On Poetics by Aristotle

Aim:

• To discuss and define tragedies in general by Aristotle.
• To discuss different elements in a tragedy in details.
• To become an expert in a specific area concerning tragedies through small study group discussions.

Learning Activities:

1. Read and study the text of Poetics from Chapter VI to Chapter XIX. Annotate the text in the margins of the hand out
2. Share our annotations.
3. Interpret the following statements or paragraphs.
   • "Now, according to our definition Tragedy is an imitation of an action
     that is complete, and whole, and of a certain magnitude; for there
     may be a whole that is wanting in magnitude" .(PG 6)
   • Part VIII
     
     Unity of plot does not, as some persons think, consist in the unity
     of the hero. For infinitely various are the incidents in one man's
     life which cannot be reduced to unity; and so, too, there are many
     actions of one man out of which we cannot make one action. Hence the
     error, as it appears, of all poets who have composed a Heracleid,
     a Theseid, or other poems of the kind. They imagine that as Heracles
     was one man, the story of Heracles must also be a unity. But Homer,
     as in all else he is of surpassing merit, here too- whether from art
     or natural genius- seems to have happily discerned the truth. In composing
     the Odyssey he did not include all the adventures of Odysseus- such
     as his wound on Parnassus, or his feigned madness at the mustering
     of the host- incidents between which there was no necessary or probable
     connection: but he made the Odyssey, and likewise the Iliad, to center
     round an action that in our sense of the word is one. As therefore,
     in the other imitative arts, the imitation is one when the object
     imitated is one, so the plot, being an imitation of an action, must
     imitate one action and that a whole, the structural union of the parts
     being such that, if any one of them is displaced or removed, the whole
     will be disjointed and disturbed. For a thing whose presence or absence
     makes no visible difference, is not an organic part of the whole.
   • Part IX
     
     It is, moreover, evident from what has been said, that it is not the
     function of the poet to relate what has happened, but what may happen-
     what is possible according to the law of probability or necessity.
     The poet and the historian differ not by writing in verse or in prose.
     The work of Herodotus might be put into verse, and it would still
     be a species of history, with meter no less than without it. The true
     difference is that one relates what has happened, the other what may
     happen. Poetry, therefore, is a more philosophical and a higher thing
     than history: for poetry tends to express the universal, history the
     particular. By the universal I mean how a person of a certain type
     on occasion speak or act, according to the law of probability or necessity;
     and it is this universality at which poetry aims in the names she
     attaches to the personages. The particular is- for example- what Alcibiades
     did or suffered. In Comedy this is already apparent: for here the
     poet first constructs the plot on the lines of probability, and then
     inserts characteristic names- unlike the lampooners who write about
     particular individuals. But tragedians still keep to real names, the
     reason being that what is possible is credible: what has not happened
     we do not at once feel sure to be possible; but what has happened
     is manifestly possible: otherwise it would not have happened. Still
     there are even some tragedies in which there are only one or two well-known
     names, the rest being fictitious. In others, none are well known-
     as in Agathon's Antheus, where incidents and names alike are fictitious,
     and yet they give none the less pleasure. We must not, therefore,
     at all costs keep to the received legends, which are the usual subjects
     of Tragedy. Indeed, it would be absurd to attempt it; for even subjects
     that are known are known only to a few, and yet give pleasure to all.
     It clearly follows that the poet or 'maker' should be the maker of
     plots rather than of verses; since he is a poet because he imitates,
     and what he imitates are actions. And even if he chances to take a
     historical subject, he is none the less a poet; for there is no reason
     why some events that have actually happened should not conform to
     the law of the probable and possible, and in virtue of that quality
     in them he is their poet or maker.
   • Part XI
     
     Reversal of the Situation is a change by which the action veers round
     to its opposite, subject always to our rule of probability or necessity.
     Thus in the Oedipus, the messenger comes to cheer Oedipus and free
     him from his alarms about his mother, but by revealing who he is,
     he produces the opposite effect. Again in the Lynceus, Lynceus is
     being led away to his death, and Danaus goes with him, meaning to
     slay him; but the outcome of the preceding incidents is that Danaus
     is killed and Lynceus saved. .........
     .......
      
   • Part XIII
     
     As the sequel to what has already been said, we must proceed to consider
     what the poet should aim at, and what he should avoid, in constructing
     his plots; and by what means the specific effect of Tragedy will be
     produced.
     
