Poetics. Aristote. Paris. 1692.
La poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) (fra) (André Dacier's French translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1692.)
Provisional text from uncorrected OCR; expect errors.
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-978
ὥστε δεῖ τὰ ἐπιτιμήματα κτέ.
A Problem in
Aristotle's sense of the term is only a kind of question (v. on
b6
); but the mere fact of a question being raised in reference to the poet's work involves the possibility of an answer unfavourable to him, i. e. of an
ἐπιτίμημα, a censure or condemnation of what he has said. We have had
ἐπιτίμημα in this technical sense in
19, 1456 b 14
, and the verb
ἐπιτιμᾶν in
17, 1455b26
, in
19, 1456 b 16
, and in
22, 1458b6
. The criticisms to which a poem is exposed
Aristotle examines under the three heads indicated in the preceding state- ment (
b7-21
), but in reverse order: (1) the strictures passed on the poet's descriptions of things (
b 22-32
); (2) those relating to the kind of subject he has chosen to depict (
b32-1461a9
); and (3) the faults found in his language (
1461a9-31
). After that he shows in what way or ways each kind of criticism has to be answered.
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-979
1460b23
τὰ πρὸς αὐτὴν τὴν τέχνην,
scil.
τοῦ ποιητοῦ ἐπιτιμήματα, the censures relating to the artistic execution in his imitations.
(εἰ)
ἀδύνατα πεποίηται.
Ueberweg suggests that the traditional
ἀδύνατα πεποίηται (without the insertion of εἰ) may be a rhetorical [ 25. 1460 18-28 329 1460b23 way of putting the supposition, such as might be used in an actual debate or discussion. In the course of this chapter
Aristotle more than once writes as if he were simply reporting a possible debate (v. on
33
ἀλλ᾽ ἴσως δεῖ, and on
1461a 1
ἀλλ᾽ οὖν φασι).
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-980
ἡμάρτηται
is the natural opposite of the
ὀρθῶς ἔχει in the next line;
comp.
Eth. E. 2. 11, 1227 b 21
ἔστι δὲ τὸν μὲν σκοπὸν ἡμαρτῆσθαι, τὰ δὲ πρὸς ἐκεῖνον περαίνοντα ὀρθῶς ἔχειν. -
Eth. Ν. 8. 12, 1160b 30
αὕτη μὲν οὖν [scil. ἀρχή] ὀρθὴ φαίνεται, ἡ Περσικὴ δ᾽ ἡμαρτημένη. -
Eth. N. 6. 10, 1142b10
ἐπιστήμης μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ἔστιν ὀρθότης, οὐδὲ γὰρ ἁμαρτία.-
2. 2, 1104 b32
περὶ πάντα ταῦτα ὁ ἀγαθὸς κατορθωτικός ἐστιν ὁ δὲ κακὸς ἁμαρτητικός.
10.
mvp-aristotle-comment-605
25.7
10. Il faut donc tirer de ces lieux-là les réponſes qu'on doit oppoſer aux reproches qu'on fait aux Poëtes.]
1
233.
mvp-aristotle-comment-233
NOTE 233.
25.7
P. 123. TO HAVE REPRESENTED THINGS IMPOSSIBLE WITH RESPECT TO SOME OTHER ART, &c.
No interpretation that I have seen, or been able to devise, of this whole ambiguous, perplexed, and, probably, mangled passage, is without its difficulties. All I could do was, to choose that, which, after the closest attention to the original, and to the best comments, appeared to me
"minimis urgeri." I will not attempt to drag the reader after me, through the detail of my own doubts and embarrassments. But lest my version, from that degree of closeness, to which, in all passages where the meaning is doubtful, I have thought it right to confine myself, should retain, in some degree, the ambiguity, or obscurity, of the original, some explanation may be necessary.
