Lesson Report:
Title
Antigone Meets MLK: Translating Justice and Civil Disobedience
In this session, students closed a translation/share-out activity drawn from Antigone, then closely read and contextualized a key section of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail� (page 3). The class identified and compared thematic through-lines (just vs. unjust laws, moral vs. legal duty, nonviolent resistance) and began drafting paired dialogues between Antigone and MLK to probe alignments and tensions between the two texts.
Attendance
– Students mentioned absent: 0
– Note: Instructor referenced 14 participants when forming breakout pairs; several students experienced intermittent connectivity and rejoined.
Topics Covered (chronological)
1) Closure: Student Translation Share-outs (Antigone-themed poetry)
– Activity: Students read their partner’s translated/retranslated lines (some from/into Urdu and then back to English).
– Sample content/themes voiced:
– “I will bury him… that death is an honorable sacrifice… better to die than live in humiliationâ€� (Antigone’s duty to family and moral law).
– “These laws are not just for today or yesterday, but exist foreverâ€� (gods’ laws vs. human edicts).
– “I’m not disobeying the laws; however…â€� (awkward back-translation highlighting nuance lost between languages).
– Instructor move: Praised efforts; emphasized that translation inevitably introduces variation and that the class will revisit translation differences in more depth later.
2) Transition to New Text and Access Logistics
– Text: Martin Luther King Jr., “Letter from Birmingham Jail.â€�
– Directions: Open PDF from Google Spaces (also shared in Zoom chat); turn to page 3, starting at “You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws,â€� end just before “I must.â€�
– Method: Popcorn reading (no need to raise hands; each reader continues seamlessly).
3) Popcorn Reading: MLK on Just vs. Unjust Laws (p. 3)
– Core claims discussed aloud:
– Distinction: Just laws align with moral/Divine law; unjust laws do not (citing St. Augustine: “an unjust law is no law at all,â€� and Aquinas: laws must be rooted in eternal and natural law).
– Criterion: Laws that uplift human personality are just; those that degrade are unjust.
– Segregation: Degrades both the segregated and the segregator; morally wrong and sinful (invoking Martin Buber’s I–Thou vs. I–It).
– Legal examples: Support obeying the 1954 Supreme Court decision outlawing segregation in schools; urge disobedience of segregation ordinances because they are morally wrong.
– Majority/minority test: Unjust = a code imposed on a minority not binding on the majority or passed without the minority’s unhampered right to vote; just = sameness made legal (majority follows what it compels the minority to follow).
– “Just on face, unjust in applicationâ€�: Permit laws used to suppress peaceful assembly become unjust.
– Lineage of civil disobedience: Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego; early Christians; Socrates; and modern cases (Nazi Germany, Hungarian freedom fighters, anti-religious laws under communism).
4) Mini-Lecture: Historical Context for MLK’s Argument
– Time/place: 1960s United States; MLK as an American Black leader, later assassinated.
– From slavery to segregation:
– Slavery existed at the nation’s founding, concentrated in Southern states.
– Civil War ended slavery, but segregation (“separate but equalâ€�) replaced it across public life (schools, theaters, bathrooms, buses, water fountains, etc.); in practice, “Blackâ€� facilities/services were inferior.
– Structural barriers: Education, jobs, and especially voting were curtailed through suppression.
– MLK’s strategy: Nonviolent direct action (sit-ins at whites-only lunch counters; enduring harassment without retaliation) to expose and confront unjust laws.
– Key framing: MLK is not anti-law; he differentiates just obedience from principled civil disobedience of unjust laws.
5) Guided Thematic Identification (Zoom Chat Brainstorm)
– Students surfaced recurring themes from the passage:
– Nonviolent protest/civil disobedience
– Equality and dignity; uplift vs. degradation of human personality
– Duty to disobey unjust laws; moral responsibility over legal compliance
– Majority/minority dynamics; voter suppression and democratic legitimacy
– Man-made law vs. divine/moral law (Augustine/Aquinas)
– Misuse of “neutralâ€� laws (e.g., permits) to entrench injustice
– Anti-religious laws as unjust; historical exempla (Nazism, Hungary)
– Critique of gradualism; urgency of action (“justice will not simply arriveâ€�)
– Application matters: laws can be just in text, unjust in use
– Cross-text link: Parallels with Antigone’s stance against Creon’s edicts
6) Paired Dialogic Writing Task: Antigone x MLK
– Grouping: Instructor randomly assigned pairs (one group became a trio due to connectivity).
– Tools and tech: Create a shared Google Doc (instructor demoed docs.google.com -> Blank -> Share -> “Anyone with the link can editâ€�); paste shareable links in Google Spaces; include both partners’ names in the document.
– Prompt and deliverable:
– Choose one MLK theme identified in chat.
– Find how that theme is present in both Antigone and MLK’s letter.
– Write a dialogue imagining Antigone and MLK in conversation about the chosen theme.
