Greek Tragedies in a Modern World
*Works Cited Not Included
From the times of Aristotle to modern day Boal people have tried to come up with a definition of tragedy that encompasses all of the works they feel to be tragedies. However, there are always a few exceptions to their rules that make their thesis insubstantial. Those who define tragedies all have different elements that they say are necessary in classifying something as a tragedy. Unfortunately for us, no one definition has ever been settled upon that everyone agrees with. The one factor that does seem to be present in every interpretation of what is necessary in a tragedy is the catharsis that is brought up in the viewer. Without that emotional reaction, whether of pity, empathy, sympathy, or perturbation, a work never seems to be classified as a tragedy. O'Neill wrote Desire Under the Elms borrowing themes from the myths of Phaedra, Medea, and Oedipus. He was trying to create a Greek tragedy in the setting of his time. Racine wrote Phedre in classic Greek style, attempting to create a Greek tragedy that had been written in the modern day. Both of these plays sought to entwine the modern world with Greek tragedies. While they each have distinctly different ways of accomplishing their goal of writing a modern Greek tragedy, they are both tragedies in their own way and bring about the similar effect of Catharsis.
Jean Racine wrote Phedre based on the Greek myth of queen Phaedra, wife of Theseus, who lusted after her stepson and, when he rejected her love, accused him of raping her and hung herself. Because of her accusation Theseus cursed his son which resulted in his death. While Racine sets the play in Troezen and kept it in its original era, he changed...
... middle of paper ...
...dre and Desire Under the Elms are derived from Greek tragedies, they take very different approaches to creating a modern-day Greek tragedy. While one sets the play in Greek times and adheres to the formal requirements, the other goes for the effect that Aristotle says tragedy should induce. There is no doubt that they should both be considered tragedies, if for no other reason than that they both fulfill requirements that have been set for tragedies. While they may fulfill different requirements, the essential effect of catharsis is achieved, to one degree or another, in both. By using different methods to achieve this catharsis, they would seem to be different types of tragedies; one Greek, one modern. The fact still remains that the plays do evoke emotions either of pity, sympathy, empathy, or perturbation, and because of this, deserve to be called tragedies.
According to Aristotle, tragedy requires an admirable hero with power and in a high state, but more importantly, he or she possesses a tragic flaw that leads to their downfall. This tragic flaw most closely relates to a character’s hubris, excessive pride in themselves or their judgment. But sometimes a character cannot be categorized as tragic, and one can argue whether or not the tragic character violates the requirements. In Sophocles’ Antigone Creon and Antigone serve as tragic characters in the play; however, Creon’s character exemplifies Aristotle’s theory of tragedy.
Aristotle (384-322 B.C. believed that tragedy, as an imitation or mimesis of life as it could be, held more importance than history, which simply records the past. He considered that performance of a tragedy provided the perfect cathartic experience for an audience, leaving them spiritually purified and inspired. He felt spectators seeing and experiencing great hardship befall the play’s hero or heroine would achieve this emotional state and benefit from it.
What makes Sophocles’ and Nathaniel Hawthorne’s protagonists both tragically beautiful is that Antigone and The Scarlet Letter follow Aristotle’s guide to tragedy. Both works have tragedy within the family. Hester wrongs her husband Roger Chillingworth by cheating, and Antigone, no matter how hard she tries, cannot justify her brother’s death or rid herself from her parent’s incestuous shame.
During the Ancient Grecian time periods, tragedy meant death because one defied against an outer prophecy. Modern day tragedy was simply realism, the unspoken way of life. In Sophocles' Oedipus the King and Ibsen's A Doll's House, the main characters - Nora and Oedipus, are both constructed to illustrate flaws in society and how naive people are. Ibsen and Sophocles both developed tragedy into a central idea that all people surreptitiously understand. Nora and Oedipus make incompetent decisions that assist in discovering their fundamental nature as tragic heroes and provoke sorrow and pity among the audience.
The tradition of the tragedy, the renowned form of drama based on human suffering that invokes an accompanying catharsis, has principally become a discontinued art. Plays that evoke the sense of tragedy-the creations of Sophocles, Euripides, and William Shakespeare-have not been recreated often, nor recently due to its complex nature. The complexity of the tragedy is due to the plot being the soul of the play, while the character is only secondary. While the soul of the play is the plot, according to Aristotle, the tragic hero is still immensely important because of the need to have a medium of suffering, who tries to reverse his situation once he discovers an important fact, and the sudden downturn in the hero’s fortunes. Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman is the modern tragedy of a common man named Willy Loman, who, like Oedipus from Oedipus Rex by Sophocles, exhibits some qualities of a tragic hero. However, the character Willy Loman should not be considered a full-on tragic hero because, he although bears a comparable tragic flaw in his willingness to sacrifice everything to maintain his own personal dignity, he is unlike a true tragic hero, like Oedipus, because he was in full control of his fate where Oedipus was not.
The genre of tragedy is one that has fascinated readers since its very conception. From the intricacies of the plots, to the internal and external struggles of the characters, tragedies are woven together in such a way that the reader is drawn into the story. Two types of tragedies particularly fascinate readers, although they diverge greatly, especially around the theme of revenge. In the areas of motivation for the revenge. and characteristics of the revenger, Greek and Senecan tragedies vary greatly.
