Poetics. Aristotle. Theodore Alois Buckley (Translator). London. 1857.
Search the Perseus Catalog for:
Search the Perseus Catalog for:
Current edition Experimental
The Poetic of Aristotle (Theodore Alois Buckley) (OCR draft) (English) (Theodore Alois Buckley's English translation, first published in 1850 and represented from the Henry G. Bohn 1857 printing; corrected against a second OCR and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.)
Provisional text from uncorrected OCR; expect errors.
Editions (4)
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) (Aristotle, Poetics. Immanuel Bekker, editor, Aristotelis Opera, volume 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1837.) — 24 focus
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) Perseus (Aristotle, De arte poetica liber. Rudolf Kassel, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965. Reference edition for passage alignment.) — 24 focus
Poetics, Greek text (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's Greek text of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 24 focus
Poetics, Greek text (Franz Ritter, 1839) (OCR draft) Experimental (Franz Ritter's 1839 Greek edition, corrected against OCR of the represented copy and aligned to the conventional Perseus chapter-and-subchapter sequence.) — 24 focus
Translations (13)
Poetics (W. H. Fyfe) (OCR draft) Perseus (William Hamilton Fyfe's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, Loeb Classical Library, 1939 printing.) — 24 focus
Arabic Poetics (Badawī edition, 1953) (OCR draft) (The ancient Arabic translation of Aristotle's Poetics in ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Badawī's 1953 edition.) — 24 focus
Poetics (S. H. Butcher, 1911) (OCR draft) Experimental (S. H. Butcher's English translation from Aristotle's Theory of Poetry and Fine Art, fourth edition, 1911.) — 24 focus
Again, Epic poetry must have as many kinds as
Tragedy: it must be simple, or complex, or 'ethical,'
or 'pathetic.'
The parts also, with the exception of
song and spectacle, are the same;
for it requires
Reversals of the Situation, Recognitions, and Scenes of
Suffering.
Moreover, the thoughts and the diction must
be artistic.
In all these respects Homer is our earliest
and sufficient model. Indeed each of his poems has a
twofold character.
The Iliad is at once simple and
'pathetic,' and the Odyssey complex (for Recognition
scenes run through it), and at the same time 'ethical.'
Moreover, in diction and thought they are supreme.
Epic poetry differs from Tragedy in the scale on
which it is constructed, and in its metre.
As regards
scale or length, we have already laid down an adequate
limit: the beginning and the end must be capable of
being brought within a single view.
This condition
will be satisfied by poems on a smaller scale than the
old epics, and answering in length to the group of
tragedies presented at a single sitting.
Epic poetry has, however, a great—a special—
capacity for enlarging its dimensions, and we can see the
reason.
In Tragedy we cannot imitate several lines of
actions carried on at one and the same time; we must
confine ourselves to the action on the stage and the part
taken by the players.
But in Epic poetry, owing to the
narrative form, many events simultaneously transacted
can be presented;
and these, if relevant to the subject,
add mass and dignity to the poem.
The Epic has here
an advantage, and one that conduces to grandeur of
effect, to diverting the mind of the hearer, and relieving
the story with varying episodes.
For sameness of
incident soon produces satiety, and makes tragedies fail
on the stage.
As for the metre, the heroic measure has proved its
fitness by the test of experience.
If a narrative poem
in any other metre or in many metres were now com-
posed, it would be found incongruous.
For of all
measures the heroic is the stateliest and the most
massive;
and hence it most readily admits rare words
and metaphors, which is another point in which the
narrative form of imitation stands alone.
On the other
hand, the iambic and the trochaic tetrameter are stirring
measures, the latter being akin to dancing, the former
expressive of action.
Still more absurd would it be to
mix together different metres, as was done by Chaeremon.
Hence no one has ever composed a poem on a great scale
in any other than heroic verse.
Nature herself, as we
have said, teaches the choice of the proper measure.
Homer, admirable in all respects, has the special merit
of being the only poet who rightly appreciates the part
he should take himself.
The poet should speak as little
as possible in his own person, for it is not this that makes
him an imitator.
Other poets appear themselves upon
the scene throughout, and imitate but little and rarely.
Homer, after a few prefatory words, at once brings in
a man, or woman, or other personage;
none of them
wanting in characteristic qualities, but each with a
character of his own.
The element of the wonderful is required in Tragedy.
The irrational, on which the wonderful depends for its
chief effects, has wider scope in Epic poetry, because there
the person acting is not seen.
