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.
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.
Nor, again, that of a bad man
passing from adversity to prosperity: for nothing can be
more alien to the spirit of Tragedy;
it possesses no single tragic quality; it neither satisfies
the moral sense nor calls forth pity or fear.
Nor, again, should the downfall of the utter villain be
exhibited. 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.
be single in its issue, rather than double as some maintain.
The change of fortune should be not from bad to good,
but, reversely, from good to bad.
It should come about as the result not of vice, but of
some great error or frailty, in a character either such as we
have described, or better rather than worse.
The practice of the stage bears out our view.
At first the poets recounted any legend that came in
their way.
Now, the best tragedies are founded on the story of a
few houses, on the fortunes of Alcmaeon, Oedipus, Orestes,
Meleager, Thyestes, Telephus, and those others who have
done or suffered something terrible.
A tragedy, then, to be perfect according to the rules of
art should be of this construction.
Hence they are in error who censure Euripides just because
he follows this principle in his plays, many of which
end unhappily.
It is, as we have said, the right ending. The best proof
is that on the stage and in dramatic competition, such
plays, if well worked out, are the most tragic in effect;
and Euripides, faulty though he may be in the general
management of his subject, yet is felt to be the most
tragic of the poets.
In the second rank comes the kind of tragedy which
some place first.
Like the Odyssey, it has a double thread of plot, and also
an opposite catastrophe for the good and for the bad.
It is accounted the best because of the weakness of the
spectators; for the poet is guided in what he writes by
the wishes of his audience.
The pleasure, however, thence derived is not the true tragic
pleasure. It is proper rather to Comedy, where those
who, in the piece, are the deadliest enemies—like Orestes
and Aegisthus—quit the stage as friends at the close,
and no one slays or is slain.
Poetics. Aristotle. S. H. Butcher (Translator). London. 1911.
Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.
Funding provided by The National Endowment for the Humanities.