ARISTOTLE, POETICS (335 - c. 322 BCE)

Transcription

1 1 ARISTOTLE, POETICS (335 - c. 322 BCE) Aristotle. On the Art of Poetry. Trans. T. S. Dorsch. Classical Literary Criticism. Ed. T. S. Dorsch. Harmondsworth: Penguin, Introduction: Poetry as Imitation Here, Aristotle s goal is to discuss the art of poetry (31), its various kinds (31) and their "characteristic functions" (31) or "power" (31) (dynamis), the types of plotstructure that are required if a poem is to succeed (31), and the number and nature of its constituent parts (31). He begins by going back to first principles (31). Epic and tragic poetry, comedy too, dithyrambic poetry, and most music composed for the flute and the lyre (31) are forms of imitation or representation (31) which differ from one another in three respects (31): in using different media for the representation (31), in representing different things (31), and in representing them in entirely different ways (31). Chapter 1: The Media of Poetic Imitation Some artists represent things by imitating their shapes and colours (32), others by the use of the voice (32). In other cases, imitation is produced by means of rhythm, language and music, these being used either separately or in combination (32). The art of the flute and the lyre consists only in music and rhythm (32); the imitative medium of dancers is rhythm alone (32) for it is by the manner in which they arrange the rhythms of their movements that they represent men s characters and feelings and actions (32). However, Aristotle argues, the form of art that uses language alone, whether in prose or verse (32) has up to the present been without a name (32). There has been no common name (32) for the work of Sophron and Xenarchus and the Socratic dialogues (32), but others are deemed poets... not from the fact that they are making imitations, but... from the fact that they are writing in metre (32). The term poet is applied even to those who produce medical and scientific works in verse (32), even though Homer and Empedocles have nothing in common except their metre (32). As a result, it is right to call the one a poet, the other... a natural philosopher (32). Such are the distinctions I would make (32). Aristotle argues that dithyrambic and nomic poetry, tragedy and comedy (33) make use of all the media... mentioned, that is, rhythm, music, and formal metre (32), but where the first two use all these media together,... the last two use them separately, one after another (33). These, in short, are the differences between the arts as far as the media of representation are concerned (33). Chapter 2: The Objects of Poetic Imitation Aristotle contends that imitative artists represent men in action" (33). These are necessarily "either of good or bad character (for all people differ in their moral nature according to the degree of their goodness or badness)" (33). Characters almost always fall into one or another of these types (33) for which reason they must therefore be represented "either as better than we are, or worse, or as the same kind of people as we are" (33). Homer, he says, depicts the better type of men (33), others normal types (33) and still others show them in a bad light (33). Tragedy and comedy are distinguished by the fact that comedy aims at representing men as worse than they are nowadays, tragedy as better (33).

2 2 Chapter 3: The Manner of Poetic Imitation Here, Aristotle turns his attention to the manner in which each kind of subject may be represented (34). It is possible, using the same medium, to represent the same subjects in a variety of ways (34), i.e. in the case of Homer s epics partly by narration and partly by the assumption of a character other than one s own (34), or in the case of lyric poetry by speaking in one s own person without any such change (34), or, in the case of plays by representing the characters as performing all the actions dramatically (34). Chapter 4: The Origins and Development of Poetry The creation of poetry (35) is due to two causes, both rooted in human nature (35), one the instinct for imitation (35) inherent in man, the most imitative of creatures (35) who learns his earliest lessons by imitation (35). We enjoy looking at the most accurate representations of things which in themselves we find painful to see (35), such as the forms of the lowest animals and of corpses (35). The reason for this is that learning is a very great pleasure (35) for many and not for philosophers only (35): they enjoy seeing likenesses because in doing so they acquire information (they reason out what each represents, and discover, for instance, that this is a picture of so and so ) (35). Sometimes it is not an imitation of something that gives the pleasure, but the execution of the colouring or some other such cause (35). In short, the instinct for imitation (35) and a feeling for music and for rhythm (35) are natural to us (35). Starting from these natural aptitudes, and by a series of for the most part gradual improvements on their first efforts, men eventually created poetry from their improvisations (35). Poetry soon branched into two channels, according to the temperaments of individual poets (35). The more serious minded... represented noble actions and the doings of noble persons" (35) while the more trivial wrote about the meaner sort of people (35-36), the former writing hymns and panegyrics (36) and heroic (36) verse, the latter invectives (36) principally in the form of iambic metre (36). Homer was the supreme poet in the serious style, standing alone both in excellence of composition and in the dramatic character of his representations of life (36) as well as the first to indicate the forms that comedy was to assume, for his Margites bears the same relationship to our comedies as his Iliad and Odyssey bear to our tragedies (36). Tragedy and comedy are more recent genres and, as such, grander and more highly regarded (36) than earlier forms. They had their first beginnings in improvisation (36), the former evolving out of the dithyramb, the latter the phallic songs (36). Little by little tragedy advanced, each new element being developed as it came into use, until after many changes it attained its natural form and came to a standstill (36). Aristotle mentions in this regard the contributions of Aeschylus and Sophocles. It was only recently, according to Aristotle, that tragedy acquired its characteristic stateliness (37) and, progressing beyond the methods of satyric drama, it discarded slight plots and comic diction (37), giving up the tetrameter (37) and dance (37) synonymous with satyrpoetry (37) for the iambic (37) that was best suited to speech (37) (for the simple reason that we most usually drop into iambics in our conversation with one another, whereas we seldom talk in hexameters [37]) and an increased number of episodes, or acts (37) Chapter 5: The Rise of Comedy; Epic Compared with Tragedy

