Israel Navigates a Limbo Between Life and Death Post-October 7
Translated & summarized from Zman Yisrael by baba
An article compares the current state of Israel to Sophocles' "Antigone," describing it as a limbo "between two deaths" following the October 7th massacre and Yitzhak Rabin's assassination. It argues that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, like King Creon, has failed to acknowledge his role in the events leading to disaster. The piece suggests Israel remains symbolically alive but unable to bury its past, particularly the unresolved Palestinian issue, leaving the public to bear the consequences.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Israel is described as being in a state of "limbo between two deaths" after the October 7th massacre.
- The article compares Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to King Creon from Sophocles' "Antigone."
- Yitzhak Rabin's assassination in 1995 is seen as a symbolic trauma that Israel has not processed.
- The October 7th massacre shattered the belief that Israel could ignore the Palestinian issue.
- Netanyahu is criticized for refusing to acknowledge his role in the events leading to the disaster.
The article draws a parallel between Sophocles' tragedy "Antigone" and contemporary Israel, particularly in the wake of the October 7th massacre and the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. In "Antigone," King Creon forbids the burial of Polyneices, leading to Antigone's defiance, her death sentence, and ultimately, the destruction of his own family. This situation is described as a state of being "between two deaths," a concept from psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan, where the physical body may be alive but the symbolic existence is extinguished, or vice versa.
The author argues that Israel, since Rabin's assassination in 1995, has been in a similar state of limbo. Rabin's physical death is a fact, but the idea he represented, the pursuit of peace through agreement, remains symbolically alive. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is portrayed as a politician who rose from the trauma of Rabin's murder, leveraging fear and survival politics, and attempting to symbolically bury Rabin's legacy. This effort, the article suggests, failed spectacularly on October 7th, when raw death shattered the nation's sense of normalcy.
The October 7th massacre is presented not as a return of the repressed, but as the return of what was actively pushed away: the Palestinian issue and the belief that Israel could continue as usual while silencing it. The article posits that the "conception" prior to the massacre was not about containing Hamas, but about managing the conflict rather than resolving it, a policy aligned with Netanyahu's approach.
Comparing Netanyahu to Creon, the article questions whether he can reach a moment of tragic recognition, admitting his own role in the events that led to disaster. Unlike Creon, who eventually acknowledged his folly, Netanyahu is depicted as refusing to do so, thus remaining outside the tragedy himself, leaving the burden on the Israeli public. This refusal, the author concludes, leaves Israel trapped between what was rejected and what is now demanding its place, between the dead and what the nation cannot bury.