In the Poetics, Aristotle presents the principles of artistic composition. While the work treats many forms of imaginative creation, including comedy, epic, dialogue, and even music and dance, it focuses most particularly on the elements of tragedy.
Little is known about the fate of Aristotle's works after his death. It is believed by some scholars that for about two hundred years following his death, the works were either lost or hidden. They were discovered by Sulla (138-78 B.C.) and brought to Rome. According to one prominent scholar, Lane Cooper, the Poetics dates from some time prior to 323 B.C. Cooper comments that the Poetics is perhaps a version of Aristotle's lecture notes, or perhaps even a collection of notes transcribed by someone who attended Aristotle's lectures on the subject. Modern editions of Aristotle's works derive from Roman editions dating back to the late first century b.c. In the Middle Ages, Latin and Arabic translations broadened the influence of Aristotle's teachings, although, as Marvin Herrick has noted, the translations available in England during this time were often thought to be of poor quality. By the end of the fifteenth century, however, Greek versions of the text of the Poetics were available in Italy, and Englishmen traveled there to study it. From that point on, Aristotle's views on the poetic art gained and lost influencein various periods, but gradually became a significant force in the criticism of poetry, drama, and literature.
Just as Aristotle devotes most of his attention in Poetics to tragedy, modern scholars dedicate much of their critical energy to evaluating Aristotle's views on tragedy. In the English translation of Aristotle's definition, tragedy is an "imitation" of a "serious and complete" action, with a "definite magnitude," or theme, that is "humanly significant." Tragedy employs "pleasing language" or "enhanced utterance;" it is characterized by action rather than narration; and it achieves "through pity and fear" what is known as "catharsis" or "purgation." A major issue of critical debate is this concept of imitation. Often, critics attempt to answer the question of what is to be imitated, and in doing so, defend the concept of dramatic imitation against the negative connotation of an imitation being less pure or noble than the original. John W. Draper has noted that while "imitation" has often been misunderstood, it should be conceived of as art's imitation of nature, where nature is understood to be the "creative force of the universe." Charles Sears Baldwin has discussed the Aristotelian concept of imitation as the representation of the character, emotions, and actions of men. Like Draper, Laurence Berns has argued that by imitation Aristotle meant the imitation of nature. Berns goes on to explain that not only is art to imitate what is "actual in nature," but the perfection that is potential in nature as well. Norman Gulley has taken a position similar to Baldwin's by maintaining that art represents human behavior and its moral aspects.
Critics also grapple with other aspects of Aristotle's definition of tragedy, especially the role of catharsis. Catherine Lord has explained that to Aristotle, tragedy was a "goal-directed system," with the goal being catharsis. G. S. Brett has examined this goal, noting that the Greek term infers purgation and purification. Brett has also stressed that Aristotle's definition of tragedy makes no reference to the effects to be experienced by spectators, and suggests that purgation is essential to tragedy without an audience to undergo the catharsis. Berns, on the other hand, maintains that the catharsis Aristotle describes is, in effect, a moral purification in which audience members or readers are taught what to fear and what to pity.
Another major source of debate among critics is Aristotle's emphasis on the primacy of plot over all other elements of tragedy. Catherine Lord has quoted the Poetics as stating that "without action there cannot be a tragedy; there may be without character." After noting that many critics resist this notion that character is entirely subordinate to plot, Lord has argued that in fact all issues related to character are a function of plot. Lord discusses the concept of hamartia as a function of plot as well, maintaining that while this word is often interpreted as the hero's tragic flaw, it is in fact a "simple mistake," not a moral frailty. Colin Hardie, however, has contended that plot and character are inseparable within the context of Aristotle's entire theory of poetics, even though parts of the Poetics seem to identify an antithesis between plot and character. Hardie explains that within the drama, the "facts and circumstances" through which character becomes defined are the plot. It is in an effort to "guarantee the individuality of character," Hardie maintains, that Aristotle emphasizes the significance of plot.
Aristotle's treatment of tragedy, combined with his coverage of other poetic arts, has contributed to the lasting significance of this treatise. The work has greatly influenced the development of literary criticism and continues to be regarded, in the words of Lane Cooper, as "one of the most illuminating and influential books ever produced by the sober human mind."
