Aristotle Poetics 17.1

Thomas Twining (Translator)

View: By Part
The Poet, both when he plans, and when he writes, his Tragedy, should put himself, as much as possible, in the place of a spectator; for, by this means, seeing everything distinctly, as if present at the action, he will discern what is proper, and no inconsistencies will escape him.

Poetics. Aristotle. Thomas Twining (Translator). London, UK. 1789.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Current edition Experimental

Poetics (Thomas Twining, 1789) (OCR draft) (English) (Thomas Twining's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1789 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.) — 17 focus
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) Perseus (Aristotle, De arte poetica liber. Rudolf Kassel, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965. Reference edition for passage alignment.) — 17 focus
Poetics, Greek text (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's Greek text of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 17 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.) — 17 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.) — 17 focus
Arabic Poetics (Badawī edition, 1953) (OCR draft) (The ancient Arabic translation of Aristotle's Poetics in ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Badawī's 1953 edition.) — 17 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.) — 17 focus
Aristotle on the Art of Poetry (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 17 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.) — 17.1 focus
For then, seeing all the circumstances in the clearest light and as if he were himself present with the actors, he will easily find out what is proper and what improper in the performance.
The Poetic of Aristotle (Theodore Alois Buckley) (OCR draft) Experimental (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.) — 17.1 focus
IT is necessary, however, that the poet should form the plots, and elaborate his diction, in such a manner that he may as much as possible place the thing before his own eyes1. For thus, the poet perceiving most acutely, as if present with the transactions themselves, will discover what is becoming, and whatever is repugnant will be least concealed from his view.
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.) — 17 focus
La poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) Experimental (André Dacier's French translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1692.) — 17.1 focus
IL faut dreſſer tout le plan de ſon ſujet, le mettre par écrit le plus exactement qu'il eſt poſſible, & le faire paſſer tout entier devant ſes yeux, car en voyant ainſi nous-mêmes tres clairement toutes ſes parties, comme ſi nous étions mêlez dans l'action, nous trouverons bien plus ſeurement ce qui ſied, & nous remarquerons juſqu'aux moindres défauts, & juſqu'aux moindres contrarietez, qui pourroient nous être échapées.
Poetica d'Aristotile (Bernardo Segni, 1549) (OCR draft) Experimental (Bernardo Segni's 1549 Florentine Italian translation, aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 17 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.) — 17 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.) — 17 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.) — 17 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.) — 17 focus

Commentary

Commentary on the Poetics (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) (Ingram Bywater's English commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus

1. mvp-aristotle-comment-598

1. mvp-aristotle-comment-599

1455a22 δεῖ δὲ τοὺς μύθους κτέ. This begins a series of supplementary rules for the guidance of the dramatic poet in practice. When writing his play in the study he must (1) see the various incidents in it as it were, so as to anticipate the impression they are likely to produce on the stage; and also (2) feel to some extent the various emotions of his personages, if his picture of emotion is to be convincing ( 1455 a 23-34 ). After these five further rules are added in the course of this and the following chapter.

1. mvp-aristotle-comment-600

συναπεργάζεσθαι: comp. 30 συναπεργαζόμενον , and Rhet. 2. 8, 1386 b 31
ἀνάγκη τοὺς συναπεργαζομένους σχήμασι καὶ ἐσθῆτι καὶ ὅλως τῇ ὑποκρίσει ἐλεεινοτέρους εἶναι
. συναπεργάζεσθαι, 'to finish off', stands in the same relation to ἀπεργάζεσθαι as συμπληροῦν and συντελεῖν to πληροῦν and τελεῖν. It is to be remembered that in Aristotle's view ( 6, 1450 b 36 ; 9, 1451 b 28 ) the language is but a secondary matter by comparison with the μῦθος. Plutarch's story of Menander's mode of working may be worth quoting: De gloria Ath. 4, 347 E λέγεται δὲ καὶ Μενάνδρῳ τῶν συνήθων τις εἰπεῖν· Ἐγγὺς οὖν, Μένανδρε, τὰ Διονύσια, καὶ σὺ τὴν κωμῳδίαν οὐ πεποίηκας ; τὸν δὲ ἀποκρίνασθαι, Νὴ τοὺς θεοὺς ἔγωγε πεποίηκα τὴν κωμῳδίαν· ὠκονόμηται γὰρ ἡ δίαθεσις [= 'the plan']· δεῖ δ᾽ αὐτῇ τὰ στιχίδια ἐπᾶσαι.

