)
He relies on “good rules” to order the state. Yet as time goes on, the matter seems more like a grudge match, and the need not to appear weak or let the other side win seems more important than the principle. He fails to see (a theme throughout the plays) what is obvious to everyone: the gods are not on his side. His ability to debate himself, present in the chorus—
“my mind kept on debating. Isn’t this action possibly of a god’s?” (l.278) (Cf. Arendt)
Both the philosophy and psychology of the matter are on full display in Antigone and Creon’s verbal battle in lines 450–580, with many lines worthy of Lion in Winter:
Creon: And you dared to overstep these (my) laws? Antigone: For me it was not Zeus who made that order. … Nor did I think your orders were so strong that you, a mortal man, could overrun the gods' unwritten and unfailing laws. Not now, nor yesterday's, they always live, and no one knows their origin in time. So not through fear of any man's proud spirit would I be likely to neglect these laws, and draw on myself the gods' sure punishment. I knew that I must die—how could I not?—even without your edict. If I die before my time, I say it is a gain. Who lives in sorrows many as are mine, how shall he not be glad to gain his death? (ll. 450–470)
Antigone: if you think my acts are foolishness, the foolishness may be in a fool’s eye. Creon: These rigid spirits are the first to fall. (ll. 470–475) (Irony, as Creon becomes more rigid—he too falls.) Creon: Your act of grace, in his regard, is a crime.
In classic Greek theatre, it is Creon’s tragic flaw that does him in. He is admired for his strength of character. These very traits lead him to stop listening. As the chorus notes:
He is clever beyond all dreams Inventive craft that he has Which may drive him one time to do good and another time to evil. (l.364)
Creon becomes more of a tyrant, making those around him frightened to speak up:
“Your presence frightened any common man.” (l.690)
In the end, Creon, so penned in by his own decrees and refusal to look weak, falls into a trap of his own making:
“Whoever thinks that he alone is wise, his eloquence, his mind, above the rest, come, the unfolding, it shows his emptiness.” (l.706) “Stubbornness and stupidity are twins.” (l.1030)
If this sounds like certain current day leaders, well, draw your own conclusions. The corrosive effects of power and insecurity have long been a deadly combo. He learns his lesson, but it comes too late: his son, wife, and daughter-in-law are dead. Having lost all happiness, he is a “breathing corpse.” He can only ruefully look toward the future.
It is Antigone, by the play’s end, who earns our pathos. Her death is noble, almost a reward to end her suffering:
I’ll bury him myself. And even if I die in the act, that death will be a glory. I’ll lie with the one I love and loved by him an outrage sacred to the gods! I have longer to please the dead than please the living here: in the kingdom down below I’ll live forever.
And:
I go, without a friend, struck down by fate, living, to the hollow chambers of the dead. (l.910)
I’m struck by the Christian imagery here, and the play must have influenced early Christian writers.
Oedipus the King
The tension comes from the dramatic irony. Audiences must have known the myth and the underlying facts and would likely have known of Antigone—although the story of that play came after it was produced first. Sophocles uses this foreknowledge to his advantage, building dramatic irony that is sublime. Early in the play, Oedipus demands the murderer of the prior king be found and expelled as a pollutant. He even calls out the fact that he married the former king’s wife and that he was unfortunate not to have children. Only later does he recognize that,
“I have called curses on myself in ignorance.” (l.745)
Oedipus the King expands the theme from Antigone of the well-respected king becoming a tyrant because of inflexibility—in this case, his inability to admit the facts, which crash down on him and destroy him once the truth finally breaks through.
The use of the word “seeing” recurs throughout—foreshadowing Oedipus’ self-inflicted blindness. Characters use the term metaphorically, yet Oedipus is “blind” to the facts and becomes literally blind by the play’s end. He fails to see the “your own [temper] that lies within you. Instead you chide me.”
Tiresias taunts him:
“Since you have taunted me with being blind, here is my word for you. You have your eyes, but see not where you are and evil, nor where you live, nor whom you live with. Do you know who your parents are?” (l.410)
Later, his mother begs him not to see, and he prays “not to see the day” and to “be out of men’s sight.”
