Defining Tragedy

Of the poetry which imitates in hexameter verse, and of Comedy, we will speak hereafter. Let us now discuss Tragedy, resuming its formal definition, as resulting from what has been already said.

We will discuss poetry that imitates in hexameter verse, and comedy, later. For now, let us discuss tragedy, returning to its formal definition in light of what we have already said.

Tragedy, then, is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in the form of action, not of narrative; through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation of these emotions. By 'language embellished,' I mean language into which rhythm, 'harmony,' and song enter. By 'the several kinds in separate parts,' I mean, that some parts are rendered through the medium of verse alone, others again with the aid of song.

Tragedy, then, imitates an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain size. It uses language enriched with different kinds of artistic ornament, each found in separate parts of the play. It presents the action rather than telling a story. Through pity and fear, it brings about the proper purging of these emotions. By 'enriched language,' I mean language that includes rhythm, 'harmony,' and song. By 'each kind in separate parts,' I mean that some parts use verse alone, while others also use song.

Now as tragic imitation implies persons acting, it necessarily follows, in the first place, that Spectacular equipment will be a part of Tragedy. Next, Song and Diction, for these are the medium of imitation. By 'Diction' I mean the mere metrical arrangement of the words: as for 'Song,' it is a term whose sense every one understands.

Since tragedy imitates people acting, spectacle must be one of its parts. Song and Diction are also parts of tragedy, because they are the means of imitation. By 'Diction' I mean only the arrangement of words in meter. As for 'Song,' everyone understands what the term means.

Again, Tragedy is the imitation of an action; and an action implies personal agents, who necessarily possess certain distinctive qualities both of character and thought; for it is by these that we qualify actions themselves, and these—thought and character—are the two natural causes from which actions spring, and on actions again all success or failure depends. Hence, the Plot is the imitation of the action: for by plot I here mean the arrangement of the incidents. By Character I mean that in virtue of which we ascribe certain qualities to the agents. Thought is required wherever a statement is proved, or, it may be, a general truth enunciated. Every Tragedy, therefore, must have six parts, which parts determine its quality—namely, Plot, Character, Diction, Thought, Spectacle, Song. Two of the parts constitute the medium of imitation, one the manner, and three the objects of imitation. And these complete the list. These elements have been employed, we may say, by the poets to a man; in fact, every play contains Spectacular elements as well as Character, Plot, Diction, Song, and Thought.

Again, tragedy is the imitation of an action. An action involves people who necessarily have distinctive qualities of character and thought. We use these qualities to describe their actions. Thought and character are the two natural causes of actions, and all success or failure depends on actions. So the plot is the imitation of the action. By plot, I mean the arrangement of incidents. By character, I mean what leads us to describe the people in the action as having certain qualities. Thought is needed wherever a statement is proved or a general truth is expressed. Every tragedy, therefore, must have six parts that determine its quality: plot, character, diction, thought, spectacle, and song. Two of these parts are the means of imitation, one is the manner, and three are the objects of imitation. That completes the list. We may say that every poet has used these elements. In fact, every play contains spectacle as well as character, plot, diction, song, and thought.

But most important of all is the structure of the incidents. For Tragedy is an imitation, not of men, but of an action and of life, and life consists in action, and its end is a mode of action, not a quality. Now character determines men's qualities, but it is by their actions that they are happy or the reverse. Dramatic action, therefore, is not with a view to the representation of character: character comes in as subsidiary to the actions. Hence the incidents and the plot are the end of a tragedy; and the end is the chief thing of all. Again, without action there cannot be a tragedy; there may be without character. The tragedies of most of our modern poets fail in the rendering of character; and of poets in general this is often true. It is the same in painting; and here lies the difference between Zeuxis and Polygnotus. Polygnotus delineates character well: the style of Zeuxis is devoid of ethical quality. Again, if you string together a set of speeches expressive of character, and well finished in point of diction and thought, you will not produce the essential tragic effect nearly so well as with a play which, however deficient in these respects, yet has a plot and artistically constructed incidents. Besides which, the most powerful elements of emotional: interest in Tragedy Peripeteia or Reversal of the Situation, and Recognition scenes—are parts of the plot. A further proof is, that novices in the art attain to finish: of diction and precision of portraiture before they can construct the plot. It is the same with almost all the early poets.

