Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Aristotle's definition of tragedy
Aristotle's definition of tragedy
Aristotle's definition of tragedy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Aristotle's definition of tragedy
A Survey of Tragedy
A modern tragedy of today and a tragedy of ancient Greece are two very different concepts, but ironically, both are linked by many similarities. In “Poetics”, Aristotle defines and outlines tragedy for theatre in a way that displays his genius, but raises questions and creates controversy. Aristotle’s famous definition of tragedy states:
“A tragedy is the imitation of an action that is serious, and also as having magnitude, complete in itself in language with pleasurable accessories, each kind brought in separately in the parts of the work; in a dramatic, not in a narrative form: with incidents arousing pity and fear; wherewith to accomplish its catharsis of such emotions.”
I believe Aristotle’s meaning of “Imitate” is to play out, as in acting, and with “Magnitude” is to imply great importance or consequence. The phrase “complete in itself in language” is the method in which the drama is delivered to the audience, while “pleasurable accessories” would refer to the costumes, props and stage. Where Aristotle states; “each kind brought in separately in the parts of the work”, I believe he is referring to the different “Scenes” within the different “Acts”. His term “dramatic, not in a narrative form” refers to “Acting”. His phrase with “incidents arousing pity and fear” would indicate the audience should witness events that drive emotion toward somebody they admire. Aristotle’s phrase, “wherewith to accomplish its catharsis of such emotions, would indicate that at the end of the play there should be a act that will purge the emotions the play was intended to create.
I feel “Poetics” provides a sound blueprint for constructing a story that will immerse an audience into an adventure. By providing, a real...
... middle of paper ...
...’s man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a Shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back — that’s an earthquake. And then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory.”
I believe the similarities have proved, through the test of time, that Aristotle’s definition of tragedy to be both enduring and accurate.
Works Cited
Aristotle. “Concept of Tragedy": An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. 1991: 1203-1205
Miller, Arthur. “Death of a Salesman”: Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. 1991: 280-317
Miller, Arthur "Tragedy and the Common Man," Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. 1991: 1831-1833
Sophocles. “Oedipus the King”: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. 1991:1205-1244
...ods come for the free drugs that he offers. Johnny is a man for whom we feel pride, shame and pity all at once but such a contradictory character would be unstable and unpredictable. Aristotle defines tragedy according to seven characteristics. These are that it is characterized by mimicry, it is serious, it expresses a full story of a relevant length, it contains rhythm and harmony, the rhythm and harmony occur in different combinations in different parts of the tragedy, it is performed not narrated and that it provokes feelings of pity and fear then purges these feelings through catharsis the purging of the emotions and emotional tensions. The composition of a tragedy consists of six segments. In order of relevance, these are plot, character, thought, diction, melody, and performance. For a comedy the ending must be merry. Instead Jerusalem ends in death.
Aristotle states that "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. Now character determines men's qualities, but it is by their actions that they are happy or the reverse. Dramatic action, therefore, is not with a view to the representation of character: character comes in as subsidiary to the actions. Hence the incidents and the plot are the end of a tragedy; and the end is the chief thing of all.
The great philosopher Aristotle was born in 384 BC and he was well known for formalizing the model of what he believed to be the perfect tragedy. Plato was his teacher and he was the tutor of Alexander the Great. He managed to produce almost a thousand books and pamphlets, from which only a few have survived. He was also well known as a peripatetic philosopher, from the verb peripateo, that is, to walk around since he really liked giving lectures while he was walking. An important subject in his thought is that happiness is the real goal of life. The Greeks used to believe that tragedy was actually the uppermost form of drama and Aristotle’s ideas were based on this belief. He pointed out that tragedy should
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.
Twice in the Poetics, Aristotle contrasts poetry with history. Whatever its didactic value, the contrast has not seemed to readers of special philosophical interest. The aim of this paper is to show that this contrast is philosophically significant not just for our understanding of tragedy but also for the light it sheds on Aristotle’s overall methodology. I shall show how he uses the method sketched in the Topics to define tragedy and explain why the same method will not define history. In particular, tragedy admits of definition because its parts constitute a unity, and much of the Poetics aims to show how, despite being defined through six distinct parts, tragedy can be one. In contrast, history, though a proper preliminary to poetics and concerned also with human action, does not admit of scientific treatment because it contains no essential unities. Aristotle’s understanding of ‘science’ is used here to explain why any attempt to create a scientific history would turn history into poetry.