Principal English Translations
SOURCE: "Aristotelian 'Mimesis' in England," in PMLA, Vol. XXXVI, No. 3, September, 1921, pp. 372-400.
[In the following essay, Draper studies the way in which the understanding of "mimesis," or imitation (as discussed by Aristotle in Poetics), changed over the course of the eighteenth century in England. Draper notes that, in general, the concept was largely misinterpreted.]
Of the many disputed terms in the Poetics, [mimēsis] "imitation," has always been one of the most fruitful of discussion and of misconception; and these misconceptions are particularly significant because, for whole periods, they were potent in moulding creative activity not only in literature,1 but also in painting and in music. When "imitation" is considered in the light of its technical use in Plato and in Aristotle, its real meaning emerges with some distinctness.2 Far from the naturalistic theory of a direct and slavish copy of objects and actions, Aristotle's [mimēsis] is a distinctly idealistic conception, and signifies "creating according to a true idea."3 Thus, when we are told that Art imitates Nature, "Nature" is not a particular thing or act, but is the creative force of the universe.4 With this conception, we can justify Aristotle's declaration that music is the most imitative of all the arts: it is the most fluid; and its flux is governed most...
(The entire section is 8994 words.)
SOURCE: "Reflections on Aristotle's View of Tragedy," in Philosophical Essays Presented to John Watson, Queen's University, 1922, pp. 158-78.
[In the following essay, Brett examines the concept of catharsis, or purgation, which Aristotle discusses in Poetics. Brett suggests that while Aristotle's definition of tragedy omits direct reference to purgation as experienced by an audience, the concept is still a significant part of his definition of tragedy.]
In all literature, ancient and modern, there are a few conspicuous passages which afford the perennial charm of mystery. Each generation of students looks on them, as Desire looks on the Sphinx; and one or another is drawn by magic into the maze of explanations which are the ghosts of former efforts. Such is the passage in which Aristotle once defined Tragedy, and if this essay achieves no final solution of the riddle, it may at least deserve the grace due to any honest venture which sustains the unfinished quest.
As this is not, in the words of the academic regulations, a contribution to knowledge, I have called it a budget of reflections. It represents in fact a voyage of the mind, a voyage of exploration directed more by desire than purpose and terminated by arrival at a stopping place rather than a final goal. The beginning of the quest was in the passage which defines the nature of tragedy...
(The entire section is 6549 words.)
SOURCE: "Character, Antecedents, and General Scope of Poetics," in The Poetics of Aristotle and Its Meaning and Influence, Cornell University Press, 1923, pp. 3-14.
[In this brief overview, Cooper reviews such textual issues as the date of composition of Poetics and the possible sources on which Aristotle drew to write the treatise. Cooper also discusses the structure, function, and goal of poetry as analyzed by Aristotle.]
The Poetics of Aristotle is brief, at first sight hard and dry, and yet one of the most illuminating and influential books ever produced by the sober human mind. After twenty-two centuries it remains the most stimulating and helpful of all analytical works dealing with poetry—and poetry is the most vital and lasting achievement of man. This pregnant treatise, dating from some time before the year 323 B. C., is indeed short and condensed. Castelvetro's famous 'exposition' of it (Vienna, 1570) fills 768 pages, and runs to something like 384,000 words. The Poetics itself contains perhaps 10,000 words. In the great Berlin edition of Aristotle (1831) it takes up only 30 columns of print, or 15 pages; in the last notable edition of the Poetics, that of Bywater (1909), the text occupies 45 pages out of 431. The Poetics makes about a hundredth part of the extant works of Aristotle.
Though never long, it doubtless once was longer;...
(The entire section is 2332 words.)
SOURCE: "The Poetic of Aristotle," in Ancient Rhetoric and Poetic, Peter Smith, 1959, pp. 132-66.
[In the following essay, Baldwin offers a general overview of Aristotle's Poetics, discussing in particular the role of imitation in Aristotle's poetic theory.]