3 3 Comedy represents the worse types of men... not in the sense that it embraces any and every kind of badness, but in the sense that the ridiculous is a species of ugliness or badness. For the ridiculous consists in some form of error or ugliness that is not painful or injurious (37). Having discussed in the previous chapter the successive stages by which tragedy developed (37), Aristotle turns his attention here to the early history of comedy (37) which is, he confesses, obscure (37): many factors, including the introduction of the chorus (37), masks (37), prologues (38), a plurality of actors (38), the development of [p]roperly worked out... stories and plots of a more general nature (38) remain murky. Epic poetry (37), like tragedy, is a representation, in dignified verse, of serious actions (38). However, the former keeps to a single metre and is in narrative form (38). Moreover, their length (38) differs: tragedy as far as possible to keep within a single revolution of the sun, or only slightly to exceed it, whereas the epic observes no limits in its time of action (38). They also share many of the same constituent parts (38). For all the elements of epic are found in tragedy, though not everything that belongs to tragedy is to be found in epic (38). Chapter 6: A Description of Tragedy Putting aside epic and comedy for the moment, Aristotle proposes to discuss tragedy (38) by drawing together the definition of its essential character (38) on the basis of what was said earlier. Tragedy is the 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 catharsis [purgation/purification/clarification] of such emotions. (my emphases; 39) By language that is enriched (39), Aristotle has in mind language possessing rhythm, and music or song (39), while by artistic devices he means some... produced by the medium of verse alone, and others again with the help of song (39). Since the representation is carried out by men performing the actions (39), Aristotle contends that spectacle is an essential part of tragedy (39) and that there must be song and diction (39), since these two are the medium of representation (39). By diction (lexis), he means the arrangement of the verses (39). Aristotle avers that in tragedy it is action that is imitated, and this action is brought about by agents who necessarily display certain distinctive qualities both of character and thought, according to which we also define the nature of the actions (39). Thought and character are... the two natural causes of actions (39) and it is on them that all men depend for success or failure. The representation of the action is the plot of the tragedy (39); by plot (mythos), Aristotle means the ordered arrangement of the incidents" (39) which comprise a play. Aristotle defines character (ethos) as "that which enables us to define the nature of the participants" (39) while thought (dianoia) is that which "comes out in what they [characters] say when they are proving a point or expressing an opinion" (39). He stresses that plot is the life-blood (40) of any play. Aristotle accordingly hypothesises that every tragedy has six constituents (39): plot, character, diction, thought, spectacle, and song (39). He asserts that two represent the media in which the action is represented (39), one involves the manner of representation (39), while three are concerned with the objects of representation (39). These are the dramatic elements... used by practically all playwrights (39). Beyond these elements, nothing further is required (39).

4 4 Of these elements, Aristotle argues, the most important is plot, the ordering of the incidents (39) for tragedy is a representation, not of men, but of action and life, of happiness and unhappiness" (39) which are necessarily "bound up with action" (39). The purpose of living is an end which is a kind of activity, not a quality; it is their characters... that make men what they are, but it is by reason of their actions that they are happy or the reverse. Tragedies are not performed, therefore, in order to represent character, although character is involved for the sake of the action. Thus the incidents and the plot are the end aimed at in tragedy. (40) There "could not be a tragedy without action, but there could be without character" (40), Aristotle asserts. Many successful contemporary tragedians fail to present character (40), while others who write speeches expressive of character, and well composed as far as thought and diction are concerned (40) often do not achieve the proper effect of tragedy (40). Far more important to tragedy is a plot giving an ordered combination of incidents (40). This is borne out by the fact that the two most important means by which tragedy plays on our feelings (40) are reversals and recognitions (40), that is, "reversals" (40) of fortune (peripeteia) and "recognitions" (40) or discoveries (anagnorisis). For all these reasons, plot is the first essential of tragedy, its life-blood (40) and character takes second place (40). Tragedy is the representation of an action, and it is chiefly on account of the action that it is also a representation of persons (40). Thought, the "ability to say what is possible or appropriate in any given circumstances" (40) and which is related to the "arts of politics and rhetoric"(40), is the third property of tragedy (40). Where the older dramatic poets made their characters talk like statesman (40), those of today make them talk like rhetoricians (41). Character is that "which reveals personal choice, the kinds of thing a man chooses or rejects when that is not obvious (41). There is no revelation of character in speeches in which the speaker shows no preferences or aversions whatsoever" (41). Thought is present in speeches where something is being shown to be true or untrue, or where some general opinion is being expressed (41). The diction of the speeches (41), qua the "expressive use of words" (41) by a character, is the fourth element. He stresses that both a character's words and actions should arise probably or necessarily from his character. Of the remaining elements, spectacle or stage-effect (41) has the least to do with the playwright s craft or with the art of poetry (41) for the "power [dynamis] of tragedy is independent both of performances and of actors" (41). Chapter 7: The Scope of the Plot Here, Aristotle focuses on discussing the arrangement of the incidents (41) which is of first importance in tragedy (41). Tragedy, he reminds us, is the "representation of an action that is complete and whole and of a certain amplitude" (41). Pointing out that a thing may be whole and yet lack amplitude (41), Aristotle argues that a whole is that which has a beginning, a middle, and an end (41). A beginning is that which does not necessarily come after something else, although something else exists or comes about after it (41). An end, on the contrary, is that which naturally follows something else either as a necessary or as a usual consequence and is not itself followed by something (41). A middle is that which follows something else, and is itself followed by something (41). Thus, he argues, well-constructed plots must neither begin nor end in a haphazard way, but must conform to the pattern (41) described above. Moreover, whatever is beautiful must necessarily not only have its parts properly

