Parvaiz and Polyneices
In reading Antigone, I felt that Polyneices connected to the character of Parvaiz in Home Fire by Kamila Shamsie. In Antigone, Polyneices is portrayed as a traitor by Creon, and his burial became a controversial topic for politics. Creon did not want Polyneices to have a burial at all since he went against his country. In Home Fire, Parvaiz also is portrayed as someone who went against the country by Karamat but this time by being a terrorist. Karamat would not allow Parvaiz's body to be buried in the United Kingdom because of his terrorist background. I think that both texts give the same message through Polyneices and Parvaiz that betrayal of the country can be viewed harshly by the ruler.
What differs between the treatment of these characters by the authors of the two texts starts with how much we get to see of the characters. In Antigone, I think it is interesting that Polyneices does not have any lines, and he is simply talked about by the other characters. He has already died. We know that he is viewed as a traitor, but we do not get to see his thoughts behind his actions. On the other hand, in Home Fire, there is a whole section dedicated to the perspective of Parvaiz, so we get to really understand his thoughts and what made him become a terrorist. I think that Shamsie added this twist to insert a new message which is that we should not judge someone by only looking at one side of the story. We have to be open to seeing different perspectives before making a judgment.
Despite them being based on the same character, I have viewed Parvaiz very differently from Polyneices because of how much SHamsie chose to show of his character. Sophocles did not really explain polyneices tory in Antigone so it was more hard to pity him
ReplyDeleteAlthough we weren't able to get a glance into Polyneices' true character in Antigone, it does make me wonder if he had a bigger role in the play that came before Antigone. Maybe then we can see how much Shamsie added to this character caught in in the crossfire.
ReplyDeleteThe contrast between Parvaiz and Polyneices is really interesting because Parvaiz is based off Polyneices, but they're actually read to be quite different characters. As you pointed out, this is probably Shamsie's intent and why she gave Parvaiz a whole section. The ending with Aneeka's death was all the more powerful.
ReplyDeleteYou make a good point about not getting to see much of Polyneices' character, since he's dead from the very beginning of the play. I think this plays a big role in how much we empathize with them; I definitely feel more connected to Parvaiz than Polyneices in this regard.
ReplyDeleteI've only read parts of Oedipus Rex and have no idea what Oedipus at Colonus entails in terms of Polyneices's character, but Shamsie clearly had the intention of elaborating on his story to convey more depth and forge Parvaiz into a complex individual. I knew barely anything about Polyneices and consequently didn't feel as connected or remorseful about his passing.
ReplyDeleteI also kept thinking about Parvaiz and Polyneices as parallel characters. I am not sure if it is the product of the time we are living in, but I felt like I had more sympathy for Polyneices because of the lack of information provided about him. I was super empathetic for Parvaiz, but part of me struggled with understanding his decisions.
ReplyDeleteThis is a great comparison topic. Because we see Parvaiz's story from his point of view, we're able to empathize with him in a way we cannot with Polyneices. That makes a big difference in how we respond to the character, but also to the message of the text, I think.
ReplyDelete