     A perfect tragedy should, as we have seen, be arranged not on the
     simple but on the complex plan. It should, moreover, imitate actions
     which excite pity and fear, this being the distinctive mark of tragic
     imitation. It follows plainly, in the first place, that the change
     of fortune presented must not be the spectacle of a virtuous man brought
     from prosperity to adversity: for this moves neither pity nor fear;
     it merely shocks us. ....A plot of this kind would, doubtless,
     satisfy the moral sense, but it would inspire neither pity nor fear;
     for pity is aroused by unmerited misfortune, fear by the misfortune
     of a man like ourselves. Such an event, therefore, will be neither
     pitiful nor terrible. There remains, then, the character between these
     two extremes- that of 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. He must be one who is highly renowned and prosperous-
     a personage like Oedipus, Thyestes, or other illustrious men of such
     families.
   • Actions capable of this effect must happen between persons who are
     either friends or enemies or indifferent to one another. If an enemy
     kills an enemy, there is nothing to excite pity either in the act
     or the intention- except so far as the suffering in itself is pitiful.
     So again with indifferent persons. But when the tragic incident occurs
     between those who are near or dear to one another- if, for example,
     a brother kills, or intends to kill, a brother, a son his father,
     a mother her son, a son his mother, or any other deed of the kind
     is done- these are the situations to be looked for by the poet. He
     may not indeed destroy the framework of the received legends- the
     fact, for instance, that Clytemnestra was slain by Orestes and Eriphyle
     by Alcmaeon- but he ought to show of his own, and skilfully handle
     the traditional. material. Let us explain more clearly what is meant
     by skilful handling. (PAGE 11)
   • Part XV
     
     In respect of Character there are four things to be aimed at. First,
     and most important, it must be good. Now any speech or action that
     manifests moral purpose of any kind will be expressive of character:
     the character will be good if the purpose is good. This rule is relative
     to each class. Even a woman may be good, and also a slave; though
     the woman may be said to be an inferior being, and the slave quite
     worthless. The second thing to aim at is propriety. There is a type
     of manly valor; but valor in a woman, or unscrupulous cleverness is
     inappropriate. Thirdly, character must be true to life: for this is
     a distinct thing from goodness and propriety, as here described. The
     fourth point is consistency: for though the subject of the imitation,
     who suggested the type, be inconsistent, still he must be consistently
     inconsistent. As an example of motiveless degradation of character,
     we have Menelaus in the Orestes; of character indecorous and inappropriate,
     the lament of Odysseus in the Scylla, and the speech of Melanippe;
     of inconsistency, the Iphigenia at Aulis- for Iphigenia the suppliant
     in no way resembles her later self.
   • As in the structure of the plot, so too in the portraiture of character,
     the poet should always aim either at the necessary or the probable.
     Thus a person of a given character should speak or act in a given
     way, by the rule either of necessity or of probability; just as this
     event should follow that by necessary or probable sequence. It is
     therefore evident that the unraveling of the plot, no less than the
     complication, must arise out of the plot itself, it must not be brought
     about by the Deus ex Machina(*dā-əs-eks-mä-ki-nə)- as in the Medea, or in the return of
     the Greeks in the Iliad. The Deus ex Machina should be employed only
     for events external to the drama- for antecedent or subsequent events,
     which lie beyond the range of human knowledge, and which require to
     be reported or foretold; for to the gods we ascribe the power of seeing
     all things. Within the action there must be nothing irrational. If
     the irrational cannot be excluded, it should be outside the scope
     of the tragedy. Such is the irrational element the Oedipus of Sophocles.
     
