Aristotle’s Definition of Tragedy

Answer

Write and explain Aristotle’s definition of tragedy. 

or, Discuss Aristotle’s concept of tragedy. Or, write and enumerate Aristotle’s definition of tragedy. Or, how does Aristotle define tragedy? Do you think his definition still holds good?

Aristotle (384-322 BC) is famous for his contribution to the versatile branches of knowledge. In his “Poetics,” he deals with dramatic art – comedy, tragedy, and epic but “Poetics” is chiefly concerned with the concept of tragedy in detail. Aristotle was the first critic of literature, and the world can learn about dramatic art through him.

The Definition of Tragedy: Aristotle, in the sixth chapter of his “Poetics,” has defined tragedy in the following manner-

Tragedy, then, is a representation of an action that is worth serious attention, complete in itself, and of some amplitude; in language enriched by a variety of artistic devices appropriate to the several parts of the play; presented in the form of action, not narration; by means of pity and fear, bringing about the purgation [catharsis] of such emotions.

Analysis of the Definition: The definition clearly has two parts. The first part tells us about the nature of tragedy, its object, its manner, and its medium of imitation, and the second part points out its function. Now, the requirements of tragedy are enumerated here in a transparent way.

Different from Other Forms of Poetic Imitation: According to the definition of tragedy, tragedy is different from other poetic imitations. It differs from other arts in the object, manner, and medium of imitation. Its object of imitation is ‘serious action,’ which stands for weighty and important action according to the critics. Aristotle says:

Tragedy is not an imitation of persons, but of actions and of life.

On the other hand, a comedy, which is also a poetic imitation, imitates ‘grotesque action. In terms of the manner of imitation, tragedy is contrary to epic. Epic uses a narrative manner, while tragedy represents life through acting. Therefore, tragedy is lifelike.

The action: Aristotle does not define the word ‘action,’ but we get an idea of action from the phrase ‘complete in itself’ that tells or relates to the plot. A plot should consist of a logical and inevitable sequence of incidents having a definite beginning, middle, and end. 

The magnitude: Besides being serious, the action must have a certain magnitude. Aristotle compares the tragic plot to a living organism to emphasize the importance of the correct size. Either the plot must not be so long that it cannot be grasped entirely, or it should not be so short that its parts cannot be comprehended properly. The action should be long enough for the characters to develop the sympathy and interest of the audience.

The function of tragedy: The aim of tragedy is to bring about a “catharsis” of the spectators — to arouse in them sensations of pity and fear which must be purged or purified so that they leave the theater feeling cleansed and uplifted. Aristotle says about catharsis:

effecting through pity and fear the purification of such emotions.

The Formative Elements of Tragedy: After giving a definition of tragedy, Aristotle considers its formative elements. He gives six constituents or formative elements of tragedy: plot, character, thought, diction, spectacle, and song. According to Aristotle:

So tragedy as a whole necessarily has six component parts, which determine the tragedy’s quality.

Unified plot:  Aristotle goes on to discuss the structure of the ideal tragic plot and spends several chapters on its requirements. He says about the unity of the plot: 

Unity of plot does not, as some persons think, consist in the unity of the hero.

Criticism: There is nothing in the world that is over criticism. In Poetics, Aristotle used the same analytical methods that he had successfully applied in studies of politics, ethics, and the natural sciences to determine tragedy’s fundamental principles of composition and content. This approach is not completely suited to a literary study, is sometimes too artificial, and is not relevant to the modern context of drama as well.

So, we can say that the main features of Aristotle’s conception cannot be ignored easily. It nonetheless has controversies and drawbacks. His theory is seminal and contributed a lot to English literature.