In the Characters there are four points to aim at. First
and foremost, that they shall be good.
There will be an
element of character in the play, if (as has been observed)
what a personage says or does reveals a certain moral
purpose;
and a good element of character, if the purpose
so revealed is good.
Such goodness is possible in every
type of personage, even in a woman or a slave, though the
one is perhaps an inferior, and the other a wholly worthless
being.
The second point is to make them appropriate. The
Character before us may be, say, manly;
but it is not appro-
priate in a female Character to be manly, or clever.
The
third is to make them like the reality, which is not the same
as their being good and appropriate, in our sense of the
term.
The fourth is to make them consistent and the same
throughout;
even if inconsistency be part of the man before
one for imitation as presenting that form of character, he
should still be consistently inconsistent.
We have an in-
stance of baseness of character, not required for the story,
in the Menelaus in Orestes;
of the incongruous and un-
befitting in the lamentation of Ulysses in Scylla, and in
the (clever) speech of Melanippe;
and of inconsistency in
Iphigenia at Aulis, where Iphigenia the suppliant is utterly
unlike the later Iphigenia.
The right thing, however, is
in the Characters just as in the incidents of the play to
endeavour always after the necessary or the probable;
so that
whenever such-and-such a personage says or does such-
and-such a thing, it shall be the probable or necessary
outcome of his character;
and whenever this incident
follows on that, it shall be either the necessary or the
probable consequence of it.
From this one sees (to digress
for a moment) that the Dénouement also should arise out
of the plot itself, and not depend on a stage-artifice, as in
Medea, or in the story of the (arrested) departure of the
Greeks in the Iliad.
The artifice must be reserved for
matters outside the play for past events beyond human
knowledge, or events yet to come, which require to be
foretold or announced; since it is the privilege of the Gods
to know everything.
There should be nothing improbable
among the actual incidents. If it be unavoidable, however,
it should be outside the tragedy, like the improbability in
the Oedipus of Sophocles.
But to return to the Characters.
as Tragedy is an imitation of personages better than the
ordinary man, we in our way should follow the example of
good portrait-painters, who reproduce the distinctive features
of a man, and at the same time, without losing the likeness,
make him handsomer than he is.
The poet in like manner,
in portraying men quick or slow to anger, or with similar
infirmities of character, must know how to represent them
as such, and at the same time as good men, as Agathon
and Homer have represented Achilles.
All these rules one must keep in mind throughout, and
further, those also for such points of stage-effect as directly
depend on the art of the poet, since in these too one may
often make mistakes.
Enough, however, has been said on
the subject in one of our published writings.
Poetics. Aristotle. Ingram Bywater (Translator), ed. Gilbert Murray. Oxford. 1909.