Most important of all is how the events are arranged. Tragedy imitates not people, but action and life. Life consists in action, and its goal is a way of acting, not a quality. Character determines people’s qualities, but their actions make them happy or unhappy. Drama, therefore, does not use action to portray character. Character is secondary to the actions. So the events and the plot are the goal of a tragedy, and the goal is the most important thing of all. Again, there can be no tragedy without action, though there can be tragedy without character. Most of our modern poets fail to portray character in their tragedies. The same is often true of poets in general. It is also true in painting, and this is the difference between Zeuxis and Polygnotus. Polygnotus portrays character well. The style of Zeuxis shows no moral character. Suppose you string together speeches that express character and are polished in language and thought. You will not produce the essential tragic effect nearly as well as a play with a plot and skillfully arranged events. This is true even if the play falls short in character, language, and thought. Besides, the most powerful sources of emotional interest in tragedy are parts of the plot. These are Peripeteia, or Reversal of the Situation, and Recognition scenes. Further proof is that beginners master polished language and precise portrayals of character before they can construct a plot. The same is true of almost all the early poets.

The Plot, then, is the first principle, and, as it were, the soul of a tragedy: Character holds the second place. A similar fact is seen in painting. The most beautiful colours, laid on confusedly, will not give as much pleasure as the chalk outline of a portrait. Thus Tragedy is the imitation of an action, and of the agents mainly with a view to the action.

Plot, then, is the first principle and, so to speak, the soul of a tragedy. Character comes second. The same is true in painting. Even the most beautiful colors, applied without order, give less pleasure than the chalk outline of a portrait. Tragedy, therefore, imitates an action. It also imitates the people involved, mainly for the sake of the action.

Third in order is Thought,—that is, the faculty of saying what is possible and pertinent in given circumstances. In the case of oratory, this is the function of the Political art and of the art of rhetoric: and so indeed the older poets make their characters speak the language of civic life; the poets of our time, the language of the rhetoricians. Character is that which reveals moral purpose, showing what kind of things a man chooses or avoids. Speeches, therefore, which do not make this manifest, or in which the speaker does not choose or avoid anything whatever, are not expressive of character. Thought, on the other hand, is found where something is proved to be, or not to be, or a general maxim is enunciated.

Third comes Thought, the ability to say what is possible and relevant in a given situation. In public speaking, this is the role of the art of politics and the art of rhetoric. Accordingly, the older poets make their characters speak in the language of civic life. Poets of our time make their characters speak in the language of rhetoricians. Character reveals moral purpose by showing what kinds of things a person chooses or avoids. Speeches do not express character if they fail to reveal this purpose or if the speaker chooses or avoids nothing. Thought, on the other hand, appears when something is shown to be true or false, or when a general principle is stated.

Fourth among the elements enumerated comes Diction; by which I mean, as has been already said, the expression of the meaning in words; and its essence is the same both in verse and prose.

The fourth element listed is diction. As I have already said, diction means expressing meaning in words. Its essence is the same in verse and prose.

Of the remaining elements Song holds the chief place among the embellishments.

Of the remaining elements, song is the most important embellishment.

The Spectacle has, indeed, an emotional attraction of its own, but, of all the parts, it is the least artistic, and connected least with the art of poetry. For the power of Tragedy, we may be sure, is felt even apart from representation and actors. Besides, the production of spectacular effects depends more on the art of the stage machinist than on that of the poet.

Spectacle has an emotional appeal of its own. But of all the parts, it is the least artistic and has the least connection to poetry. We can be sure that tragedy has power even without a performance or actors. Besides, spectacular effects depend more on the skill of the stage machinist than on the poet's art.