Veneration of Aristotle has been impatiently classed with "other mediæval superstitions," both by those who disliked authority and by those who revolted against the inlaying and overlaying of his text with centuries of interpretations.1 Since the Renaissance the Poetic has, indeed, fared in this regard somewhat as the Bible; and in both cases those deviations from the original intention are widest, perhaps, which have arisen from "private interpretation," from missionary zeal more anxious to read into the text than to read in it. What may be called on the other hand communal interpretation, the consentient application of Aristotle's ideas to the typical problems of a whole group or period, constitutes an important guide in the history of criticism. Both kinds of interpretation imply in the original an extraordinary fertility. This vitality, it is also clear, is of principles, of ideas set forth not only as classifying, but as constructive. The principles have been from time to time crystallized in rules; and some of the rules, having been found restrictive or even inhibitory, have thereupon been flung aside....
(The entire section is 10569 words.)
SOURCE: "The Middle Ages and the Renaissance," in The Poetics of Aristotle in England, Yale University Press, 1930, pp. 8-35.
[In the following essay, Herrick traces the influence of Aristotle's Poetics on English literature from Roger Bacon's (c. 1214-1294) mention of the treatise in his works through the possible influence of Aristotle's ideas on Shakespeare.]
The first Englishman to mention Aristotle's Poetics was Roger Bacon (c. 1214-1294). Like most of his learned contemporaries, Bacon pursued philosophical and scientific studies as means to the greater study of theology. While his primary aim, then, was neither philosophical, scientific (in our sense of the word), nor literary, he fully realized the need for an adequate understanding of the ancient languages and literatures, since they alone, he believed, could furnish the proper tools for more exalted labors.1 He was convinced that up to his own day Boethius alone, in the West, had fully understood both Greek and Latin.2 The chief reason for the prevailing ignorance of Bacon's day was the difficulty of obtaining the classical writings, not only in the long-neglected Greek, but in Latin as well. Robert Grosseteste (c. 1175-1253), Franciscan scholar and Bishop of Lincoln, had invited Greek teachers to England, and encouraged the study of Aristotle; but himself made little progress in Greek...
(The entire section is 9619 words.)
SOURCE: "The Relation of Character and Plot," in Aristotle's Poetics, Rupert Hart-Davis, 1967, pp. 68-81.
[In the following essay, written in 1956, House maintains that Aristotle's views regarding the importance of plot in tragedy actually reveal his "attempt to guarantee the individuality of character."]
This brings us to the famous argument by which Aristotle says that "plot" is more important than "character"; it is stated in the second half of ch. vi (pp. 36-9) and has produced a great deal of discussion. It is absurd in any language (quite apart from questions of translation) to bandy about complicated terms like "character", "plot" and "action" as if they were "fixities and definites". In this particular discussion much avoidable trouble has been caused by the assumption that the meanings of the terms "character" and "action" are self-evident, and that there is some kind of elementary opposition between them.
The essential clues to the proper interpretation of this latter half of ch. vi are present in the language that Aristotle uses in the chapter itself; but they can be understood more clearly by reference to what he says in the Nicomachean Ethics. And this is one of the passages which, as I said before, does presuppose some knowledge of the Ethics and the terminology used there.
The point to get hold of first is this: although Aristotle in the...
(The entire section is 4711 words.)
SOURCE: "The Tragic Action and Character," in Aristotle's Poetics, Rupert Hart-Davis, 1964, pp. 82-99.
[In the following essay, written in 1956, House analyzes the features of dramatic characters which Aristotle discusses in Poetics. In particular, House focuses on the tragic hero and on the concept of hamartia, noting that the understanding ofhamartia as the hero's "tragic flaw" is misleading.]
In the definition of Tragedy in ch. vi, Bywater's version makes Aristotle say that Tragedy is an imitation of an action that is "serious"; this is also Butcher's translation at that point. But in fact the Greek word here in the definition [spoudaīos] is the same as that used at the beginning of ch. ii (p. 25) in the sentence:
The objects the imitator represents are actions, with agents who are necessarily either good men [spoudaīos] or bad.
The word for the good men in ch. ii is the same as the word translated "serious" in ch. vi. Is this difference justified?
Many people have argued for and defended the translation "serious" in ch. vi; and I have been among them in the past, and must now recant. The reason for wanting to defend it is obvious. If it can be made out that "serious" is right (as meaning "having importance", "being of import", "having weight", and so on), Aristotle's general theory is...
(The entire section is 5859 words.)
