Aristotles Tragic Hero in Sophocles Antigone- Unveiling the Protagonist Fate
Tragic heroes manifest in ways that may not be clear to the average human being but which can attain clarity when the issue achieves preference in the eyes of literature experts. The issue of a tragic hero arises when an individual or a figure gets an elevation at a point when those who believe in him qualify them as exceptionally good. In Socrates’ time, the issue of female dominance did not exist. It is against this background that the ‘her’ terminology or description did not exist. Socrates appeared to indicate that to whom nature has gifted much, much is expected from them. As such, most of the people laying their excessive hopes on people identified as heroes take them as tragic individuals when the expectations take a dive. Most tragic heroes design their downfall by behaving in a naturally kind way, only for them to learn that the world treats them in a different way. In Antigone, the issue of a hero remains such an individual willing to give their all to their community but ends up failing. Sophocles and Aristotle agree on the point of having tragic heroes sacrificing their lives for the sake of others. The tragic hero remains that individual keen on alleviating a community but who fails based on their weaknesses.
Sophocles’ explanation of the tragic hero arises at the point of a highly hated individual turning around to give assistance to the underprivileged. However, tragic individuals often find themselves getting entangled in issues beyond their understanding. The entire framework around the philosophical arguments remains to get to the points of the heroes and understand their positions. In the opening of Antigone, the sons of the king of Oedipus appear keen on defending his territory. Everyone buying within the game plan laid by the king qualifies him as a hero. The issue around the king appears to give a positive appraisal of his followers. However, the entire reality at the end of the day does not work around him. The people may appear to win, and the king works around such, but he ends up losing everything “of beasts that range mountain meadows; (Sophocles). The Antigone factor arises in the aspect of winning over cultural factors but losing on the individual masculine end. The Antigone dimension incorporates the dimensions of full responsibility in terms of admitting what went wrong and what became right. Aristotle supports Sophocles in terms of admitting that society can interpret a set of heroes as promoters of a society’s interest while interpreting others as the main sponsors of a society’s downfall.
Antigone, against the then societal norms, elected to apply the image and gender of an absolute female in communicating the image of an anti-hero. This girl made a lot of rescues and yet came up to become one of the most misunderstood girls in Greek history. The girl indicated that she was willing to rescue her people, but her people did not understand the role she had in society. Sophocles indicates as such, “From you, dear heart, my brother. When you died, I took you up, all three, and laid you out” Sophocles). The nobility, as promoted by the Greek intellectual class, did not want to attract conflicted attention and attraction. However, Antigone goes ahead to pretend that it can represent the divinity of law or civility, yet they cannot discuss dishonor. While the entire Sophocles story supports the element of a single story in a manner that encourages heroes, Aristotle indicates that we must accept heroes with their flaws. Even when people do not accept us with our dignity, we must also accept that every one of us can act in error. The mistakes that people make should qualify them as individuals written off. The tragic falling-off happens systemically, as explained by Sophocles and supported by Aristotle’s argument.
The dooming of a particular fate within the representation of a given flaw against the indication of willingness to perform a collective good qualifies one as a tragic hero, at least in the eyes of Sophocles and supported by Aristotle, works around misinterpretation. The conflict in expectations and the misunderstandings around the input versus the output carry the capacity to achieve confusion. Aristotle applied the genus and family equation in arguing for the tragic hero. The entire framework remains around imitation of what men (and lately women) can do and what the recipients may do. Aristotle goes ahead to indicate that “We assume that, for the finest form of Tragedy, the Plot must not be simple but complex; and further, it must imitate actions arousing pity and fear; (Aristotle). The entire foundation behind this end of thinking is that of getting people to understand that tragic heroes have two ends. One angle allowed them to give their all, and the other end convinced them to attract all kinds of negative attention.
The word hero arises from a good aspect of personality. Tragic events manifest the elements of disasters and negative news. Modern tragic heroes defy the conventionalities of respectable people and instead fit within the people expected to attain the characters of villains and personalities not qualified to attract collective attention. However, this modern tragic hero should also attract massive sympathy on the basis of sacrificing their soul to win the attention of the masses. It is against this basis that most tragic heroes have absorbed the attention of most narration creators from the sense of appealing to all ends of the community. The anti-hero assumes their image by communicating their strengths and weaknesses. In ‘Antigone,’ Sophocles reminds his audience of the need to take a two-dimensional approach toward everyone else. Heroes remain human beings with progressive approaches but carrying their defined kinds of flaws. Therefore, Aristotle, as part of the nobility, indicated that society must learn to take care of the merits as they contend with the flaws. In saying, “Language and mind swift as the wind,” Aristotle reminds Sophocles to activate the element of reminding everyone that nature equalizes everything. Sophocles’ thinking and Aristotle’s’ arguments made a lot of sense in terms of reminding audiences that tragic hero exists everywhere.
Oedipus appeared doomed to fail, as presented by Sophocles, although he did his best to defend the people of his nation. The entire representation by Sophocles remains that so many people remain misunderstood to the extent that their main gains get swallowed or drowned to levels that they may not understand. In many nations, the people and the generals who fought for the countries appeared to be those who brought bloodshed, other than those who did not work around winning the wars for others. It is against this background that Aristotle called for the security of the noble class, a category of people expected to think for the rest and the section of individuals designed to take up the minds of other people. Heroes may get misunderstood, and not everyone properly understands the issue of the nobility. That hero or heroine can appear as a culprit in the wider scheme of things. It is still within this kind of thinking that the entire philosophical class, incorporating the literature category, brought up the issue of the tragic hero. The tragic hero remains a point of contradiction and an element of confusion, especially to audiences.
Works Cited
Bobrick, Elizabeth. “Sophocles’Antigoneand The Self-Isolation Of The Tragic Hero”. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, vol 35, no. 1, 2015, pp. 40-46. Informa UK Limited, doi:10.1080/07351690.2014.957128.
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
We’ll write everything from scratch
Question 
In a 5-page, double spaced paper having a clear thesis and strong topic sentences determine who the tragic hero is in Sophocles’ Antigone using Aristotle’s criteria only.
Aristotles Tragic Hero in Sophocles Antigone- Unveiling the Protagonist Fate
Be sure to use specific detail and quotes from the text which are appropriately cited parenthetically. The key to success in this paper is focusing on the criteria and being detailed.