By the various expressions,
μιμήσασθαι κατ’ ἀδυναμίαν — ἁμαρτία ἡ καθ’ αὑτὴν — αὐτῆς — καθ’ ἑαυτὴν, and, above all, by
ΚΑΚΟΜΙΜΗΤΩΣ ἔγραψε, which seems to fix clearly the sense of the rest, Aristotle means, I think, to indicate all such faults as are incompatible with good imitation—that is, in his view, with good Poetry. All other faults he denominates,
κατὰ συμβεβηκὸς—
incidental. Faults he allows them to be; but smaller, and more pardonable, faults:
ΕΛΑΤΤΟΝ γὰρ, εἰ μὴ ᾔδει, &c. In this class he reckons,
τὰ ἀδύνατα—
things impossible. The expression is unhappily ambiguous : for we may understand either
ἀδύνατα in general, or,
ἀδύνατα κατ’ ἰατρικὴν ἢ ἄλλην τέχνην. The commentators are divided. I cannot be of their party, who adopt the first of these senses. I see not how impossibilities, or absurdities,
1
in general, could, consist- ently with Aristotle's principles, be admitted by him into the number of merely incidental faults—
κατὰ συμβεβηκὸς—such as affected not the Poetry itself. We must, I think, understand—
ἁμαρτήματα ἢ ἀδύνατα—
things inaccurate, or, what is worse, impossible,
καθ’ ἑκάστην τέχνην—
upon the principles of some other art.
2
Aristotle then goes on, and applies his solution, founded on the foregoing distinction, to the worst species of such incidental faults—to things
ἀδύνατα. Take, he says, the worst: suppose the Poet to have represented something impossible, with respect to some particular art, as that of medicine, geography, &c. This, strictly speaking, is a fault; but it is a fault that may even be justified, (
ὀρθῶς ἔχοι,) if, by means of it, the Poet has answered, better than he could have done without it, the end of his own art, &c. Still, he continues, supposing this not to be the case, we are to consider, whether the fault, admitting it to be a fault, be
τῶν κατὰ τὴν τέχνην, ἢ κατ’ ἄλλο συμβεβηκὸς, &c. If the pursuit of Hector cannot be absolutely justified by the
θαυμαστὸν, the
ἔκπληξις which is produced by it, still it is not
κακομιμήτως γεγραμμένον; the Poetry is good, and the end of Poetry, the pleasure arising from the wonderful and the striking, is actually attained, though it be true, that it might have been attained without the fault in question.
By the expression,
τὰ πρὸς ἀυτὴν τὴν τέχνην ἀδύνατα, I understand—with respect to the art of which the Poet speaks; not, with respect to the art of Poetry itself: though I confess the latter sense to be that, which the words,
ἀυτὴν τὴν τέχνην,
the art itself, most naturally present. But this sense of the expression seems to me to be utterly irreconcilable with the sense of the whole passage. In rejecting it I have the concurrence of Victorius, Piccolomini, and M. Batteux. Besides, that the expression itself seems to be jargon.
3
For, what are
"things impossible to, (or, with respect to,) the art of Poetry itself?" —The only reasonable meaning of the phrase is—things, which it is beyond the power of the art to represent or imitate; as it is beyond the power of painting to imitate sounds.
4
But how can the phrase be applied, as Dacier applies it, to the
ἄλογον,
"deraisonnable tout ce qui est absurde?" Is it not just as possible for Poetry to represent a horse flying, as a ship sailing? — The sense, which I have given, seems also supported by the antithetic expression that follows—
τέλος τὸ ΑΥΤΗΣ—
" its own purpose;" and still more by the clearer phrase which he presently after uses —
τὴν ΠΕΡΙ ΤΟΥΤΩΝ τέχνην —
" the art to which these things belong."
I must, however, repeat my confession, that no passage of this treatise appears to me to be of more desperate perplexity than this; nor is there any of the numerous and stubborn difficulties I have had to encounter, of which I wish to be understood to offer my solution with less confidence. Here, as in many other places, had I waited for perfect satisfaction, I might have stood still for ever:—
—ἐικέλοι ἀνδρὶ Κείνῳ, ὃς ἐν τριοδοῖσι πολυτρίπτοισι κυρήσας Ἕστη ἐφορμαίνων· κραδίη δέ οἱ ἄλλοτε λαιὴν, Ἄλλοτε δεξιτερὴν ἐπιβάλλεται ἐις ὁδὸν ἐλθεῖν. Παπταίνει δ’ ἑκατέρθε· νόος δέ οἱ ἠΰτε κῦμα Εἰλεῖται, μάλα δ’ ὄψε μιῆς ὠρέξατο βουλῆς.
5
25.3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-111
25.7
IF IT DOES NOT COME UNDER EITHER OF HESE DESCRIPTIONS HE MAY SAY IT IS ACCORDING TO RECEIVED OPINION, AS IN WHAT RELATES TO THE GODS.