SOURCE: "Aristotle's Poetics," in Ancients and Moderns: Essays on the Tradition of Political Philosophy in Honor of Leo Strauss, edited by Joseph Cropsey, Basic Books Inc., Publishers, 1964, pp.
[In the following essay, Berns reviews several aspects of Aristotle's Poetics which he believes have been misunderstood. He examines what Aristotle meant by the term "imitation"; the role of pity and fear in enabling purgation; and character traits of the "tragic hero."]
Henry Jackson, the highly respected classical scholar, an editor of some texts of Aristotle, paid the following compliment to Aristotle's Politics. "It is an amazing book," he said. "It seems to me to show a Shakesperian understanding of human beings and their ways.…" Aristotle, the philosopher, is praised because his understanding of human beings approaches or matches that of Shakespeare, the poet. The poet's understanding is the standard. In this remark, Jackson seems to take it for granted that the poet's understanding of human beings and their ways is somehow the most adequate and most profound understanding. This is not hard for us modern men to understand. For one thing, the poet's picture of the world preserves that wonder and mystery which seem to dissolve and disappear in the accounts of the philosophers and scientists. Furthermore, the great poet convinces us of his knowledge in a much more powerful way than bare...
(The entire section is 8315 words.)
SOURCE: "Tragedy without Character: Poetics VI.1450a 24," in The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. XXVIII, No. 1, Fall, 1969, pp. 55-62.
[In the following essay, Lord examines Aristotle's elevation of plot above all other elements of tragedy and argues that he does indeed assert that all aspects of character, including the concept of "hamartia," are a function of plot.]
It is commonly believed that there are two kinds of readers or spectators. There are those who read primarily for plot, story, action, narrative, and who especially enjoy spectacle—the vulgar. Then there are those, the connoisseurs of letters, the cognoscenti—ourselves—who place a greater premium on character, thought, and diction. When we find Aristotle expressly giving the pride of place to plot among the six parts of Tragedy—Plot, Character, Thought, Diction, Spectacle, and Music—we are instantly perplexed, if not outraged. Even those of us who may be sympathetic to Aristotle on some fairly general ground are strongly tempted to suppose that what Aristotle means by plot, mythos in some places, logos in others, cannot possibly be that crude thing, namely, story and action. He must mean something more subtle than that. Those of us who are not prepared to give Aristotle the benefit of the doubt will insist that he does, indeed, mean the crude thing and that...
(The entire section is 4870 words.)
SOURCE: "Aristotle on the Purposes of Literature," in Articles on Aristotle: 4. Psychology and Aesthetics, edited by Jonathan Barnes, Malcolm Schofield, and Richard Sorabji, Duckworth, 1979, pp. 166-75.
[In the following essay, Gulley studies Aristotle's use of the term "imitation" and the relationship between that which the dramatic or literary artist represents and that which is "true."]
In beginning this inaugural lecture I am aware that the notion of inauguration carries the notion of what is propitious. To inaugurate, in its literal Latin sense, is to take omens from the flight of birds. It has a transferred sense of consecrating a place or installing a person in office. In this sense the implication is that the ceremonial omens are favourable. Here are two modern dictionary definitions of it:1 (i) to begin or initiate under favourable circumstances, with a good deed or omen, or with propitious exercises; (ii) to commence or enter upon, especially something beneficial.
This suggests that, in an inaugural lecture, I should say something about the beneficial nature of what I am entering upon and indicate in what respects the omens are favourable for me. It suggests also, perhaps, since my profession is to provide students with a classical education, that I should indicate the benefits of a classical education.
But this would be too extensive a programme...
(The entire section is 6427 words.)
SOURCE: "The Conditions of Aesthetic Feeling in Aristotle's Poetics," in British Journal of Aesthetics, Vol. 24, No. 2, Spring, 1984, pp. 138-48.
[In the following essay, Packer argues that the 'formal and psychological requirements of good tragedy "outlined by Aristotle in Poetics cannot be thought of as a definition of tragedy. Rather, Packer maintains, Aristotle intends them as "the premises and conclusion of a demonstration" that identifies the causal relationship between the formal features of tragedy and the psychological response of the audience or reader.]