In Oedipus, the characters struggle to avoid their fate. They can make free choices, but in uncovering the facts, they stumble into their destiny through imperfect knowledge. The play asks whether it would be better to be “blind” to the truth. Characters beg Oedipus to stop seeking it, but he doesn’t. Even as he refuses counsel from others, he persists, leading to his own tragedy—and his mother’s suicide.
It is easy to see the circumstances of the play as fantastical. But how much do we really know about our world, our past, our friends? There are likely facts and circumstances surrounding us that, with perfect knowledge, would seem bizarre. We live in a world of imperfect knowledge and allow ourselves to remain happily blind. Oedipus’ “tragic flaw” may be as much his refusal to accept the comfort of the metaphorical blindness the rest of us rely on.
Oedipus at Colonus
The final play in this series picks up on the themes of blindness and innocence. Taking place between Oedipus the Kingand Antigone, Colonus has the blind king wandering the countryside with his daughters. There is a definite King Lear vibe here. His blindness—both to his circumstances before the tragedy was revealed and his literal blindness now—makes him (as Lear) “more sinned against than sinning” (King Lear Act 3, Scene 2).
The play is less successful as a drama than the other two. Yet the knowledge that the two daughters, who are saved by play’s end while saving their father, will eventually be killed themselves adds a level of pathos throughout.
Sophocles Antigone Oedipus the King Oedipus at Colonus
This is an excellent translation of three of the seven remaining (out of 120) known plays by Sophocles. The translation shows the nuance and poetry of the playwright without ever being formal. Sophocles didn’t write these three plays as a trilogy or even to be performed together, but they do work together—forming three chapters of the Oedipus story. This collection presents the plays in the order they were written, not the timeline of the story. The “last” play in the timeline, Antigone, is first, followed by the first and second. Although not intended by Sophocles, seeing the ending and having it in mind adds an extra layer of pathos and tragedy (not that these plays need more!). In addition to common characters and stories, there are common themes throughout:
1. The arrogance of power. Those with power—Oedipus, Creon, Oedipus’ two sons—are not bad. The two kings, in particular, are presented as effective rulers. Yet each becomes a tyrant by refusing to take advice from others or heed the signs that the audience knows are there. This results in a downward spiral where the characters become more isolated and are finally defeated by their own stubbornness (e.g., tragic flaw). The tragic irony is that in Oedipus we see the king refuse Creon’s counsel, whereas later Creon refuses the advice of his advisors. The plays also show the impact on society of the tyrant leader who punishes those who offer counsel he doesn’t like—with disastrous effects on both him and those doing the reporting.
2. The battle between the laws of the land/order and the justice of the gods/individual choice. This theme is most prominent in Antigone but is present throughout. Creon’s fall in Antigone comes from his insistence on his law instead of following the gods’ law (natural law?).
3. Blindness—blind to our faults, blind to the fact that we are blind—acting as if we know. Is truth or knowing better than being ignorant and moving on?
Antigone
The earliest, and to my thinking, most successful of the three plays (although all are great). Putting content aside, the play is a delight to read, with the verbal battles between Antigone and King Creon being worthy of Shakespeare (or Lion in Winter) for their sheer entertainment. It’s easy to put each character in a box—Antigone, the angry protector of her family and of human dignity. This dignity is given by the gods, who require us to give the dead a proper burial—regardless of man-made law or their offenses on earth. Creon—the king who needs to restore order out of the ultimate disorder of Oedipus’ rule (marrying your mother, killing your father, etc.)—must enforce earthly justice. In the end, the “natural” law of the gods prevails.
