Choice of Anouih’s Creon and Antigone on XXI Century Georgian Stage

The essence, idea of Anouih’s dramaturgy is contradiction between an individual and society, between free choice of a person and laws created by society. In his so-called “black plays” the dividing line is drawn on a so-called happy life, between characters saying “yes” and “no”. Anouih defi nes a role of a character (person) from the beginning. They act in time and space on the basis of roles assigned to them. The main characters of his plays are divided into two mainly opposite sides. Young rebellious people who protest against accepted “happy” lifestyle. They prefer death to such life and “heroically” choose death. The others choose “life” according to accepted, established rules, and continue to live. Just this protest, heroism, contradiction between the State dictatorship and free personality are reproduced in “Antigone”, written in Paris, France during World War II. From this period onwards, Anouih’s dramaturgy refl ects existential judgment of life. In earthly life it is impossible to preserve genuine true love and purity. The solution is a heroic death chosen in protest. To express rebellion, disapproval of laws and rules of life, the playwright reworked the myth of Antigone, the youngest daughter of Oedipus and Jocasta and created a play in which the choice is made by two equal persons. Antigone says “no” to life according to established rules. Therefore, she is in a winning position and is a hero. The intellectual legislator, the ruler of the State, Creon, says “yes”, he chooses life, government of a public formation – State, and therefore he is a tyrant in a losing position. This is not tragedy of just Antigone or Creon, it is tragedy of both of them. The choice is tragic for both. Antigone sacrifi ces her life for this choice. And Creon sacrifi ces to the state his child, wife, nieces, all whom he loves and remains alone.
Gaga Goshadze off ered an interesting interpretation of “Antigone”. The director staged Anouih’s play practically without changes, with the exception of small coupures and removal of minor characters. And the narrator was also given the function of the author. The director expressed his ideas by rearranging accents. The freedom of choice or obedience of law? Personal freedom or public or state dictate? It is interesting that if in Anouih’s play we feel obvious sympathy towards Antigone (Do not forget that the play was written in occupied France, during World War II), in Gaga Goshadze’s performance the audience will sympathize both – Antigone, as well as Creon. At least, the choice of Gia Roinishvili’s Creon may be understood and accepted. Moreover, Creon and Antigone are in equal position. As in the play, they are both main characters. But if with Anouih Antigone is a positive hero and Creon is a negative hero, there is no such evident division in the performance. The director puts the spectators as well against some choice.