     Again, since Tragedy is an imitation of persons who are above the
     common level, the example of good portrait painters should be followed.
     They, while reproducing the distinctive form of the original, make
     a likeness which is true to life and yet more beautiful. So too the
     poet, in representing men who are irascible or indolent, or have other
     defects of character, should preserve the type and yet ennoble it.
     In this way Achilles is portrayed by Agathon and Homer.
   • Part XVI
     ...
     But, of all recognitions, the best is that which arises from the incidents
     themselves, where the startling discovery is made by natural means.
     Such is that in the Oedipus of Sophocles, and in the Iphigenia; for
     it was natural that Iphigenia should wish to dispatch a letter. These
     recognitions alone dispense with the artificial aid of tokens or amulets.
     Next come the recognitions by process of reasoning.
   • Part XVII(PAGE 14)
     ...
     After this, the names being once given, it remains to fill in the
     episodes. We must see that they are relevant to the action. In the
     case of Orestes, for example, there is the madness which led to his
     capture, and his deliverance by means of the purificatory rite. In
     the drama, the episodes are short, but it is these that give extension
     to Epic poetry. Thus the story of the Odyssey can be stated briefly.
     A certain man is absent from home for many years; he is jealously
     watched by Poseidon, and left desolate. Meanwhile his home is in a
     wretched plight- suitors are wasting his substance and plotting against
     his son. At length, tempest-tost, he himself arrives; he makes certain
     persons acquainted with him; he attacks the suitors with his own hand,
     and is himself preserved while he destroys them. This is the essence
     of the plot; the rest is episode.
   • Part XVIII
     ...
     Again, the poet should remember what has been often said, and not
     make an Epic structure into a tragedy- by an Epic structure I mean
     one with a multiplicity of plots- as if, for instance, you were to
     make a tragedy out of the entire story of the Iliad. In the Epic poem,
     owing to its length, each part assumes its proper magnitude. In the
     drama the result is far from answering to the poet's expectation.
     The proof is that the poets who have dramatized the whole story of
     the Fall of Troy, instead of selecting portions, like Euripides; or
     who have taken the whole tale of Niobe, and not a part of her story,
     like Aeschylus, either fail utterly or meet with poor success on the
     stage. Even Agathon has been known to fail from this one defect. In
     his Reversals of the Situation, however, he shows a marvelous skill
     in the effort to hit the popular taste- to produce a tragic effect
     that satisfies the moral sense. This effect is produced when the clever
     rogue, like Sisyphus, is outwitted, or the brave villain defeated.
     Such an event is probable in Agathon's sense of the word: 'is probable,'
     he says, 'that many things should happen contrary to probability.'
   • Part XIX
     It remains to speak of Diction and Thought, the other parts of Tragedy
     having been already discussed. concerning Thought, we may assume what
     is said in the Rhetoric, to which inquiry the subject more strictly
     belongs. Under Thought is included every effect which has to be produced
     by speech, the subdivisions being: proof and refutation; the excitation
     of the feelings, such as pity, fear, anger, and the like; the suggestion
     of importance or its opposite. Now, it is evident that the dramatic
     incidents must be treated from the same points of view as the dramatic
     speeches, when the object is to evoke the sense of pity, fear, importance,
     or probability. The only difference is that the incidents should speak
     for themselves without verbal exposition; while effects aimed at in
     should be produced by the speaker, and as a result of the speech.
     For what were the business of a speaker, if the Thought were revealed
     quite apart from what he says?
     
     Next, as regards Diction. One branch of the inquiry treats of the
     Modes of Utterance. But this province of knowledge belongs to the
     art of Delivery and to the masters of that science. It includes, for
     instance- what is a command, a prayer, a statement, a threat, a question,
     an answer, and so forth. To know or not to know these things involves
     no serious censure upon the poet's art. For who can admit the fault
     imputed to Homer by Protagoras- that in the words, 'Sing, goddess,
     of the wrath, he gives a command under the idea that he utters a prayer?
     For to tell some one to do a thing or not to do it is, he says, a
     command. We may, therefore, pass this over as an inquiry that belongs
     to another art, not to poetry.

   *a god introduced by means of a crane in ancient Greek and Roman drama to decide the final outcome 2 : a person or thing (as in fiction or drama) that appears or is introduced suddenly and unexpectedly and provides a contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty .

4. In small study groups, discuss in details the following:

   Group 1	Group 2	Group 3	Group 4	Group 5
   Proper proportion	Sub-components of dramatic theater	Literature and human nature	Poetry vs. history--the "truth" problem	Spectacle / Special Effects vs. Tragic or Comic effects
   Literature's function	tragic flaw (hamartia)	Completeness of a work of literature ("unities of form and time")	Simple vs. complex plots	Tradition and the Individual Talent
   Character construction		"Unity of action"	Literature and the "agon" (conflict)	Poetry, Inspiration and Madness
   VI.2 How does Aristotle define tragedy? What emotions are aroused by tragedy? What purpose does tragedy serve?	IX 3-4 Why is poetry more philosophic than history? How does Aristotle define "the universal"? What is the aim of poetry?	IX 11-12 What qualities should the incidents in a tragedy have?	X 1-3 What are the two kinds of tragic plots? Explain how they are different from one another.	XI 1-5 What is a peripety? What is a discovery? What is the best form of discovery?
   			XIII 2-3 What are the three forms of plot to be avoided? Explain why each is inappropriate to tragedy. What kind of plot best arouses pity and fear? Why does this kind of plot best arouse these emotions? In the ideal form of tragedy what is the cause of the protagonist's misfortune?

   Some Aristotelian Principals