5 5 ordered, but also be of an appropriate size, for beauty is bound up with size and order" (42). This is why a minutely small creature (42) as well as an extremely large one (42) would not be beautiful (42) because it would take almost no time to see (42) the former, while the latter could not be taken in all at once (42). Just as living creatures and organisms... must be of reasonable size (42), so too plots must be of a reasonable length, so that they may be easily held in the memory (42). Aristotle points out that limits in length (42) are determined, in as far as they concern performance on stage (42), by the water-clock (42) while, in terms of dramatic art (42), the proper length is that which "as a matter either of probability or necessity, allows of a change from misery to happiness or from happiness to misery" (42). Chapter 8: Unity of Plot Here, Aristotle contends that a plot does not possess unity... merely because it is about one man (42) for [m]any things... may happen to one man, and some of them will not contribute to any kind of unity (42). Similarly, he may carry out many actions from which no single unified action will emerge (43). It is accordingly an illusion to write a Heracleid... in the belief that, Heracles being a single person, his story must also possess unity (43). By contrast, Homer s Odyssey is not about everything that happened to Odysseus (43) but, rather, revolves around a single action (43). For this reason, the plot of a play, being the representation of an action, must present it as a unified whole (43). Its various incidents must be so arranged that if any one of them is differently placed or taken away the effect of wholeness will be seriously disrupted (43). For this reason, if the presence or absence of something makes no apparent difference, it is no real part of the whole (43). Chapter 9: Poetic Truth and Historical Truth It is not, Aristotle argues, the poet s function to describe what has actually happened, but the kinds of things that might happen, that is, that could happen because they are, in the circumstances, either probable or necessary" (43). What distinguishes the historian and the poet is not that the one writes in prose and the other in verse (43) but, rather, that one tells of what has happened, the other of the kinds of things that might happen (43). This is why poetry is something more philosophical and more worthy of serious attention than history (43-44). For while poetry is concerned with universal truths (44), that is, the kinds of things a certain type of person will probably or necessarily say or do in a given situation (44) (this is the aim of poetry, although it gives names to its characters (44]), history treats of particular facts (44), that is, what, say, Alcibiades did, or what happened to him (44). Comic poets build up their plots out of probable occurrences, and then add any names that occur to them (44); however, in tragedies, authors keep to the names of real people, the reason being that what is possible is credible (44). Though we cannot be certain of the possibility of something that has not happened, what has happened is obviously possible (44). It is not necessary... to keep entirely to the traditional stories which form the subjects of our tragedies (44), Aristotle advises, though these are familiar to many. Aristotle stresses that the poet must be a maker of plots rather than verses, since he is a poet by virtue of his representation, and what he represents is actions (44). Moreover, even if he writes about things that have actually happened, that does not make him any less of a poet (44) for writing about things that are in accordance with the laws of possibility and probability (44). Aristotle argues that simple plots and actions (45) are worst (45) when they are