IF the objection to the poet is, that he has not drawn his characters conformable with truth, and he can neither shew that they are according to truth, or that the deviation from truth is occafioned by a defire to represent characters above the level of human nature, he may yet excuse himself by saying, that he has followed models, which, though they may neither have an archetype in nature, or be better than perhaps they really are, nevertheless have the sanction of popular opinion for their credibility. This seems to have been exactly the cafe with Homer's gods; and the popularity of Shakespear's supernatural beings rests on the fame ground even at this day, when the belief of them is nearly annihilated. How entirely has Shakespear availed himself of a vulgar fuperstition in his Ghost of Hamlet which first appears, ' the bell then beating one,' and which vanishes at the crowing of the cock. And with what propriety, according to the fabulous creed of his age, and which is still orthodox in the regions of fiction, has he distinguished the 3 T2 fairies
fairies from the more gloomy tenants of the invisible world in these beautiful lines. Night's swift dragons cut the clouds full fast, • And yonder shines Aurora's harbinger, At whose approach ghosts wandering here and there Troop home to church yards. -Damned spirits all • That in cross ways and floods have burial, ، Already to their wormy beds are gone.'
• But we are spirits of another fort:
• I with the morning's love have oft made sport, • And like a forefter the groves may tread • Even till the eastern gate all fiery red, ، Opening on Neptune with fair blessed beams, • Turns into yellow gold his falt green streams.'
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-188
Ritter, cap. 25 § 5
ὥστε δεῖ- λύειν: si reprehenduntur nonnulla in quodam artis poeticae opere a quaestionum subtilium captatoribus, ad diluendas reprehensiones quaerere convenit, utrum ars (poetica) ipsa peccaverit an peccatum ab alia arte acceptum propagaverit. quid excusationis et quando proferendum sit, ubi ars ipsa
ἀδύνατα commiserit, continuo docet verbis
πρῶτον μέν -Ἕκτορος δίωξις.
τὸ γὰρ τέλος –
ποιεῖ μέρος: respicit quae paulo ante (c. 24, 8) apud verum Aristotelem legit, unde perperam colligit epicae poesis finem esse ut admirationem faciat (
τὸ ἐκπλήττειν), id quod Aristoteles nusquam dixit neque dicere potuit. idem falsus auctor ex loco indicato exemplum illud suum sumpsit, sed tam obscure breviterque, ut hominem decet in exemplis unice versantem et nihil ultra exempla sapientem. —
εἰ μέντοι τὸ τέλος - περὶ τούτων τέχνην: in his primum friget 5) Noli defendere falsum auctorem eiusmodi locis, qualis est in Topicis VI, 4 init.
πρῶτον μὲν εἰ μὴ διὰ προτέρων καὶ γνωριμωτέρων πεποίηται τὸν ὁρισμόν.additum
ἢ μᾶλλον ἢ ἧττον, tum subobscurum est quid sibi velint illa
καὶ κατὰ τὴν περὶ τούτων τέχνην, quibus idem significari videtur quod modo monitum est,
εἰ οὕτως ἐκπληκτικώτερον ἢ αὐτὸ ἢ ἄλλο ποιεῖ μέρος, h. e. si ne id quidem excusationis gratia dici potest,
οὕτω ἐκπληκτικώτερον γίγνεσθαι ἢ αὐτὸ ἢ ἄλλο μέρος. nimirum technicus hic noster ubique artes loquitur. cf. Commentar. ad c. 20, 4.
ἔτι ποτέρων - κακομιμήτως ἔγραψεν: alteram illam levioremque peccandi rationem interrogando et lectorem quasi excitando proponit, postquam priorem absolvit. si poeta
κατὰ συμβεβηκός peccavit, illum peccasse quidem sed levius esse peccatum excusantes dicemus. illa
ἔλαττον γὰρ –
κακομιμήτως ἔγραψεν exempli gratia afferuntur. si quis cervae cornua tribuit (id quod et alii poetae fecerunt et Pindarus Ol. III, 29. vid. Boeckhii Explicationes ad h. 1.), is eam non
κακομιμήτως γράφει, interpolatore quippe iudice: non enim quae sunt male describit (
κακομιμήτως γράφει), sed quae non sunt, eorum unum aliquid admisit, ut magis peccaverit in
ἱστορίαν τῶν ζῴων quam in ipsam artem poeticam. hem astutias. similiter, ut poetae cornutas cervas producentes, Aristophanes peccavit, dum scribit in Nubibus 151.
ἐνέβαψεν εἰς τὸν κηρὸν αὐτῆς (pulicis)
τώ πόδε, ubi scholiasta:
δυϊκὸν τὼ πόδε ἐπὶ τῆς ψύλλης κακῶς·
λέγεται γὰρ ἓξ ἔχειν πόδας.