But as is so often the case with ancient literature, there is more nuance than meets the eye. There is the motivation of the main characters. Antigone wants to follow the custom of the gods by burying her family’s dead—regardless of the King’s decree and at the cost of her life. But is she also motivated by family pride? And as the “battle” wears on, Antigone insists on following the custom regardless of the impact of this decision (her sister will be banished, for example). Creon sounds more reasonable at first—citing the need for order, to punish those who rebelled versus those who supported the state. He is a man of action who judges people by their actions, not intent:
“you cannot learn of any man the soul, the mind, in the intent until he shows his practice of the government and laws.” (l.175)
He relies on “good rules” to order the state. Yet as time goes on, the matter seems more like a grudge match, and the need not to appear weak or let the other side win seems more important than the principle. He fails to see (a theme throughout the plays) what is obvious to everyone: the gods are not on his side. His ability to debate himself, present in the chorus—
“my mind kept on debating. Isn’t this action possibly of a god’s?” (l.278) (Cf. Arendt)
Both the philosophy and psychology of the matter are on full display in Antigone and Creon’s verbal battle in lines 450–580, with many lines worthy of Lion in Winter:
Creon: And you dared to overstep these (my) laws? Antigone: For me it was not Zeus who made that order. … Nor did I think your orders were so strong that you, a mortal man, could overrun the gods' unwritten and unfailing laws. Not now, nor yesterday's, they always live, and no one knows their origin in time. So not through fear of any man's proud spirit would I be likely to neglect these laws, and draw on myself the gods' sure punishment. I knew that I must die—how could I not?—even without your edict. If I die before my time, I say it is a gain. Who lives in sorrows many as are mine, how shall he not be glad to gain his death? (ll. 450–470)
Antigone: if you think my acts are foolishness, the foolishness may be in a fool’s eye. Creon: These rigid spirits are the first to fall. (ll. 470–475) (Irony, as Creon becomes more rigid—he too falls.) Creon: Your act of grace, in his regard, is a crime.
In classic Greek theatre, it is Creon’s tragic flaw that does him in. He is admired for his strength of character. These very traits lead him to stop listening. As the chorus notes:
He is clever beyond all dreams Inventive craft that he has Which may drive him one time to do good and another time to evil. (l.364)
Creon becomes more of a tyrant, making those around him frightened to speak up:
“Your presence frightened any common man.” (l.690)
In the end, Creon, so penned in by his own decrees and refusal to look weak, falls into a trap of his own making:
“Whoever thinks that he alone is wise, his eloquence, his mind, above the rest, come, the unfolding, it shows his emptiness.” (l.706) “Stubbornness and stupidity are twins.” (l.1030)
If this sounds like certain current day leaders, well, draw your own conclusions. The corrosive effects of power and insecurity have long been a deadly combo. He learns his lesson, but it comes too late: his son, wife, and daughter-in-law are dead. Having lost all happiness, he is a “breathing corpse.” He can only ruefully look toward the future.
It is Antigone, by the play’s end, who earns our pathos. Her death is noble, almost a reward to end her suffering:
I’ll bury him myself. And even if I die in the act, that death will be a glory. I’ll lie with the one I love and loved by him an outrage sacred to the gods! I have longer to please the dead than please the living here: in the kingdom down below I’ll live forever.
And:
I go, without a friend, struck down by fate, living, to the hollow chambers of the dead. (l.910)
I’m struck by the Christian imagery here, and the play must have influenced early Christian writers.
Oedipus the King
The tension comes from the dramatic irony. Audiences must have known the myth and the underlying facts and would likely have known of Antigone—although the story of that play came after it was produced first. Sophocles uses this foreknowledge to his advantage, building dramatic irony that is sublime. Early in the play, Oedipus demands the murderer of the prior king be found and expelled as a pollutant. He even calls out the fact that he married the former king’s wife and that he was unfortunate not to have children. Only later does he recognize that,
“I have called curses on myself in ignorance.” (l.745)
Oedipus the King expands the theme from Antigone of the well-respected king becoming a tyrant because of inflexibility—in this case, his inability to admit the facts, which crash down on him and destroy him once the truth finally breaks through.
The use of the word “seeing” recurs throughout—foreshadowing Oedipus’ self-inflicted blindness. Characters use the term metaphorically, yet Oedipus is “blind” to the facts and becomes literally blind by the play’s end. He fails to see the “your own [temper] that lies within you. Instead you chide me.”
Tiresias taunts him:
“Since you have taunted me with being blind, here is my word for you. You have your eyes, but see not where you are and evil, nor where you live, nor whom you live with. Do you know who your parents are?” (l.410)
Later, his mother begs him not to see, and he prays “not to see the day” and to “be out of men’s sight.”