6 6 episodic (45). An episodic plot (45) is one in which the sequence of the episodes is neither probable nor necessary (45). In such cases, to strain a plot beyond the bounds of possibility (45) is to dislocate the continuity of events (45). Given that tragedy is the representation not only of a complete action, but also of incidents that awaken fear and pity (45), effects of this kind are heightened when things happen unexpectedly as well as logically (45), for then they will be more remarkable than if they seem merely mechanical or accidental (45): even chance occurrences seem most remarkable when they have the appearance of having been brought about by design (45). For example, when the statue of Mitys at Argos killed the man who had caused Mitys s death by falling down on him at a public entertainment (45). Aristotle argues that plots of this type are necessarily better than others (45). Chapter 10: Simple and Complex Plots Aristotle differentiates simple (45) from complex (45) plots on the basis of the actions of which they are representations (45). By the former, Aristotle means one which is single and continuous... and in which the change of fortune comes about without a reversal or discovery (45). The latter is one in which the change is accompanied by a discovery or a reversal, or both. These should develop out of the very structure of the plot, so that they are the inevitable or probable consequence of what has gone before (45). There is a big difference between what happens as a result of something else and what merely happens after it (45). Chapter 11: Reversal, Discovery and Calamity Here, Aristotle argues that a reversal (46) (of fortune) is a"change from one state of affairs to its opposite" (46), for example from happiness to misery, and that conforms... to probability or necessity (46). Similarly, discovery is a change from ignorance to knowledge" (46) which leads either to love or hatred between persons destined for good or ill fortune (46). The most effective form of discovery is that which is accompanied by reversals (46). There are other kinds of discovery, for example, in relation to inanimate and trifling objects (46) but the form of discovery most essentially related to the plot and action of the play is the one described above (46). A discovery of this kind in combination with a reversal will carry with it either pity or fear, and it is such actions as these that... tragedy represents (46): such a combination is likely to lead to a happy or unhappy ending (46). Because it is persons who are involved in the discovery, it may be that only one person s identity is revealed to another, that of the second being already known (46). At other times, a natural recognition of two parties is necessary (46). Aristotle also mentions a third (46) plot-element: suffering, or calamity (46) which is an action of a destructive or painful nature, such as death openly represented, excessive suffering, wounding, and the like (47). Chapter 12: The Main Parts of Tragedy Aristotle contends that the separate sections (47) into which a tragedy is arranged are prologue, episode, exode, and choral song, the last being subdivided into parode and stasimon (47). The prologue is the whole of that part of a tragedy that precedes the parode, or first entry of the Chorus (47). An episode is the whole of that part of a tragedy that comes between complete choral songs (47). The exode is the whole of that part of a tragedy which is not followed by a song of the Chorus (47). The parode is the

7 7 whole of the first utterance of the Chorus (47) and the stasimon is a choral song without anapaests or trochees (47). Chapter 13: Tragic Action At this point, Aristotle states his intention to say what is to be aimed at and what guarded against in the construction of plots (47) as well as what are the sources of the tragic effect (47). He argues that the structure of tragedy is at its best (48) when it is complex, not simple (48) and when it represents actions capable of awakening pity and fear (48), which is the characteristic function (48) of tragedy. He says that good men should not be shown passing from prosperity to misery, for this does not inspire fear or pity, it merely disgusts us (48). By the same token, nor should evil men be shown progressing from misery to prosperity. This is the most untragic of all plots,... for it does not appeal to our humanity, or awaken pity or fear in us (48). Nor should an utterly worthless man be seen falling from prosperity into misery. Such a course might indeed play upon our humane feelings, but it would not arouse either pity or fear (48); the former, pity, should be awakened by undeserved misfortune (48), and the latter by that of someone just like ourselves pity for the undeserving sufferer and fear for the man like ourselves (48). Aristotle advocates, instead, a mean between these extremes (48): the sort of man who is not conspicuous for virtue and justice, and whose fall into misery is not due to vice and depravity, but rather to some error [hamartia], a man who enjoys prosperity and a high reputation, like Oedipus" (48). The well-conceived plot will have a single interest (48), the change in fortune will be... from prosperity to misery (48) and this is due, not to depravity, but to some great error, either in such a man as I have described or one better than this, but not worse (48). Nowadays, he writes, the best tragedies are written about a handful of families... whom it has befallen to suffer or inflict terrible experiences (48). Critics who assert that Euripides plays should not end in misfortune (48) are wrong because this is the right ending (49). The strongest evidence of this is that on the stage and in the dramatic competitions plays of this kind... are the most tragic of all, and Euripides, faulty as his management of other points, is nevertheless regarded as the most tragic of our dramatic poets (49). The next best type of structure... has a double thread of plot, and ends in opposite ways for the good and bad characters (49). This kind of tragedy is considered the best only because of the feeble judgment of the audience, for the poets pander to the taste of the spectators (49). This, however, is not the pleasure that is proper to tragedy" (49) but belongs rather to comedy (49). Chapter 14: Fear and Pity Fear and pity may be excited by means of spectacle (49) but they can also arise, Aristotle maintains, from the very structure of the action which is the preferable method and the mark of a better dramatic poet (49). The plot should so be ordered that even without seeing it performed anyone merely hearing what is afoot will shudder with pity and fear as a result of what is happening (49). To produce this effect by means of stagespectacle is less artistic, and requires the cooperation of the producer (49). He stresses that not every kind of pleasure should be demanded of tragedy, but only that which is proper to it (49). Since the dramatist has by means of his representation to produce the tragic pleasure... associated with pity and fear,... this effect is bound up with the events of the plot (49).

