The “Exceeding” Subject and the Ritual Manifestation of Truth in the Judiciary. Reading Sophocles with Foucault

The aim of this essay is to discuss Fouc ault’s interpretation of the norm as a discursive practice that produces the subjec t as an outsider; particularly, it calls into question the role of the judiciary within this framework. The first part of the essay ret race s Foucault ’s analysi s of Sophocles’ play Oidipous Tyranno s in his courses and conferences conferences1. He argues that, in Sopho cles’ play, the judiciary procedure instituted by Oedipus does not require Oedipus’ presence as a judge (and nor as the sovereign ). Oedipus’ case is particularly relevant for Foucault’s, insofar as the king of Thebes is the perfect example of an exceeding charac t er, whose exercise of power requires a ritual manifestation of “truth” alè thurgie ) in order to restore the efficacy of the coercive power of the law As the judiciary is a language based on a system of representations, the criminal is represented a s someone who breaks the law but does not exceed the juridical representation. The second part of the essay discusses , from a juridical and political some aspects of another very well known play by Sophocles Antigone , which Fouc ault has not discussed . Both Oedipus and Antigone are produced as criminal subjects by a political authority , but she refuses this attribution, contesting its legitimacy. On the one hand, in order to maintain his sovereign power by claiming that he saved the city from the miasma (inf ection) that endangers it which is the prefiguration of an internal conflict Oedipus promotes the judiciary apparatus that