Aristotle's Epic and Tragedy paper 3

NAME                :      BHUMI N. VAJANI

ROLL NO.         :      06

SUB                  :       Literary Theory and Criticism:              

M.A.                   :      SEM – I

TOPIC               :      Aristotle's Epic and Tragedy

SUBMIT TO      :      Department of English

                                  Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji                               Bhavnagar University

YEAR                :      2012-2013

Aristotle’s Comparison of Epic and Tragedy:-

                Introduction

             Aristotle was born at Stagira in chat dice in 384 BC. He taught Alexander for about three years. He found a school called Lyceum. He devoted his life on teaching and lecturing to scholars on a variety of subjects. He treated his last breather in 322 BC.

                Aristotle an Epic and Tragedy :-

            According to Aristotle, epic and tragedy have the same forms. Epic can be full of complexity. Epic of recognition can emphasize character or suffering. Because epic is in the other manner of imitation. Epic lack one form found in the tragedy- the tragedy of spectacle. Although thought and diction don not produce forms of tragedy or epic, both are important to epic as they are tragedy. Aristotle gives the example of one of the greatest poet of Greek Epic, Homer. He has cited the prime example of Epic artistry. If we talk about Iliad, we find Iliad to be simple and full of suffering. The plot of Iliad is very simple and doesn’t needs much explanation. Its argument is 'The wrater of Achilles'. Having bed aroused by the death of his friend Patroclus, Achilles sets out consciously to ruin hector. He succeeds in destroying hector by the end of the poem. Although some of the episodes are just added for the variation, which are 'Outside the Plot'. Aristotle describes Iliad as an 'Epic' of suffering. From the starting point, the emphasis is on the 'tragic deed' that is the end of the plot- the murdering of hector- and this deed is a episode of suffering. 'The Odyssey', on the other hand, is an epic of recognition and of character. But it can be said that odyssey is not both these forms simultaneously, one can see that the plot of odyssey is complex one. It evolved several recognition of Ulysses by telemachuns, the neat herd, the nurse, and eventually the suitors. In this sense there is , as Aristotle remarks, "Recognition Throughout the parts of odyssey emphasizing character, however, are 'outside the plot! The most important such 'part' is tale of is wanderings. This tale has an episode plot that is simple in form and furthermore in its movement the type of plot that Aristotle seems to have in mind for the 'tragedy of character'". Having classified that Homer outstrips all other in diction and thought.

                Difference Between Epic and Tragedy :-

         The first and foremost difference between epic and tragedy arise from means and manner s of imitation. Epic uses ' Words alone' and a single meter throughout one, the other hand tragedy and harmony and employs a variety of meters in the choral sections. Again if we see, we can know that epic also uses the 'mixed' narrative manner of Homer, whereas tragedy uses the 'Dramatic' manner.

            Another difference is more related to the size and contents of epic and tragedy. Though both imitation the same object is noble action. It is fact that they do so using different means and manners affect the way in ethic they present their material. Tragedy is intended for stage presentation is manner and has parts which cannot be found in epic i.e. means.

             Aristotle's comment on the length of tragedy gave rise during the neo-classic period to the doctrine of unity of time. According to this doctrine, which became literally a critical dogma in seventeenth century France and in the restoration England, when Aristotle asserts that 'tragedy attempts, as far as possible, to remain, within one circuit of sun here, he refers to the time covered by the dramatic action of the play. This interpretation accords with the rationalist bias of neo-classic critics. Spectators, they argued would not believe in the reality of an action that compressed several days or, in the case of Shakespearean plays for several years into a three hour drama. One has to agree that if the spectators did not believe in the reality of an action, he tragedy would not have its proper effect. This same idea was carried to absurd extremes. In England Shakespeare and his other Elizabethan contemporaries.

                  On the other side the twentieter century critic has rejected the idea that Aristotle formally advocated unit of time in his work 'Poetics'. In this matter, we would better probe into the Greek tragedies. Greek tragedies confine their action to a 'Single circuit of the sun' in this sense. The 'Agamemnon' and 'Eumenddes' are well-known examples of plays that cover several days. In the second place, neo-classic verisimilitude is a demonstrably false doctrine and one that is not consistent with Aristotle’s explicit rejection of the theory that poetic imitation is an imitation or copying of history.

                  The above concept can be seen with Aristotle’s view-he lived before hundreds of years. In those days, he became and even today he is known as father of criticism. He might have written the criticism as the need of his society and demand of his time. Even Greek tragedies or epics not follow him perfectly.