8 8 At this point, Aristotle turns his attention to what kinds of incident (49) are to be regarded as fearful or pitiable (50). Such deeds must involve people who are either friends to one another, or enemies, or neither. Now if a man injures his enemy, there is nothing pitiable either in his act or in his intention, except in so far as suffering is inflicted; nor is there if they are indifferent to each other. But when the sufferings involve those who are near and dear to one other, when, for example, brother kills brother, son father, mother son, or son mother, or if such a deed is contemplated, or something else of the kind is actually done, then we have a situation of the kind to be aimed at. (50) The deed must be done by characters acting consciously and in full knowledge of the facts (50), as when for instance Euripides made Medea kill her children (50). Alternatively, they may do it without realising the horror of the deed until later, when they discover the truth; this is what Sophocles did with Oedipus (50). A third alternative is for someone who is about to do a terrible deed in ignorance of the relationship to discover the truth before he does it (50). In short, the deed must either be done or not done, and by someone either with or without knowledge of the facts (50). The least acceptable of these alternatives is when someone in possession of the facts is on the point of acting but fails to do so, for this merely shocks us, and, since no suffering is involved, it is not tragic (50). Next in order of effectiveness (50) is when the deed is actually done (50) but the character only leans the truth afterwards (50). Aristotle feels at this point that he has said enough... about the arrangement of the incidents in a tragedy and the type of plot it ought to have (50). Chapter 15: The Characters of Tragedy Here, Aristotle asserts that in characterisation there are four things to aim at (51). First, the characters should be good (51). Character is displayed... if some preference is revealed in speech or action (51). If the preference is for what is good the character will be good (51). There can be goodness in every class of person; for instance, a woman or a slave may be good, thought the one is possibly an inferior being and the other in general an insignificant one (51). Second, the portrayal should be appropriate (51): for example, it is inappropriate to give a female character... manliness or cleverness (51). Third, characters should be lifelike (51). Fourth, characters should be consistent (51) to the point where an intrinsically inconsistent (51) character must necessarily be portrayed as consistently inconsistent (51). As in the arrangement of the incidents, so too in characterisation one must always bear in mind what will be either necessary or probable (52), that is, it should be necessary or probable that such and such a person should say or do such and such a thing, and similarly that this particular incident should follow on that (52). At this point, Aristotle digresses to remark that the unravelling of the plot should arise from the circumstances of the plot itself, and not be brought about ex machina (52), as in Euripides Medea where a deus ex machina facilitates an improbable ending. In general, he stresses, there should be nothing inexplicable about what happens (52). Since tragedy is a representation of people who are better than average (52), Aristotle recommends that we should copy the good portrait-painters (52) who, while reproducing the distinctive appearance of their sitters and making likenesses, paint them better-looking than they are. In the same way the poet, in portraying men who are hottempered, or phlegmatic, or who have other defects of character, must bring out these qualities in them, and at the same time show them as decent people (52), as in Homer s

9 9 portrayal of Achilles. Chapter 16: The Different Kinds of Discovery Here, Aristotle intends to explain the different kinds of discovery (53). The least artistic, and... mostly used from lack of invention (53) is discovery by means of visible signs and tokens" (53), such as congenital marks (53), or those that are acquired (53) such as scars (53), or external objects such as necklaces (53). A second and better form of discovery consists in those which are manufactured by the poet, and which are inartistic for that reason (53), such as when a character reveals who he is. A third and even better form of discovery is due to memory, when the sight of something leads to the required understanding (53). The fourth and even better kind of discovery is the result of reasoning (53) and occurs in the wake of a character s logical ruminations. Sometimes there is a related but fictitious form of discovery arising from... fallacious reasoning (54). The fifth and best (54) form of discovery is that which is "brought about by the incidents themselves, when the startling disclosure results from events that are probable (54), as happens in Sophocles Oedipus. Chapter 17: Some Rules for the Tragic Poet Here, Aristotle advises that the poet, in putting together his plots and working out the kind of speech to go with them,... should as far as possible keep the scene before his eyes (54). By seeing everything very vividly, as though he were himself an eyewitness of the events, he will find what is appropriate (54). As far as possible, too, the dramatic poet should carry out the appropriate gestures as he composes his speeches (55) for those who can actually make themselves feel the relevant emotions will be the most convincing agitation or rage will be most vividly reproduced by one who is himself agitated or in a passion (55). This is why poetry is the product either of a man of great natural ability or of one not wholly sane; the one is highly responsive, the other possessed (55). With regard to the :stories, whether he is taking over something readymade or inventing for himself (55), he should first plan in general outline, and then expand by working out appropriate episodes (55). Moreover, by contrast to epics, the episodes (55) in plays are of course short (55). Chapter 18: Further Rules for the Tragic Poet Each tragedy has its complication and its denouement (56). The complication consists of the incidents lying outside of the plot, and often some of those inside it, and the rest is the denouement (56). The former refers to that part of the story from the beginning to the point immediately preceding the change to good or bad fortune (56). The denouement (literally, French for the unravelling of a knot) is that part from the onset of this change to the end (56). Many poets are skilful in complicating their plots but clumsy in unravelling them; a constant mastery of both techniques is what is required (56). Tragedies should be classed as similar or dissimilar according to their plots, that is, according to their similarity in complication and denouement (56). Aristotle hypothesises that there are accordingly four kinds of tragedy... corresponding to that of the constituent parts that I spoke about (56). There is complex tragedy, which depends entirely on reversal and discovery (56); tragedy of suffering (56); tragedy of character (56); and spectacular tragedy (56).