An important question raised by Aristotle's analysis of tragic art concerns the relative significance of, and relation between, two sets of requirements for good tragedy stipulated in Chapter VI of the Poetics. The first, which I shall call the 'formal requirement', lists several rules of composition and form the text itself must exhibit in order to have value as tragic poetry, such as its length and the kinds of actions it must present;1 and the second, which hereafter shall be referred to as the 'psychological requirement', specifies pity and fear as the most appropriate emotional responses the reader or spectator of good tragedy should experience. To which requirement, if either, Aristotle gives priority, and how, if at all, Aristotle believes the formal characteristics of a text can elicit these particular...
(The entire section is 5328 words.)
SOURCE: "Aristotle's Aesthetics 1: Art and Its Pleasure," in Aristotle's "Poetics," Duckworth, 1986, pp. 42-81.
[In the following essay, Halliwell examines Aristotle's conceptualization of "mimetic arts" and argues that the pleasure which results from experiencing a work of mimetic art is "a response to the intelligible structure imposed on his material by the artist's rational capacity."]
There is evidence to be found in the Poetics, and it receives some confirmation from material elsewhere in the corpus, that Aristotle's thoughts on poetry were not formed in isolation from comparative reflections on other related activities, especially the visual arts, music and dancing—activities which it is now automatic for us to describe collectively as art'. For Aristotle the most significant common factor shared by these activites, and their products, was mimesis, and it is directly in connection with mimesis that we encounter in the Poetics and occasionally in other works general pronouncements covering both poetry and one or more of the arts indicated above. Such pronouncements were not without precedent, and it is possible in particular to discern some influence on Aristotle of the analogy between poetry and painting frequently drawn and exploited by Plato. But Aristotle's use of the comparison was not merely conventional, and its repeated occurrence in the Poetics associates it with...
(The entire section is 18136 words.)
SOURCE: "Outside the Drama: The Limits of Tragedy in Aristotle's Poetics," in Essays on Aristotle's 'Poetics ', edited by Amelie Oksenberg Rorty, Princeton University Press, 1992, pp. 133-49.
[In the following essay, Roberts contends that in discussing the natural limit of plot length, Aristotle conceived of some action as taking place "outside" of the drama's plot. Roberts analyzes what types of action might fall into this category and the methods by which events taking place outside of the play's action could be conveyed to the audience.]
In Chapter 7 of the Poetics (1450b26-31). Aristotle notes that the action of which a play is an imitation must be whole, that is, must have a beginning, a middle, and an end; a beginning, he goes on to say, is that which does not follow naturally or necessarily from anything else, and an end is that from which nothing else follows. This claim often strikes readers at first as obvious and then as untrue. What Aristotle says seems obvious in the sense that a play's action has in fact a duration limited in time; it starts and it stops. It seems untrue in the sense that there appears to be a great deal that precedes the actual beginning of many Greek tragedies, and that tragedies often end with some indication that there is more to come; furthermore, what precedes is often causally connected with the events of the play itself, and what follows often...
(The entire section is 10534 words.)
Herrick, Marvin T. "A Supplement to Cooper and Gudeman's Bibliography of the Poetics of Aristotle." The American Journal of Philology LII, No. 2 (April, May, June 1931): 168-74.
Introduces new titles and includes titles that were omitted from Lane Cooper and Alfred Gudeman's 1928 A Bibliography of the Poetics of Aristotle.
Adkins, Arthur W. H. "Aristotle and the Best Kind of Tragedy." The Classical Quarterly New Series, Vol. XVI, No. I (May 1966): 78-102.
Examines Aristotle's qualifications for the appropriate subject matter of tragedy and the relevancy of such requirements to extant Greek tragedy. Also considers why Aristotle considered some types of experience unsuitable for tragedy.
Belfiore, Elizabeth. "Aristotle's Concept of Praxis in the Poetics." The Classical Journal 79, No. 2 (Dec.-Jan. 1983-1984): 110-24.
Studies Aristotle's use of the term praxis, or "action" in the Poetics and argues that contrary to what critics often maintain, praxis as it is used in the Poetics does not refer to an action qualified as moral or ethical; rather, praxis refers simply to an event.
Boggess, William F. "Aristotle's Poetics in the Fourteenth Century." Studies in Philology LXVII, No. 3 (July 1970):...
(The entire section is 665 words.)