1. mvp-aristotle-comment-601

a23 πρὸ ὀμμάτων τιθέμενον: De mem. 1. 450 a 4
ὁ νοῶν, κἂν μὴ ποσὸν νοῇ, τίθεται πρὸ ὀμμάτων ποσόν, νοεῖ δ᾽ οὐχ ὡς ποσόν
. — Probl. 40. 14, 957 a 22
τό τε ἐνύπνιόν ἐστιν ὅταν διανοουμένοις καὶ πρὸ ὀμμάτων τιθεμένοις ὕπνος ἐπέλθῃ
(comp. Bon. Ind. 509 b 30 ).

1. mvp-aristotle-comment-602

οὕτω repeats the idea of πρὸ ὀμμάτων τιθέμενον; what follows, ἐναργέστατα ὁρῶν κτέ., is added as an explanation.

1. mvp-aristotle-comment-603

ὁρῶν. Vahlen retains the article before ὁρῶν, and supposes an hyperbaton like that in 6, 1449 b 23 . The article, however, is certainly not wanted, and may easily be explained as a dittographia.
a26

Remarques sur la poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) (André Dacier's French commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus

1. mvp-aristotle-comment-413

17.1 IL faut d'abord dreſſer tout le plan de ſon ſujet, le mettre par écrit le plus exactement qu'il eſt poſſible, & le faire paſſer tout entier devant ſes yeux ; car en voyant ainſi nous-mèmes tres clairement toutes ſes parties, comme ſi nous étions preſens à l'action, nous trouverons bien plus ſeurement ce qui ſied, &c.] 1

Commentary on the Poetics (Henry James Pye, 1792) (OCR draft) (Henry James Pye's 1792 English commentary, aligned to the Kassel reference edition.) focus

17.1. mvp-aristotle-comment-64 17.1

THE POET AS WELL WHEN HE COMPOSES THE INCIDENTS AS WHEN HE ADDS THE LANGUAGE, OUGHT AS MUCH AS POS- SIBLE TO CONSIDER EVERY THING AS PASSING BEFORE HIS EYES.