10 10 Aristotle warns against giving tragedy an epic structure (57), that is, one with a multiplicity of stories as though one were to attempt a plot covering the whole story of the Iliad (57). By reason of its length, the Iliad can allow the proper development of its various parts, but in plays the results of such attempts are disappointing (57). It has been folly, for example, on the part of poets to attempt to dramatise the destruction of Troy (57), unlike Euripides how attempted only parts of it (57). Last but not least here, Aristotle advises that the Chorus should be regarded as one of the actors (57), a part of the whole (57) who should assume a share in the action (57), as in Sophocles plays. Chapter 19: Thought and Diction Here, having dealt with (57) the other parts of tragedy (57), Aristotle states his intention to say something about diction and thought (57). Thought, he believes, has been covered in his treatise on rhetoric, for it more properly belongs to that study (57). It includes all the effects produced by means of language (57-58), including proof and refutation, the awakening of emotions such as pity, fear, anger, and the like, and also exaggeration and depreciation (58). Aristotle stresses that in the action of the play the same principles should be observed whenever it is necessary to produce effects of pity or terror with this difference, however, that here the effects must be made without verbal explanation (58), while the others are produced by mean of language coming from the lips of a speaker, and are dependent on the use of language (58). With regard to diction (58), one branch of study (58) relevant is that concerned with the various forms of expression, an understanding of which belongs to the art of elocution (58). Aristotle has in mind such things as a command, a prayer, a statement, a threat, an answer, and so on (58). He warns that the poet s art is not seriously criticised according to his knowledge or ignorance of these things (58). Chapter 20: Some Linguistic Definitions Language, Aristotle argues, is made up of the following parts (58): the letter, the syllable, the connecting-word, the article, the noun, the verb, the inflexion or case, and the phrase of proposition (58). A letter is an indivisible sound... from which intelligible language may be produced (58). These include the vowel (58), the semi-vowel (58) and the consonant (58). A syllable is a sound-unit without meaning (59). A connecting-word is a sound-unit without significance which neither hinders nor helps the production of a single significant utterance from the combination of several sounds (59). An article is a sound without significance which indicates the beginning or the end of a speech, or a dividing-point in it (59). A noun is a composite of sounds with a meaning; it is independent of time, and none of its individual parts has a meaning in its own right (59). A verb is a composite of sounds with a meaning; it is concerned with time (59) and none of its individual parts has a meaning in its own right (59-60). Case or inflexion in a noun or verb is that which gives the sense of of or to a thing (60), or indicates whether it relates to one or many, as with man and men (60). It can also refer to types of intonation (60). A phrase or proposition is a composite of sounds with a meaning, and some parts of it have a meaning of their own (60). Verbs and nouns are not present in all propositions. Chapter 21: Poetic Diction

11 11 Nouns may be classified as simple... or as double or compound (60). Each is either a word in current use, or a foreign load-word, a metaphor or an ornamental word, a poetic coinage or a word that has been expanded or abbreviated or otherwise altered (60). By a word in current use (60), Aristotle means a word that everybody uses (60); by loanword one that other peoples use (61). Metaphor is the application to one thing of a name belonging to another thing; the transference may be from the genus to the species, from the species to the genus, or from one species to another, or it may be a matter of analogy (61). An example of transference from genus to species (61) is Here lies my ship, for lying at anchor is a species of lying (61) Transference from species to genus is seen in Odysseus has indeed performed ten thousand noble deeds, for ten thousand... is used here instead of the word many (61). Transference from one species to another is seen in Draining off the life with the bronze (61) for draining off is used for severing (61). A metaphor by analogy (61) occurs when, for example, a cup stands in the same relationship to Dionysus as a shield to Ares, and one may therefore call the cup Dionysus s shield and the shield Ares cup (61). Similarly, old age is to life as evening is to day, and so one may call old age the evening of life or the sunset of life (61). Likewise, one might say sowing his god-created flame (61) whereby the sun s scattering of its flame... stands in the same relationship to sunlight as sowing does to corn (61). A poetic coinage is a word which has not been in use among a people, but has been invented by the poet himself (61). Chapter 22: Diction and Style The greatest virtue of diction is to be clear without being commonplace (62). The clearest diction is that which consists of words in everyday use, but this is commonplace (62). By contrast, diction abounding in unfamiliar usages has dignity, and is raised above the everyday level (63) by means of loan-words, metaphors, expanded forms, and anything else that is out of the ordinary (63). Aristotle advocates a mixture of the various elements (63) with unusual words, the metaphors, the ornamental terms (63), etc. preventing the language from being mean and commonplace (63) while the everyday words give the necessary clarity (63). Among the most effective means of achieving both clarity of diction and a certain dignity is the use of expanded, abbreviated, and altered forms of words; the unfamiliarity due to this deviation from normal usages will raise the diction above the commonplace, while the retention of some part of the normal forms will make for clarity (63). As in all things, moderation is necessary in all kinds of writing alike (64). Everything has its place: it is laughable to use unusual words in comedies but how great a difference is made by their being used properly may be seen in epic poetry if one replaces them with ordinary everyday words in the verse (64). Although all the devices mentioned are important, Aristotle is of the view that the most important thing to master is the use of metaphor (65): it cannot be learnt from anyone else, and it is the mark of great natural ability, for the ability to use metaphor well implies a perception of resemblances (65). Aristotle believes that different types of words (65) are suited to different genres: compound forms are best suited to dithyrambs, unfamiliar borrowings to heroic verse, and metaphorical usages to iambic verse (65) which as far as possible models itself on speech (65) and in which the only appropriate terms are those that anyone might use in speeches (65), which are words in current use, metaphors, and ornamental speech (65). At this point, Aristotle feels he has said enough about tragedy and the art of representation by means of action (65). Chapter 23: Epic Poetry