Thus, the pursuit of
Hector would be ludicrous if placed upon the stage—the
Greeks standing still and not joining in the pursuit, and
Achilles waving them back.
But in the Epic poem the
absurdity passes unnoticed.
Now the wonderful is
pleasing: as may be inferred from the fact that every
one tells a story with some addition of his own,
knowing that his hearers like it.
It is Homer who
has chiefly taught other poets the art of telling lies
skilfully.
The secret of it lies in a fallacy. For,
assuming that if one thing is or becomes, a second is
or becomes, men imagine that, if the second is, the first
likewise is or becomes.
But this is a false inference.
Hence, where the first thing is untrue, it is quite un-
necessary, provided the second be true, to add that the
first is or has become.
For the mind, knowing the
second to be true, falsely infers the truth of the first.
There is an example of this in the Bath Scene of the
Odyssey.
Accordingly, the poet should prefer probable im-
possibilities to improbable possibilities.
The tragic plot
must not be composed of irrational parts. Everything
irrational should, if possible, be excluded; or, at all
events, it should lie outside the action of the play (as,
in the Oedipus, the hero's ignorance as to the manner
of Laius' death);
not within the drama, -as in the
Electra, the messenger's account of the Pythian games;
or, as in the Mysians, the man who has come from Tegea
to Mysia and is still speechless.
The plea that otherwise
the plot would have been ruined, is ridiculous;
such a
plot should not in the first instance be constructed.
But once the irrational has been introduced and an air
of likelihood imparted to it, we must accept it in spite of
the absurdity.
Take even the irrational incidents in the
Odyssey, where Odysseus is left upon the shore of Ithaca.
How intolerable even these might have been would be
apparent if an inferior poet were to treat the subject.
As it is, the absurdity is veiled by the poetic charm
with which the poet invests it.
The diction should be elaborated in the pauses of
the action, where there is no expression of character
or thought.
For, conversely, character and thought are
merely obscured by a diction that is over brilliant.
Aristotle on the Art of Poetry (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 24 focus
II. Besides this, Epic poetry must divide into the same
species as Tragedy;
it must be either simple or complex,
a story of character or one of suffering.
with the exception of Song and Spectacle, must be the
same, as it requires Peripeties, Discoveries, and scenes of
suffering just like Tragedy.
Lastly, the Thought and Diction
in it must be good in their way.
in Homer first; and he has made due use of them. His
two poems are each examples of construction, the Iliad
simple and a story of suffering, the Odyssey complex (there
is Discovery throughout it) and a story of character. And
they are more than this, since in Diction and Thought too
they surpass all other poems.
There is, however, a difference in the Epic as compared
with Tragedy, (1) in its length, and (2) in its metre.
(1) As
to its length, the limit already suggested will suffice: it must
be possible for the beginning and end of the work to be
taken in in one view—a condition which will be fulfilled
if the poem be shorter than the old epics, and about as
long as the series of tragedies offered for one hearing.
For the extension of its length epic poetry has a special
advantage, of which it makes large use. In a play one
cannot represent an action with a number of parts going
on simultaneously; one is limited to the part on the stage
and connected with the actors. Whereas in epic poetry
the narrative form makes it possible for one to describe
a number of simultaneous incidents; and these, if germane
to the subject, increase the body of the poem.
This then
is a gain to the Epic, tending to give it grandeur, and also
variety of interest and room for episodes of diverse kinds.
Uniformity of incident by the satiety it soon creates is apt
to ruin tragedies on the stage.
(2) As for its metre, the
heroic has been assigned it from experience;
were any one
to attempt a narrative poem in some one, or in several, of
the other metres, the incongruity of the thing would be
apparent.
of metres—which is what makes it more tolerant than the
rest of strange words and metaphors, that also being a point
in which the narrative form of poetry goes beyond all others.
The iambic and trochaic, on the other hand, are metres of
movement, the one representing that of life and action,
the other that of the dance.
Still more unnatural would it
appear, if one were to write an epic in a medley of metres,
as Chaeremon did.
Hence it is that no one has ever written
a long story in any but heroic verse; nature herself, as we
have said, teaches us to select the metre appropriate to such
a story.
Homer, admirable as he is in every other respect, is
especially so in this, that he alone among epic poets is not
unaware of the part to be played by the poet himself in
the poem.
The poet should say very little in propria persona,
as he is no imitator when doing that. Whereas the other
poets are perpetually coming forward in person, and say but
little, and that only here and there, as imitators, Homer after
a brief preface brings in forthwith a man, a woman, or some
other Character—no one of them characterless, but each
with distinctive characteristics.
