Political Dimension of Antigone's Demand. Aporias and Challenges

Abstract

Sophocles’ Antigone remains a true challenge for the audience to this day, both fascinating and unsettling. This is due to the main character’s ambiguous attitude, which is difficult to define and assess, sparks controversy and debate, and compels us to ask ever-new questions. It is no wonder that within the rich interpretive tradition of this work, various readings coexist side by side, some of which are difficult to reconcile with one another.

In this article, I have focused on tracing that part of this interpretive tradition with which Judith Butler engages in polemic in her book *Antigone’s Claim*. This tradition consists of three different ways of interpreting the behaviour and utterances of the drama’s main character, proposed by Hegel, Lacan, and Irigaray. I aim to demonstrate that although, including Butler’s, they differ fundamentally in their premises and conclusions, they are united by the fact that in each of them, the recognition and evaluation of Antigone’s behaviour is of key importance in relation to the question of how the private and public spheres relate in a democratic state. In this way, these interpretations address, in various ways, the political dimension of Sophocles’ play,

Keywords: public sphere, private sphere, divine law, state law, liberal democracy, totalitarianism