12 12 At this point, Aristotle turns his attention to the art of representation in the form of narrative verse (65), i.e. epic poetry. He asserts that its plots should be dramatically constructed, like those of tragedies; they should centre on a single action, whole and complete, and have a beginning, middle and an end, so that like a single complete organism the poem may produce its own special kind of pleasure (65). It should not be constructed like the common run of histories, in which it is not the composition of a single action that is required, but of a single period, and of everything that happened to one or more persons during this period, however unrelated the various events may have been (65-66). In any sequence of time events may follow one another without producing any one single result (66) for example, the sea-battle at Salamis and the engagement with the Carthaginians in Sicily took place at the same time, but did not work toward the same end (66). It is, accordingly, a pity that most of our poets use the methods of the historian (66). Aristotle praises Homer as divinely inspired beyond all other poets (66) because although the Trojan war had a beginning and an end, he did not attempt to put the whole of it into his poem (66) as it would have been too large a subject to be taken in all at once (66) and the diversity of its incident would have made it too complicated (66). Instead, he selected one part of the story (66) and introduced many incidents from other parts as episodes, such as the Catalogue of Ships (66). Other epic poets write about one man, or a single period of time, or a single action made up of many separate incidents (66). Chapter 24: Epic Poetry (Continued) Aristotle asserts that epic poetry must divide into the same types as tragedy, the simple, the complex, that which turns on character, and that which turns on suffering (66). Apart from song and spectacle, its constituent parts must be the same (66). It also needs reversals and discoveries and tragic incident (66), while the thought and diction must be of good quality (66). Homer was the first to use (66) all these things (66) and with skill (67). His Iliad is simple in structure and a story of suffering (67), while the Odyssey is complex (for it has discovery scenes throughout) and turns on character (67). Moreover, they both surpass all other poems in diction and in quality of thought (67). Aristotle argues that epic differs, however, from tragedy in the length of the composition and in the metre used (67). With regard to the former, the special advantage (67) of epic is its ability to be of considerable length (67), but it must be possible for the beginning and end to be embraced within a single view (67). Another difference between epic and tragedy is that where in tragedy it is not possible to represent several parts of the story as taking place simultaneously, but only the part that is actually being performed on the stage by the actors (67), epic, being narrative, is able to represent many incidents that are being simultaneously enacted (67). These, provide they are relevant,... increase the weight of the poem, and give it the merits of grandeur, variety of interest, and diversity in its episodes (67). Turning his attention to metre, Aristotle asserts that heroic hexameter is the right metre for epic (67) because it has the greatest weight and stability, which enables it to admit unfamiliar borrowings and metaphorical usages (67). In this regard, the narrative form of representation is better than any other (67). Arguing that nature herself teaches us to choose the right metre for our purposes (67), Aristotle is of the view that the iambic and the trochaic tetrameter are metres suitable to the expression of movement, the latter being a dancing measure, while the former lends itself to the dramatic representation of action (67). Moreover, it would be inappropriate to mix several