In Oedipus, the characters struggle to avoid their fate. They can make free choices, but in uncovering the facts, they stumble into their destiny through imperfect knowledge. The play asks whether it would be better to be “blind” to the truth. Characters beg Oedipus to stop seeking it, but he doesn’t. Even as he refuses counsel from others, he persists, leading to his own tragedy—and his mother’s suicide.
It is easy to see the circumstances of the play as fantastical. But how much do we really know about our world, our past, our friends? There are likely facts and circumstances surrounding us that, with perfect knowledge, would seem bizarre. We live in a world of imperfect knowledge and allow ourselves to remain happily blind. Oedipus’ “tragic flaw” may be as much his refusal to accept the comfort of the metaphorical blindness the rest of us rely on.
Oedipus at Colonus
The final play in this series picks up on the themes of blindness and innocence. Taking place between Oedipus the Kingand Antigone, Colonus has the blind king wandering the countryside with his daughters. There is a definite King Lear vibe here. His blindness—both to his circumstances before the tragedy was revealed and his literal blindness now—makes him (as Lear) “more sinned against than sinning” (King Lear Act 3, Scene 2).
The play is less successful as a drama than the other two. Yet the knowledge that the two daughters, who are saved by play’s end while saving their father, will eventually be killed themselves adds a level of pathos throughout.
July 3, 2025
Honestly, maybe I'm comparing too many things to Homer and a great epic poem but these plays felt like they should have been a part of a broader story but were instead a few drawn out scenes. That is probably an artifact of the limitations of the contest rules for which they were written and the fact that everyone watching would already be familiar with the story but still. I get things should be judged for what they are and plays don't have to cover the range that a novel would but even judging it on its own merit, I wasn't blown away.
They are good at capturing the depth of horrible emotions humans are capable of in lunacy inducing tragedies. And Sophocles was good and crafting the story to build up the anticipation, tension, and emotional horror as much as possible. The essays in the collection are good -- they are clearer and more interesting than most essays in classic books.
Still, I would say overrated given the recognition that the name Oedipus still brings, Freud metaphorically "bumping" the topic or not.
These are the first ancient Greek plays I've read and so far I'm not impressed.
They are good at capturing the depth of horrible emotions humans are capable of in lunacy inducing tragedies. And Sophocles was good and crafting the story to build up the anticipation, tension, and emotional horror as much as possible. The essays in the collection are good -- they are clearer and more interesting than most essays in classic books.
Still, I would say overrated given the recognition that the name Oedipus still brings, Freud metaphorically "bumping" the topic or not.
These are the first ancient Greek plays I've read and so far I'm not impressed.
November 15, 2025
The introduction to Sophocles' life and works (provided by Mark Griffith and Glenn W. Most) includes the statement that, "To Aristotle in the fourth century, as to many lovers of drama since, Sophocles' plays appear to represent the pinnacle of what Greek tragedy was capable of achieving, the fulfillment of its very 'nature.'" I whole-heartedly agree.
Sophocles' characters are rich in emotion and easy to empathize with. Their actions, even when irrational, are well-motivated by (beautifully-described) passions. Compared to some other Greek tragedians, whose plays can be harsh and scary with no redeemable characters, Sophocles' masterful dialogue gives his plays a more profound sense of tragedy.
Sophocles' characters are rich in emotion and easy to empathize with. Their actions, even when irrational, are well-motivated by (beautifully-described) passions. Compared to some other Greek tragedians, whose plays can be harsh and scary with no redeemable characters, Sophocles' masterful dialogue gives his plays a more profound sense of tragedy.
July 16, 2025
Liked these translations a lot. Though it's three different translators, they're fairly uniform in style, and it's a strong style. Something of the dryness that seems inevitable in translations from ancient Greek, but lots of great poetry too. Edition could have had endnotes covering something more than 'text is uncertain here' though.
March 21, 2024
Oedipus the King. The new editors slightly revised and cleaned up David Grene's translation from the 2nd edition. This brisk, elegant, and intelligible version is really useful for teaching the text.
February 1, 2025
honestly really touching. i am pleasantly surprised! antigone as a character really resonated w me too wow crazy how this shit holds up
September 15, 2025
the ancient greeks really were just so special. what incredible storytellers. i’m glad some of their working survived.
August 26, 2025
perhaps one of the crazier stories in greek mythology, that entire lineage is cursed
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews