Aristotle's The Poetics

Parts IX-XIV and XXV-XXVI of Aristotle's The Poetics

In sections IX-XIV and XXV-XXVI of The Poetics, Aristotle gives agruments and reasons for what he believes to be the way to construct the greatest form of what he calls "poetry" but perhaps now would be called a drama. In section IX, Aristotle states that a poetic is greater than a historian because: a historian uses writing to refer to the past, which has finite reasoning (these events happened), but a poet uses writing to refer the reader to what could happen through what Aristotle calls, "the law of probability or necessity" (if something is likely or needs to happen it most likely will). Continuing this section, Aristotle gives reasoning for why tragedy is the best form of "poetry". Comedies form plots based upon the "law of probability" but give unrealistic names, but Tragedies use real names and only that which could happen, will happen in the story. Aristotle finishes secton IX, by talking about how to make the best plot and also by stating the greatest effect of tragedies. According to Aristotle, a plot should contain a series of events with a "probable or necessary sequence". Each event has to have a good chance of happening and should cause a future event to have a probability of happening. Aristotle concludes by stating that tragedies are great not only because they cause their audiences to feel fear or pity, but also because they cause fear/pity among their audiences, through the cleverness of their cause and effect plots. In section X, Aristotle defines good and bad plot systems: a bad one he calls, "Simple," which does not contains any "Reversal of the Situation" or "Recognition", and a good one he calls, "Complex," which contains "Reversal of the Situation" or "Recognition", or both. These terms of "Reversal of the Situation" and "Recognition", Aristotle defines in section XI. "Reversal of the Situation" he defines as a complete change of circumstance, in which a main character acheives a situation opposite to his previous situation, and "Recognition" he defines as the name implies, coming to a new understanding. Aristotle finishes section XI by stating that the best tragedy will use good forms of both of the previously mentioned events as well as a third part which he calls the "Scene of Suffering", which involves some extremely harsh action (usually death). In section XII, Aristotle defines the parts of a good tragedy, such as: the Prologue (the part before the first chorus song), an Episode (a part between chorus songs), the Exode (the part after the final chorus song), and the chorus songs. Aristotle continues his conversation about the formation of a plot, in section XIII, where he states that a good plot, uses a "complex plan", in which the audience is forced to feel pity or fear because of the undeserved misfortune of a man. The change must happen not by the fault of any person but only by an inherent error that causes it. The change finally should be from good to bad. Aristotle continues his idea of inspiring the greatest forms of audience fear and pity, in section XIV. He then states that in order to inspire the greatest fear a friend has to kill the hero, not an enemy, because an enemy has more reason to kill the hero. These events therefore msut occur by an act of prophesy or ignorance of identity. Aristotle begins section XXV, by stating that poets are artists and as such should imitate the world either: as it is, as it is said to be, or as it should be. The poet's method of expressing their vision would therefore be language, and like other forms of art, it can be incorrectly presented for a variety of reasons. Aristotle separates these fallacies into two categorys: essence and accidental. Accidental fallacies are causes of either ignorance or mistake and are always bad. Essence fallacies Aristotle describes as metaphors and sometimes are justified due to the ability of poetics to make strange comparisions, but these fallacies should be used as little as possible. In Aristotle's final section (XVI), Aristotle give reasoning for why tragedies are better than Epics. Aristotle first states that tragedies only fail due to bad actors not due to an inherently bad style. The main point however that Aristotle claims is that tragedies produce that same amount of audience impression in a lesser amount of time than Epics.

Aristotle's idea of a poet seems to be similar to and may have inspired John Berger's idea of an artist. According to Berger, an artist is suppose to paint what they see, and in this same manner, poets, who are also artists, should write their story from their view of the world (as it is, as it is said, or as it should be). Aristotle's The Poetics also seems to influence William Shakespeare in his writing of Romeo and Juliet. In this tragedy, Romeo and Juliet, by fortune and by a cuase of events fall in love with each other (this is an undeserved and probable fortune). This fortune how ever turns into a negative chain of events, as Romeo is kicked out on the city and Juliet is forced to marry someone else. Juliet then fakes her death so that see may run away with Romeo, but Romeo hears of her death and poisons himself as an act of love. Juliet then awakes to see Romeo dead (by misfortune) as follows Romeo's actions and kills herself as well. Both of their deaths occured by misfortune and were preformed by themselves not by foes.

After reading Aristotle's The Poetics one could ask the question: Aristotle claims to have stated enough about the structure of the plot of tragedies, and also states that in the plot there should have one change in fortune from good to bad, but also states that a good tragedy uses a form of a change in the situation. Therefore could a good tragedy include a situation where a man starts from a bad situation then go to a better one and finallydrop to a worse situation?

The answer, according to Aristotle, would be no because the plot line changes too much and would mainly appease the lesser minds. The early events in such a plot line also would not easily point to the eventual "Scene of Suffering". Finally such a change in events is not quite probable enough to happen and as such would be less relatable to the audience.