13 13 metres (67) in the same poem, hence the propensity to stick to the heroic measure (67). Aristotle contends that Homer is especially admirable in this respect: he is the only poet who recognises what part he himself ought to play in his poems (67-68). The poet should speak as little as possible in his own person, for it is not in that way that he represents actions (68). The problem is that too many [o]ther poets appear in their own character throughout their own poems, and little of what they write is impersonal representation (68), whereas Homer after a few prefatory words,... at once introduces a man, a woman, or some other person, no one of them lacking in character but each with distinctive characteristics (68). Contending that the marvellous is a source of pleasure (68), Aristotle argues that though the marvellous should of course be represented in tragedy (68), in epic poetry, where the persons acting the story are not before our eyes, may include more of the inexplicable, which is the chief element in the marvellous (68). Turning his attention to matters of a rational nature, Aristotle then proposes that Homer knows how to tell untruths as they ought to be told, that is, by the use of fallacy (68). Aristotle has in mind in this regard the so-called episode of the Washing in the Odyssey (68) where Odysseus convinces his wife Penelope that he is someone else ( Aethon, a Cretan [footnote 1, p. 68]) by accurately describing Odysseus dress and appearance and his squire (footnote 1, p.68) as if he were someone he had met along the way. In this case, the fallacy is that she infers the truth of the antecedent from the truth of the consequent (footnote 1, p.68). Aristotle, the founder of logic, puts it this way: If one thing exists because another exists, or happens because this other happens, people think that, if the consequent exists or happens, the antecedent will also exist; but this is not the case. Thus if a proposition were untrue, but there was something else which must be true or must happen if the proposition were true, then it is this something else that we should lay down as a fact; for the mind, knowing it to be true, may fallaciously infer the truth of the original proposition. (68) Aristotle proceeds to argue that [p]robable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities (68). Stories should not be made up of irrational incidents; anything irrational should as far as possible be excluded, or if not, at least kept out of the tale proper (68-69). He insists that plots like these should not be devised in the first instance, but if a poet does employ such a plot and it appears that it could have been worked out more reasonably, then his endeavour is entirely misplaced (69). Those irrational elements (68), for example, in the episode of Odysseus s being set ashore in Ithaca (69), that do appear in epics like the Odyssey would not have been acceptable if they had been treated by an inferior poet; as it is Homer has managed to disguise their absurdity, charming it away by his other excellences (69). Aristotle concludes this chapter by warning that diction should be elaborated only in neutral sections, that is, passages where neither character nor thought is in question, for diction that is too brilliant may obscure the presentation of character and thought (69). Chapter 25: Critical Objections and their Answers Here, Aristotle turns his attention to various critical problems their number, their nature, and the solutions to be offered (69). He notes that, like the painter or any other artist, the poet aims at the representation of life (69). He accordingly must always represent things in one of three ways: either as they were or are, or as they are said to be

14 14 or seem to be, or as they ought to be (69). His medium is language (69) and may include the admixture of unfamiliar terms and metaphors and various other modifications that we allow to poets (69). There are, he points out, not the same standards of correctness in poetry as in political theory or in any other art (69-70). In poetry, there are two kinds of fault (70), one essential, the other incidental (70). His fault is essential if the poet has undertaken to represent some particular fact, and has gone astray through sheer lack of skill (70). His fault is incidental if his is an error in some special branch of knowledge (70) such as medicine (70). Turning to examples of essential faults, Aristotle contends that the poet is at fault if the depiction is of something impossible (70), though he may be justified in doing it as long as the art attains its true end (70), that is, as long as it makes this or some other part of the poem more striking (70). Aristotle believes that it is a less serious fault not to know that a female deer has no horns than to make an unrecognisable picture of one (70). In other words, ignorance of the facts is less dangerous than a lack of artistic skill. In response to criticism that a description (70) is not true (70), Aristotle suggests that there are three possible responses: No, but it ought to be like that (70); or it was described in accordance with tradition (70); or it represents things as they used to be (70). In deciding whether something... said or done is morally good or bad (71), Aristotle argues, we need to pay regard to the goodness or badness of the saying or deed itself (71) and take into account the persons by whom and to whom it was said or done, the occasion, the means, and the reason whether, for example, to bring about a greater good, or to avert a greater evil (71). At this point, Aristotle turns his attention to criticisms of diction (71) by pointing out that some words are rare (71), others metaphorical (71); that sometimes it is a matter of how to read a word (71); that when a word seems to involve some inconsistency of meaning, we ought to consider in how many ways it may be interpreted (72). A little later, Aristotle proposes that [v]erbal inconsistencies should be examined in the same way as refutations in dialectical exercises in order to see whether the poet means the same thing, in the same relation and with the same significance as you mean yourself before you blame him for contradicting either what he has himself said or what an intelligent man would assume to be true (73). He also points out, pace Glaucon, that some critics make unreasonable presuppositions (73): if the poet s words conflict with the conclusions they have thus reached, they censure him as though he had actually said what they ascribe to him (73). Aristotle then declares that the impossible has to be justified on grounds either of poetic effect, or of an attempt to improve on reality, or of accepted tradition (73), or even probability: it is probable enough that things should happen contrary to probability (73). With regard to poetic effect, a convincing impossibility is preferable to an unconvincing possibility (73). However, irrationality and depravity are rightly censured when there is no need for them and they are not properly used (73). All in all, Aristotle summarises, there are five grounds on which a passage may be censured: that it is impossible, irrational, immoral, inconsistent, or technically at fault (73-74). Chapter 26: Epic and Tragedy Compared Here, Aristotle considers the question which of the two forms of representation is the better, the epic or the tragic (74). If the better form is the less vulgar, and the less vulgar is always that which is designed to appeal to the better type of audience, then it is