THIS rule [A], by which the epopee is much less shackled, though by no means exempt from its observance, is of the utmost confequence to the dramatic poet. As to the instance of a drama failing in the representation from a neglect of this necessary care which Ariftotle adduces, though the particular tragedy is loft, we may easily supply the nature of the error from conjecture. We may suppose Amphiaraus to be in a temple out of which it was impossible for him to come unobserved by the spectators, and then to appear on the stage without being perceived to come out of it. From this obfervation Dacier infers the strict attention to the unity of place on the ancient theatre, of which we have spoken so largely before [B]. But surely it has nothing to do with it. It was undoubtedly not the general practise of the ancient theatre to change the supposed scene of action. And as the action from the continued prefence of the chorus was seldom if ever interrupted, it was barely possible that a cha-
[A] See Note v. Chap. xxiv. [B] See Note III. Chap. v. racter,
racter, after being supposed to go into a confined place in the fight of the spectators could be conceived to come out again unseen by them, without violating, not the arbitrary rules of the drama, but the natural probability of the representation. And on the other hand, from the frequent change of scene and intervals of action this may happen on the modern, or at least on the English stage, without the least absurdity. But nevertheless though this is generally true of both, it is not univerfally true. When a change of scene is plainly implied by the language and incidents of the Grecian drama, such an event may take place there WITHOUT improbability; and if the identity of place and continuation of action is marked in an English drama, such an event cannot take place WITH propriety. In the Eumenides of Æschylus, where, after Apollo has perfuaded Orestes to quit his temple at Delphos and repair to that of Minerva at Athens, his perfecutors follow him, and afterwards he goes out himself; they may without impropriety all enter again at the fame door, because that door, though according to the apparatus of the ancient theatre exactly the fame, is now supposed to be changed from the temple of Apollo to that of Minerva; fince between the verses 234 and 235 the scene is obviously changed from Delphos to Athens, and as Orestes and the chorus immediately appear, there must be a break in the action comprehending a considerable interval of time. And in an English play represented even without scenery in a private house, if a character were to go into a door, we will suppose as into a closet to be concealed, (a common incident in comedy,) and during the obvious continuation of the scene appear at another door, should not we laugh at the striking impropriety? Or to take a contrary instance from a particular play; if in the last scene of the Clandestine Marriage, Sir John Melville were to come out of the very door from which Lord Ogleby is summoning
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. summoning him, we should hardly agree with the learned Serjeant in pronouncing it to be the clearest ALIBI We ever saw proved. The last scene of Shakespear's Romeo and Juliet seems to be at the same time both within and without the monument of the Capulets. The duel between Romeo and Paris is in the church-yard. The death of Romeo, as also the awakening and death of Juliet must be within the monument, the inside of which could not be seen from the church-yard, as on the entry of Friar Laurence he only discovers a light in it, on a nearer approach he difcerns the blood of Paris on the stoney entrance, and obviously on looking down into the vault discovers the bodies of Romeo and Paris. To shew how this confirms the doctrine of Ariftotle as to the difference between the epopee and tragedy in this respect, I never was struck by it though a frequent and attentive reader of our immortal bard, till I faw Mr. Northcote's picture in the Shakespear Gallery, who has drawn the scene in the inside of the vault with the body of Romeo lying at the foot of the stairs that lead down to the bottom of it. In the play as now represented this is entirely obviated by the judicious alteration of Mr. Garrick. For Juliet awakens, and comes out of the tomb as Romeo is about to enter it. It is necessary also for the dramatic poet to adapt his language to the action that must accompany it, especially in those striking situations which are most calculated to produce strong theatrical effect [c]. An [c] We have no appropriated name for these in English. The French call them coUPS DE THEATRE. 3 A over-
over-fight of this kind seems to occur in the Grecian Daughter. When Euphrafia stabs Dionyfius she exclaims, * A daughter's arm fell monster strikes the blow, • Yes first she strikes; an injur'd daughter's arm. • Sends thee devoted to th' infernal gods.' All, or at least the greatest part of this seems to be intended to precede the blow: and yet probability requires that the blow of a woman that kills an armed warrior should be unforeseen and sudden [D]. The Regent affords another inftance of this kind of impropriety. Just at the con-- clufion the Duke and the Ufurper engage hand to hand before all the Duke's friends. They should either have fought before the Duke's attendants had arrived, or in prefence of both parties who might have been supposed to have mutually awed each other from interfering (E]. [D] Mrs. Siddons felt the force of this. She strikes Dionyfius without speaking a word, and repeats the passage over him as he lies on the ground. [E] See this circumstance compared with what Aristotle says of the battle between Achilles and Hector in the Iliad. Note v. Chap. xxiv. NOTE

