Antigone

Zizek finally faces his obsession and dares make her his mouthpiece. All writers do that at least once: crawl into their favourite character FROM SOMEONE ELSE'S play/novel/movie and speak through his/her mouth... It is a joy to read this piece of self-indulgence. Love it.

This is an interesting re-envisioning the possible denouements of the play. If you've read Sophocles, the first two thirds of the play is the same. Zizek offers three different endings to stimulate your opinion of the play's political/existential significance. There is a preface and an introduction, both of which I read after reading the "translation" itself. I recommend this approach. But why?Zizek is way too smart to not have considered using the introductory essay as a commentary after the play; out of the "force of habit" or of tradition, I felt the need to promote the "translation" to the primary and the "introduction" to the secondary position. However you choose to modify or or not modify the sequence of reading it, I think it was a worthwhile endeavor for myself.Maybe the actual best reason I can offer for violating the publication's design is that anyone who, like myself, doesn't like spoilers will not want to be exposed to the translator-adaptor's commentary on the crucial divergences of the play from Sophocles until having read the text for herself.

The author's retelling of the Greek classic is a real challenge and thought provoking one.

There were a few pages where the lines broke oddly, maybe it can be updated, maybe the odd breaks were intentional but I doubt it. If not for those pages I would have given 5 stars but alas.