– Length: At least six back-and-forth exchanges; instructor also stated each character should have six lines (to be clarified next session).
– Aim: Go beyond “both oppose unjust lawsâ€� to explore nuanced agreements/disagreements (e.g., individual defiance vs. organized nonviolence; divine law vs. natural law; immediacy vs. prudence).
– Timebox: 10–15 minutes in breakout rooms; many began drafting; some faced internet issues and received reassignment/support.
7) Wrap-Up and Next Class Preview
– Incomplete work: Not required as homework; optional to continue; class will have a few minutes at the start of next session to finish and share links.
– Next reading: Plato’s Apology (approx. 20 pages). Posted to Google Spaces. Students should read as much as possible to prepare for deeper comparative analysis (Antigone–MLK–Socrates).
– Submission logistics reminder: Share dialogue links in Google Spaces; ensure documents are set to “anyone with link can edit/viewâ€� and labeled with partner names.
Actionable Items
Urgent (before next session)
– Post/verify links:
– Ensure the MLK PDF and Plato’s Apology PDF are in Google Spaces and accessible.
– Create a single collection post/thread in Google Spaces for dialogue links; remind students to include both names on the doc.
– Clarify deliverable:
– Resolve the length requirement ambiguity (minimum six total exchanges vs. six lines per character); post a brief clarification in Spaces.
– Standardize terminology: “Google Docâ€� (not “Google Docs sheetâ€�) to avoid confusion.
– Prep quick support:
– Prepare a one-slide refresher on how to set Google Doc sharing to “Anyone with the link can edit.â€�
– Draft 2–3 guiding questions to help pairs deepen Antigone–MLK dialogue (e.g., “Would Antigone endorse nonviolent mass action or lone defiance?â€� “How do divine law and natural law overlap or diverge?â€�).
During next session
– Allocate 5–10 minutes for pairs to finalize dialogues and post links; then sample-read 2–3 dialogues to model nuanced comparison.
– Touchpoint with students who had connectivity issues (e.g., those reassigned to a trio, students who dropped and rejoined) and confirm they have partners and access.
– Briefly revisit translation variance (from the opening activity) as a lens for reading philosophical texts in translation.
Longer-term follow-ups
– Provide a short glossary/reference sheet for names and concepts that appeared in MLK’s excerpt (Augustine, Aquinas, Buber’s I–Thou, Paul Tillich, Brown v. Board 1954, Shadrach/Meshach/Abednego) to support ELLs.
– Consider a simple rubric for evaluating the Antigone–MLK dialogues (accuracy to texts, depth of comparison, use of evidence, nuance).
– Plan the comparative bridge into Plato’s Apology (Socrates on law, obedience, and conscience) to triangulate themes across all three texts.
Homework Instructions:
ASSIGNMENT #1: Read Plato’s “Apology of Socrates� (Preparation for comparative analysis)
You will read the Apology to prepare for tomorrow’s deeper analysis of justice, law, and moral duty, building on our work with Antigone and Martin Luther King Jr. Focus on how Socrates argues about obeying moral obligations vs. human laws, and how that connects to the themes we discussed today.
Instructions:
1) Get the text:
– Open the PDF the instructor will post in our class space (Google Spaces). If you have trouble accessing it, let the instructor know right away. A reputable online version is acceptable if needed.
2) Plan your time:
– The text is about 20 pages. Aim to read all of it in 60–90 minutes. If you can’t finish, read as much as you can so you can follow tomorrow’s discussion.
3) Read with today’s themes in mind:
– Keep these lenses from class in front of you: just vs. unjust laws; moral law vs. human law; civil disobedience and when it’s justified; accepting consequences for principled action.
– Recall examples from today: Antigone’s divine/moral duty vs. Creon’s decree and MLK’s distinction between just and unjust laws and nonviolent civil disobedience.
4) Prioritize key sections if short on time:
– Socrates’ mission and the Delphic Oracle story (why he questions people).
– His stance on obeying orders vs. doing what is right (e.g., refusing an unjust command under the Thirty Tyrants; saying he would keep philosophizing even if the city ordered him to stop).
– His comments on justice, integrity, and accepting legal penalties.
– The sentencing and his final remarks to the jury.
5) Read actively:
– Annotate or take brief notes. Mark at least 3–5 passages (with page numbers) that speak to our class themes (e.g., moral responsibility over legal obligation, civil disobedience, justice/injustice).
– Jot a one-line note next to each marked passage explaining why it connects to Antigone and/or MLK.
6) Optional but helpful preparation:
– Write 2–3 bullet points that compare Socrates’ position to Antigone’s and/or MLK’s (e.g., where they agree, where they might disagree, and why).
7) Be ready for class:
– Bring your notes and be prepared to cite passages in discussion and comparative activities at the start of the next session. No submission is required tonight; the goal is to understand and be ready to discuss.