                  Else, says that both manner and means affect the ways the epic and tragedy present action. The most obvious influence is manner. Here, our great Sanskrit plays can be kept in mind while considering the Greek. The epic is recited in the mixed manner where as tragedy is presented by many agents i.e. performed on stage. If we consider Ramayana and Mahabharata they have no time range. They cover generations. In practice, dramas especially Greek dramas were much shorter taking an average of perhaps two hours. Epic on the other hand, has no theoretical limit. In this respect the epic is line novel. Spenser's 'Faerie Queen' ,'Iliad','Mahabharata','Ramayana' cannot be completed in one sitting while plays can be watched in one sitting or they can be read in one sitting.

                 Aristotle observes that at first the poets proceeded in tragedy in the same way as they did in epic. Aristotle does not mention any writers before Aeschylus. He felt that Aeschylus led the way in incorporating Homeric techniques into tragedy. The only unified trilogy that has survived is the oresteia of Aeschylus. It is probably important as it continuous the Iliad by telling of the murder of Agamemnon by Clytemnestra, the slaying of Clytemnestra, the spying of Clytemnestra by her son orates and the cleansing of orates by the Athenian tribunal. The orosteia is Homeric in size and content. As tragic poets assimilated the Homeric influence more fully, the trilogy lost popularity.

                    The last contrast between the epic and the tragedy is that there are six 'Parts' or constituent elements in tragedy. Three derived from object of imitation, two from means and one from manner Epic has only four 'parts'. Tragedy uses song also. Tragedy reader can judge all the parts but for an epic reader it’s just impossible to judge all the essential parts of an epic. So he considers tragedy before an epic inspire of the fact that epic preceded tragedy in history. Tragedy includes epic. Most of the important concepts related to epic can be brought up on connection with tragedy. Epic is Longer but may give less benefit as Aristotle says.

                Aristotle’s Preference for Tragedy :-

                    After considering various differences between epic and tragedy question arises of superiority. It 'Epic' better or 'Tragedy'. Aristotle favored. In 'Poetics' he discussed this question at length. he see it his own words,' If the more refined art is higher and the more refined in every case is that which appeals to the better sort of audiences. The art which imitates anything and everything is manifestly most unrefined. Tragic art stands to epic in the same relation as the younger to the older actors. So we are told the epic poetry is addressed to a cultivated audience, who do not need gesture; tragedy to an inferior public, being then unrefined, it is evidently lower of the two. Tragedy like epic poetry produced its effect even without Acton; it releveals its power by me reading. Then in all other respects tragedy is superior if this fault is not inherent in it.

                 According to Aristotle tragedy is superior to epic because besides having all the elements of epic, it also has same additional elements. Tragedy has better unit whole where as many incidences are scattered in epic. There are many stories in stories in epic. Tragedy ends more perfectly then epic and so it is better than epic. Tragedy keeps your concentration as its of less hours while epic gives freedom to your imagination to render while reading.

               Probability and Necessity  :

          The poet brings out the probable and necessary link up of various events both in the development of plot and also in the internal working of the character. Butcher brightly emphasis that the rule of probability and necessity refers to the cohesion of the parts. Tragic heroes like Othello, Hamlet, Antigen process a grandeur a magnificent of though will and action which is much above the level of the average humanity. Indian actions they are true to their nature, their actions are probable and necessary outcome of their respective character and after their environment in which they are placed. Aristotle examines in detail the Plato’s charge that poetry is all lies. He faces the fundamental objection that poetry present not facts but fiction. It criticizes as an untruth and unreal. Aristotle's reply is that poetry is not reality but a higher reality. Poetry transcend facts and the idea of reality is in the poets mind. It gives us the ideal reality in the poets mind.

               Aristotle points out the sources of tragic pleasure   :

Ø   Pleasure is derived from air, natural sense of harmony and rhythm.

Ø   It is also derived from the instinct of imitation. A successful tragedy gives pleasure because it satisfies our basic instinct of imitation.

Ø   Poetry is imitation of an imitation of something which we are not familiar increases our knowledge and gives us pleasure.

Ø   The pleasure of tragedy is caused by the purgation.

Ø   Tragedy imitates action and life, its pain and misery. There is emotional identification of the spectator with the person or persons who suffer on the stage. Perpetuity and Anagnorsis helped to create and heighten interest as well as emotions. All are sense, emotions and thoughts are involved. In this way we smile through our tears.

Ø   Tragedy gives aesthetic pleasure because it increases our understanding of life and its problems. The spectator gets a kind of inner illumination.

Ø   The unity of the plot diction. Spectator etc. also contributes to the sources of the pleasure in tragedy.

Ø   These are the main features of Aristotle's theory of tragedy, it must be remembered that Aristotle was writing his theory based on green drama. It is not meant for universal application. He does provide a foundation for all discussion about tragedy and his contribution is valuable.

               Conclusion   :

Ø   Aristotle solved most of the problems raised by Plato his mentor and also beautifies the beauty of tragedy and epic efficiently. He emphasizes the shaping part of the imagination. Which empowers the poet to go beyond philosophy and history?