The myth of Eurydice is a sad story in which two lovers are separated by death. After his love dies, Orpheus journeys into the underworld to retrieve her, but instead loses her for good. Playwright Sarah Ruhl takes the myth of Eurydice and attempts to transform this sad tale into a more light-hearted story. However, despite humorous lines and actions throughout the play, the melancholy situation of the actual tale overwhelms any comicality present. Although meant to be funny, Sarah Ruhl's “Eurydice” can be seen as a modernized tragedy about two lovers who are separated forever by a twist of fate.
Throughout literary history, tragic heroes have been defined as a great or virtuous character in a dramatic tragedy who is destined for downfall, suffering, or defeat. However, philosophers such as Aristotle tried to find connections between tragic heroes in Greek plays. This in-depth analysis of tragic heroes lead Aristotle to create six criteria for a true tragic hero: He or she has to be a Noble figure of royalty and noble in character, has to be imperfect by design, has a flaw or error that is a choice, is punished excessively for this choice flaw, has to undergo a downfall that leads to a realization, and the story of this tragic hero has to make the audience reach a moment of catharsis or purging of emotions. A prime example of a tragic hero that fits all of these criteria is Creon from the play Antigone, written by Sophocles in 441 BC. The story of Antigone is a tragedy that describes a stubborn and proud king named Creon who refuses to allow a burial for the brother of Antigone. Creon’s excessive pride leads to a series of unfortunate events resulting in the death of Antigone, his son Haemon, and his wife Eurydice. Throughout the course of the play, Creon undergoes each standard that is required by Aristotle’s terms to be a tragic hero.
The play “Antigone” by Sophocles displays many qualities that make it a great tragedy. A tragedy is defined as a dramatic or literary work in which the principal character engages in a morally significant struggle ending in ruin or profound disappointment. In creating his tragedy “Antigone”, Sophocles uses many techniques to create the feelings of fear and pity in his readers. This in turn creates an excellent tragedy.
Racine, is a well known classical tragedy writer of the French. He used biblical and classical models with literature to make much of his works. With Phaedra, being the head character of the play, one must understand with illustrating her passion over rational thinking especially when she chooses in restoring a sensation for love, uncovering a suffering overt, and refusing the lie her life had appeared. Although with passion being that strict emotion of forceful action, one must see that it is a profoundly inspiring play. However, Phaedra replenishes her volatile sensation for desire, in choosing to live. With an...
...ke Stephens shares, “ the purgation and ennoblement called for by Aristotle as essential effects of tragedy.” The ending result is meant to be pity and fear as it has been discussed in class and by Stephens. The pity , however, may not necessarily be towards Emily but also all the characters of the play and even ourselves. And the fear component of this cathartic moment comes from the question if we are going to be able to reflect on life and its worth before it is too late.
Aristotle, a philosopher, scientist, spiritualist and passionate critic of the arts, spent many years studying human nature and its relevance to the stage. His rules of tragedy in fact made a deep imprint on the writing of tragic works, while he influenced the structure of theatre, with his analysis of human nature. Euripides 'Medea', a Greek tragedy written with partial adherence to the Aristotelian rules, explores the continuation of the ancient Greek tales surrounding the mythology of Medea, Princess of Colchis, and granddaughter of Helios, the sun god, with heartlessness to rival the infamous Circe. While the structure of this play undoubtedly perpetuates many of the Aristotelian rules, there are some dramatic structures which challenge its standing with relevance to Aristotle's guidelines, and the judgment of Medea as a dramatic success within the tragic genre.
...n Aristotle’s view of characters. Aristotle also suggests that a tragedy should have the power to provoke audience’s emotion of pity and fear. The suffering and behavior of each character in Hamlet possess that power. The author agrees with the Aristotelian analysis of Hamlet, the story of Hamlet was perfectly based on Aristotle’s tragedy theory. However, the author thinks that the tragedy doesn’t always have to end up in misery. A tragic story can also have some hidden happiness in the suffering, misery of tragic hero(s), in which way can audience realize that there is still hopeful when your life is tragic and encourage people to strive hard to create a better life.
The tragedy was a large part of people's lives in ancient Greece. Tragedies became prominent long before Christ was born. A tragedy, or goat-song, usually were seen during festivals in ancient Greek times. Tragedies gradually increased in seriousness until they were given utmost importance. Greek tragedies began at a festival in honor of a god, there were three great tragic authors, and all tragedies include a tragic situation.
There are distinct differences between the theories outlined within Aristotle’s Poetics and Bharata’s The Nāṭyaśāstra which both attempt to elaborate upon the audience relationship and the phenomenon produced relating to the theatrical experience. However, despite the dissimilarities there are components of catharsis and rasa that share common elements and ideas surrounding the creation and the effects of these experiences. Aristotle contends the cathartic nature of tragedy aids in purgation of emotion, however ultimately limiting it to the powers of tragedy as only creating this, where, contrarily, The Nāṭyaśāstra outlines the power any actor has in creating bhāva, leading to rasa. Whilst both theories do have common attributes in their aims of heightening an audience experience, it is the differentiating that outcomes that greatly affect their overall influence.