Aristotle's theory of tragedy
Aristotle's theory of tragedy: As the great period of Athenian drama drew to an end at the
beginning of the 4th century BCE, Athenian philosophers began to analyze its
content and formulate its structure. In the thought of Plato (c. 427–347 BCE),
the history of the criticism of tragedy began with speculation on the role of
censorship. Aristotle's theory of tragedy To Plato (in the dialogue on the Laws) the state was the noblest
work of art, a representation (mimēsis) of the fairest and best life. He feared
the tragedians’ command of the expressive resources of language, which might be
used to the detriment of worthwhile institutions. Aristotle's theory of tragedy He feared, too, the emotive
effect of poetry, the Dionysian element that is at the very basis of tragedy. Aristotle's theory of tragedy Therefore, he recommended that the tragedians submit their works to the rulers,
for approval, without which they could not be performed. Aristotle's theory of tragedy It is clear that
tragedy, by nature exploratory, critical, independent, could not live under
such a regimen.
In the Poetics, Aristotle's famous study of Greek
dramatic art, Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) compares tragedy to such other metrical
forms as comedy and epic. Aristotle's theory of tragedy He determines that tragedy, like all poetry, is a
kind of imitation (mimesis), but adds that it has a serious purpose and uses
direct action rather than narrative to achieve its ends. Aristotle's theory of tragedy He says that
poetic mimesis is imitation of things as they could be, not as they
are — for example, of universals and ideals — thus poetry is a more
philosophical and exalted medium than history, which merely records what has
actually happened.
The aim of tragedy, Aristotle writes, is to bring about a
"catharsis" of the spectators — to arouse in them sensations of pity
and fear, and to purge them of these emotions so that they leave the theater
feeling cleansed and uplifted, with a heightened understanding of the ways of
gods and men. Aristotle's theory of tragedy Aristotle's theory of tragedy This catharsis is brought about by witnessing some disastrous and
moving change in the fortunes of the drama's protagonist (Aristotle recognized
that the change might not be disastrous, but felt this was the kind shown in
the best tragedies — Oedipus at Colonus, for example, was considered
a tragedy by the Greeks but does not have an unhappy ending).
According to Aristotle, tragedy has six main elements: plot,
character, diction, thought, spectacle (scenic effect), and song (music), of
which the first two are primary. Aristotle's theory of tragedy Most of the Poetics is devoted to
analysis of the scope and proper use of these elements, with illustrative
examples selected from many tragic dramas, especially those of Sophocles,
although Aeschylus, Euripides, and some playwrights whose works no longer
survive are also cited.
Several of Aristotle's main points are of great value for an
understanding of Greek tragic drama. Particularly significant is his statement
that the plot is the most important element of tragedy:
Tragedy is an imitation, not of men, but of action and life,
of happiness and misery. Aristotle's theory of tragedy And life consists of action, and its end is a mode of
activity, not a quality. Aristotle's theory of tragedy Now character determines men's qualities, but it is
their action that makes them happy or wretched. Aristotle's theory of tragedy The purpose of action in the
tragedy, therefore, is not the representation of character: character comes in
as contributing to the action. Hence the incidents and the plot are the end of
the tragedy; and the end is the chief thing of all. Aristotle's theory of tragedy Without action there cannot
be a tragedy; there may be one without character. . . . The plot, then, is the first
principle, and, as it were, the soul of a tragedy: character holds the second
place.
Aristotle goes on to discuss the structure of the ideal
tragic plot and spends several chapters on its requirements. Aristotle's theory of tragedy He says that the
plot must be a complete whole — with a definite beginning, middle, and end —
and its length should be such that the spectators can comprehend without
difficulty both its separate parts and its overall unity. Aristotle's theory of tragedy Moreover, the plot
requires a single central theme in which all the elements are logically related
to demonstrate the change in the protagonist's fortunes, with emphasis on the
dramatic causation and probability of the events.
Aristotle's theory of tragedy: Aristotle has relatively less to say about the tragic hero
because the incidents of tragedy are often beyond the hero's control or not
closely related to his personality. The plot is intended to illustrate matters
of cosmic rather than individual significance, and the protagonist is viewed
primarily as the character who experiences the changes that take place. This
stress placed by the Greek tragedians on the development of plot and action at
the expense of character, and their general lack of interest in exploring
psychological motivation, is one of the major differences between ancient and
modern drama.
Plato is answered, in effect and perhaps intentionally, by
Aristotle’s Poetics. Aristotle defends the purgative power of tragedy and, in
direct contradiction to Plato, makes moral ambiguity the essence of tragedy. Aristotle's theory of tragedy The tragic hero must be neither a villain nor a virtuous man but a “character
between these two extremes,…a man who is not eminently good and just, yet whose
misfortune is brought about not by vice or depravity, but by some error or
frailty [hamartia].” The effect on the audience will be similarly ambiguous. Aristotle's theory of tragedy A
perfect tragedy, he says, should imitate actions that excite “pity and fear.”
He uses Sophocles’ Oedipus the King as a paradigm. Near the beginning of the
play, Aristotle's theory of tragedy Oedipus asks how his stricken city (the counterpart of Plato’s state) may
cleanse itself, and the word he uses for the purifying action is a form of the
word catharsis. Aristotle's theory of tragedy The concept of catharsis provides Aristotle with his
reconciliation with Plato, a means by which to satisfy the claims of both
ethics and art. Aristotle's theory of tragedy “Tragedy,” says Aristotle, “is an imitation [mimēsis] of an
action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude…through pity and
fear effecting the proper purgation [catharsis] of these emotions.” Ambiguous
means may be employed, Aristotle maintains in contrast to Plato, to a virtuous
and purifying end.
To establish the basis for a reconciliation between ethical
and artistic demands, Aristotle insists that the principal element in the
structure of tragedy is not character but plot. Since the erring protagonist is
always in at least partial opposition to the state, the importance of tragedy
lies not in the character but in the enlightening event. Aristotle's theory of tragedy “Most important of
all,” Aristotle said, “is the structure of the incidents. For tragedy is an
imitation not of men but of an action and of life, and life consists in action,
and its end is a mode of action, not a quality.” Aristotle considered the plot
to be the soul of a tragedy, with character in second place. Aristotle's theory of tragedy The goal of
tragedy is not suffering but the knowledge that issues from it, as the
denouement issues from a plot. Aristotle's theory of tragedy The most powerful elements of emotional interest
in tragedy, according to Aristotle, are reversal of intention or situation
(peripeteia) and recognition scenes (anagnōrisis), and each is most effective
when it is coincident with the other. Aristotle's theory of tragedy In Oedipus, for example, the messenger
who brings Oedipus news of his real parentage, intending to allay his fears,
brings about a sudden reversal of his fortune, from happiness to misery, by
compelling him to recognize that his wife is also his mother.
Later critics found justification for their own
predilections in the authority of Greek drama and Aristotle. Aristotle's theory of tragedy For example, the
Roman poet Horace, in his Ars poetica (Art of Poetry), elaborated the Greek
tradition of extensively narrating offstage events into a dictum on decorum
forbidding events such as Medea’s butchering of her sons from being performed
on stage. And where Aristotle had discussed tragedy as a separate genre,
superior to epic poetry, Horace discussed it as a genre with a separate style,
again with considerations of decorum foremost. A theme for comedy may not be
set forth in verses of tragedy; each style must keep to the place allotted it.
Previous Question Next Question
0 comments:
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.