Occasionally I feel the need to yell into these abysses, so the long version of this essay is on Medium.com (search Faith Jones).
Antigone and her story of moral intransigence continue to be iconic to feminism. Academics appropriate culture too, so you can hypothesize someone championing and putting Antigone on a plinth even when siding with a source of oppression, if it awards research grants. I think I detected here a glint of contempt for Antigone, a single pro-Creon (authoritarian rule) comment in an otherwise pro-Antigone (the disempowered) volume.
If you read Antigone, as opposed to reading someone who has read Antigone, you might not be overly enthusiastic compared to the other Theban plays but it teaches: Do what’s right, do not comply to make life easier for someone more powerful. The author lists campaigns, modern tragedies and lionises personal heroes. It’s preaching to the converted as readers probably have a classical education and have experienced victimisation. Some recollections include declarations from the manifestos of mentally ill murderers offended by women not being under male control. The western world is mostly free of this thinking and the society/religious justification. Punjabi and Arabic translations please.
In the Stone Age, it may surprise you to hear that all gods were female (see The Myth of the Goddess, by Anne Baring and Jules Cashford), but male war gods replaced them as a need to survive the neighbours arose. Reversal could be underway; the pacification and effeminisation of male lives, but what then is their role?
I did wonder whether the author was expecting us to automatically accept information provided without question. (a) “We talk about the destruction of the earth in terms of rape: ‘the rape of the environment’ etc. These metaphors serve to reinforce humanity’s dominance over the earth [yes] and diminish the importance of environmental concerns.” [no]. Surely the emotive language is there to enrage the level of concern for the environment? Then there’s (b) Beyonce is the greatest cultural contributor of this century; and (c) “In turn, when women are viewed as closer to nature, we are seen as less civilised, less fully human even, than men.” Really? “We are seen as” is the author assuming a female readership (realistic) and commenting on unvoiced thoughts inside unmet male strangers’ heads. Extracting hypothetical people’s thoughts and citing them as evidence? What superpowers they must wield at the University of California.
Abolishing school dress codes, ok, but what about school uniform?: a psychological work/play switch, stopping rich/poor fashion competition and bullying. Were Athenian men really normally bisexual? I thought (misread?) Tiresias was asked by the gods whether it was preferable to live as a man or a woman, but here it says Tiresias was asked which gender gets more out of having sex. The answer could change.
We are told it took Alexander the Great 13 days and nights to sexually satisfy Thalestris, Queen of the Amazons, concluding that (fictional?) Amazon women were not just independent but also progressive, strong and equal. With revisionist eyes, Alexander the Great was about 4 ft tall and gay as two spoons, so the 13 day point was more likely the moment she finally gave up on flicking the silly thing.
What’s disappointing for me is that (Preface xvii) the author poisons their own championing of poor Antigone (the disempowered public) by letting the reader know by inference that her own family and friends would have supported our modern equivalent of the oppressive Creon in crushing Antigone. Unless I’m reading this fleeting comment wrong, it implies support for forced conquest against the victim’s will (worse than no consent) and also for removing women’s (and everyone else’s) right to vote. The text reads: “This book grew from my attempts to explain to Athena [the author’s daughter] that the things which were preoccupying her and her peer group – girls’ safety, school dress codes, dieting, as well as dealing with a changing political climate in which their freedoms were being curtailed…” This commentary is obviously a reference to ‘Brexit’. Facts: The UK entered the EU via the Maastricht Treaty, which was imposed against the will of the majority of its population (opinion poll range at the time was 62–68 percent against). This was an act of forced conquest. It reversed women’s suffrage as the EU’s law-composing government, The European Commission, is 100 percent unelected. No consent and no democracy is tyranny. Removing the legal and democratic checks and balances on power invites abuse and dystopia (unelected Commission directives become law without even a debate in national parliaments). The logic behind the EU getting rid of democracy at the senior level is surprisingly fair and comes with good intentions: to end the so-called ‘tyranny of the majority’ problem, in which majority interest continually side-lines minorities. This stops unfairness to minorities but (problem) the only way a public majority can stop the tyranny’s leadership group abusing power is by violence. The ‘rights’ lost (borderless travel) can be replicated by treaty alone. You don’t have to be conquered, disenfranchised and left vulnerable.
We were disempowered and compelled to obey (like Antigone) but stood up to the oppressor in defiance (like Antigone) and became free. The author’s family appear saddened. Oh, bless. How will your friends punish insolent little Antigone next?
It is a neo-liberal delusion to be unaware when you have become indistinguishable from dictators, imposing your will on others without consent. I see this family moved from the UK to the US, for career prospects. I suggest asking USA friends if they would approve of the same thing happening to them.: “Would you agree to the US being forcibly conquered against the will of your population and ruled by an unelected foreign government?” “Do you think you would have more rights and freedoms if that happened?” They’d just stare at you.
Referring to Euripides’ lost adaptation of Antigone in the wrapping up of this book: “Perhaps the hero Hercules intervened, and they all lived happily ever after, an ending that would have allowed Antigone to rebel against Creon’s authoritarianism and to have a future.”
Antigone’s intransigence over one issue (burying the dead) has morphed into our duty not to be a passive bystander when we witness injustice. Summary: Well researched, insightful and informative but the reader should filter quality information from personal opinion.