The marvellous is certainly required in Tragedy. The
Epic, however, affords more opening for the improbable,
the chief factor in the marvellous, because in it the agents
are not visibly before one.
The scene of the pursuit of
Hector would be ridiculous on the stage—the Greeks halting
instead of pursuing him, and Achilles shaking his head to
stop them; but in the poem the absurdity is overlooked.
The marvellous, however, is a cause of pleasure, as is shown
by the fact that we all tell a story with additions, in the
belief that we are doing our hearers a pleasure.
Homer more than any other has taught the rest of us the
art of framing lies in the right way. I mean the use of
paralogism. Whenever, if A is or happens, a consequent, B,
is or happens, men's notion is that, if the B is, the A also is
—but that is a false conclusion. Accordingly, if A is untrue,
but there is something else, B, that on the assumption of its
truth follows as its consequent, the right thing then is to add
on the B. Just because we know the truth of the conse-
quent, we are in our own minds led on to the erroneous
inference of the truth of the antecedent. Here is an instance,
from the Bath-story in the Odyssey.
A likely impossibility is always preferable to an uncon-
vincing possibility.
The story should never be made up of
improbable incidents; there should be nothing of the sort
in it. If, however, such incidents are unavoidable, they
should be outside the piece, like the hero's ignorance in
Oedipus of the circumstances of Laius' death; not within it,
like the report of the Pythian games in Electra, or the man's
having come to Mysia from Tegea without uttering a word
on the way, in The Mysians.
So that it is ridiculous to say
that one's Plot would have been spoilt without them, since
it is fundamentally wrong to make up such Plots. If the
poet has taken such a Plot, however, and one sees that he
might have put it in a more probable form, he is guilty of
absurdity as well as a fault of art.
Even in the Odyssey
the improbabilities in the setting-ashore of Ulysses would be
clearly intolerable in the hands of an inferior poet. As it
is, the poet conceals them, his other excellences veiling
their absurdity.
Elaborate Diction, however, is required
only in places where there is no action, and no Character
or Thought to be revealed. Where there is Character or
Thought, on the other hand, an over-ornate Diction tends to
obscure them.
Poetics (Thomas Twining, 1789) (OCR draft) Experimental (Thomas Twining's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1789 and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 24.19 focus
The Poetic of Aristotle (Henry James Pye, revised 1792) (OCR draft) Experimental (Henry James Pye's revised 1792 English translation, corrected against the 1788 first edition, aligned to the Kassel reference edition, and supplied with a selective apparatus of substantive 1788 readings.) — 24.19 focus
Poetica Latine conversa (Franciscus Ritter, 1839) (OCR draft) Experimental (Franz Ritter's Latin translation, corrected against OCR of the represented copy and aligned to the conventional Perseus chapter-and-subchapter sequence.) — 24 focus
La poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) Experimental (André Dacier's French translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1692.) — 24.19 focus
10.
Poetica d'Aristotile (Bernardo Segni, 1549) (OCR draft) Experimental (Bernardo Segni's 1549 Florentine Italian translation, aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 24 focus
De poetica (Antonio Riccobono, 1587) (OCR draft) Experimental (Antonio Riccobono's Latin translation, first published in 1587; text represented from Immanuel Bekker's 1831 edition.) — 24 focus
De arte poetica liber (William of Moerbeke, ca. 1277) (OCR draft) Experimental (William of Moerbeke's medieval Latin translation, represented by the 1953 Aristoteles Latinus edition.) — 24 focus
Arabic Poetics (Abū Bishr Mattā; Tkatsch edition) (OCR draft) Experimental (The Arabic translation attributed to Abū Bishr Mattā, edited by Jaroslaus Tkatsch in 1928 and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 24 focus
Arabic Poetics (Abū Bishr Mattā; Tkatsch edition, unaligned) (OCR draft) Experimental (Tkatsch's edition of the medieval Arabic translation in its original, unaligned segmentation.) — 24 focus
Notes on the current edition
Poetics
Commentary
Commentary on the Poetics (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) (Ingram Bywater's English commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus
19.
mvp-aristotle-comment-952
19.
mvp-aristotle-comment-953
Remarques sur la poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) (André Dacier's French commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus
31.
mvp-aristotle-comment-587
Commentarius in Aristotelis Poeticam (Franciscus Ritter, 1839) (OCR draft) (Ritter's Latin commentary, extracted from the 1839 volume, divided by Ritter's chapters and sections, and linked to the corresponding Perseus reference subsections.) focus
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-182
Ritter, cap. 24 § 10