"Death of a Salesman By Arthur Miller ." Goodreads . N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. .
Miller, Arthur. Death of a Salesman. Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. Seventh Edition. X.J. Kennedy, and Dana Gioia. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc., 1999. 1636-1707.
Kardaun, Maria S. "Greek Tragedy As A Challenge To Modernism: A Depth Psychological Perspective." Psyart(2011): 10. ContentSelect Research Navigator. Web. 4 Mar. 2014.
In Arthur Miller’s essay, Tragedy and the Common Man, Miller creates a distinction from classical tragedies by creating a modern tragedy. Aristotle’s classic tragedy is, “an imitation of an action that is serious and complete in the mode of action and is not narrated. It effects pity and fear which is called catharsis. It has a beginning, middle, and end and its function is to tell of such things that might happen in the future- to express the universal” (Aristotle). To produce the feelings of either pity or fear, reversal, which is, “the change from one state of affairs to its exact opposite” (Aristotle), and recognition, which is, “the change from ignorance to knowledge, on the part of those who are marked for good fortune or bad” (Aristotle) must both ...
According to Aristotle, a tragedy must be an imitation of life in the form of a serious story that is complete in itself among many other things. Oedipus is often portrayed as the perfect example of what a tragedy should be in terms of Aristotle’s Poetics. Reason being that Oedipus seems to include correctly all of the concepts that Aristotle describes as inherent to dramatic tragedy. These elements include: the importance of plot, reversal and recognition, unity of time, the cathartic purging and evocation of pity and fear, the presence of a fatal flaw in the “hero”, and the use of law of probability.
According to Aristotle, the importance of tragedy as a genre is to represent action. Thus unity of action purportedly has the strongest implications for the effectiveness of the work itself. Aristotle posits “a story, since it is the representation of action, should concern an action that is single and entire, with its several incidents so structured that the displacement or removal of any one of them would disturb and dislocate the whole.” (Aristotle 27) and deems this claim imperative. A good plot, and thereby an effective tragedy, does not include events, which are not connected to each other or specifically the main plot. In theory, these unconnected events are distracting from the main action and dissipate the tragic effect. With Aristotle’s definition, no sub-plot should exist in tragedy. For all events to be “necessary or [have] probable connection with each other.” (Aristotle 27) none should exist not directly related to the main action. Again, unity allows for the tragic effect to be concentrated, intending to allow for increased feelings of pity and
Aristotle’s Poetics is a written work that generates a loose standard for tragedy and also creates a solid definition to produce a
“Tragedy… is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in the form of action, not of narrative; with incidents arousing pity and fear, wherewith to accomplish its katharsis of such emotions...” (Poetics, P.10) Aristotle was a great admirer of Sophocles’ Oedipus the King, considering it the perfect tragedy, and not surprisingly, his analysis fits that play perfectly. Aristotle's theorizations in the Poetics were modelled on the tragedy of Oedipus, the king of Thebes. The play is adjudged as a great example of tragic drama on the basis of the following:plot, character, diction, thought, spectacle, and melody. The concept of tragedy applies to both ancient greek theatre and modern day
In 350 B.C.E., a great philosopher wrote out what he thought was the definition of a tragedy. As translated by S.H. Butcher, Aristotle wrote; “Tragedy, then, is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in the form of action, not of narrative; with incidents arousing pity and fear, wherewith to accomplish its catharsis of such emotions. . . . Every Tragedy, therefore, must have six parts, which parts determine its quality—namely, Plot, Characters, Thought, Diction, Spectacle, Melody. (http://www.cnr.edu/home/bmcmanus/poetics.html)” Later in history, William Shakespeare wrote tragedies that epitomized Aristotle’s outline of a tragedy. Shakespeare’s Hamlet is one such tragedy.
...hough the two demonstrate the elements in different ways, they both achieve an effective tragedy. Now after learning about Aristotle’s philosophy on tragedy, one can examine any type of tragic poetry, play, movie and analysis if the elements are portrayed. Its interesting to see how much of Aristotle’s philosophy has effected poetry in the art of the Greek tragedy, Medea, and the modern movie, No Country for Old Men.