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

1. mvp-aristotle-comment-118

Ritter, cap. 17 § 1

Qui tragoediam facere adgreditur, rem ad scribendum delectam ante oculos suos explicare et habitum personarum agentium corpore suo exprimere debet. in co negotio multum se iuvari sentiet, si primum generatim fabulam delineaverit, tum nominibus impositis eam amplificaverit episodiisque distinxerit. Praecepta a poeta tragico in argumentis constituendis et in moribus exprimendis observanda postquam exposuit, addit nonnulla unde idem ille condiscat, qua cautione et quibus exercitationibus adhibitis eo pervenire possit, ut argumenta moresque apte conformata exhibeat. eadem haec disputatio sub finem c. 18. continuatur: initium enim ab aliena manu sinistre additum est. ceterum quae utroque capite explicantur, exceptis illis ab interpolatore admixtis, ex disputatione ampliore et luculenta in breviorem a technico contracta videntur esse. δεῖ δὲ τοὺς μύθους- σχήμασι συναπεργαζόμενον: duas res philosophus ei qui tragoediam scripturus est commendat, ut in ipsis rebus a se pertractandis versetur, ut porro personarum agentium vultus et gestus suo corpore inter scribendum exprimat. ad δεῖ συνιστάναι intellectu supplere debemus τὸν συνίσταντα, h. e. tragicum poetam. τοὺς μύθους intellige fabulas a fama suppeditatas, non argumenta tragoediarum in universum. conf. adnotatio ad §. 3. ὅτι μάλιστα πρὸ τῶν ὀμμάτων τιθέμε vov: poeta inter ipsas res versari easque sibi ob oculos ponere debet. in hoc praeceptum quomodo peccari possit, exemplo illo statim ex Carcini Amphiarao allato in parenthesi docetur, quo facto alterum illud praeceptum, ὅσα δὲ δυνατόν, καὶ τοῖς σχήμασι συναπεργαζόμενον, subsequitur. aliud est πρὸ ὀμμάτων λέγειν (anschaulich reden) vel ποιεῖν deeo qui dicit vel scribit, quode explicatum est in Rhetoricis III, 11. ὁ γὰρ ᾿Αμφιάραος - ἐξέπεσε : festive sibi respondent haec, Αμφιάραος ἐξ ἱεροῦ ἀνῄει atque ἐπὶ δὲ τῆς σκηνῆς ἐξέπεσε. scilicet Carcinus ὁ τραγικός Amphiaraum ex templo redeuntem fecit, idemque hunc egressum spectatoribus non cognitum deinceps ita respexit, ut tragoedia obscura fieret ideoque non placeret. festivum in locutione illud est, quod ἐξέπεσε, verbum de fabulis exactis dici solitum, ad ipsam Amphiarai personam transfertur, quodque qui de templo egressus erat, in scena non stetisse dicitur. de illo verbi ἐκπίπτειν significatu dixit Hemsterhusius ad Luciani Nigrin. c. 8. Dissenius ad Demosthenem de Corona p. 416. (p. 265 R.) ὅσα δὲ δυνατόν, καὶ τοῖς σχήμασι συναπερ - γαζόμενον: hoc alterum praeceptum mores potissimum spectat, prius argumenti conformationem. iam enim poetae suadet, ut is, dum sive iratos sive quocumque alio modo affectos pingit, ipse iratorum vel alio affectu commotorum vultus et gestus ( σχήματα) imitetur, quo verius eos affectus verbis exprimere possit ipse ira sive odio incitatus vel quomodocumque commotus. scilicet qui vultum irati vel aversantis vel aliter commoti adhibet, is sese sponte subirasci aversarique sentit, idemque in ceteris affectibus usu venire solet. vid. Aristotel. Physiognom. c. 4. p. 808 b 12. ἡ τῆς ψυχῆς ἕξις ἀλλοιουμένη συναλλοιοῦ τοῦ σώματος μορφήν, πάλιν τε ἡ τοῦ σώματος μορφὴ ἀλλοιουμένη συναλλοιοῖ τὴν τῆς ψυχῆς ἕξιν. conf. quae disputavit Wüllnerus meus in libro bonae frugis plenissimo Ueber die Verwandtschaft des Indogermanischen, Semitischen und Tibetanischen cet. §. 3. non bene interpretes nonnulli de figuris ab histrionibus in scena exprimendis cogitaverunt: eae enim histrionum sunt, non poetarum; neque hoc loco agendae tragoediae sed perscribendae praecepta traduntur. quod ad structuram verborum attinet, haec ὅσα δὲ δυνατόν, καὶ τοῖς σχήμασι συναπεργαζόμενον respondent superioribus illis ὅτι μάλιστα πρὸ ὀμμάτων τιθέμενον. media igitur παρενθετικῶς prolata sunt.