How do Horace and Aristotle view the effect of literature on an audience?
Aristotle views the effects of literature on the audience in a number of ways, including the following:
- He suggests that human beings enjoy learning and acquiring knowledge. Poetry appeals to this innate human instinct to learn. Plato assumed that most people are uninterested in learning. In contrast, Aristotle assumes that the instinct to learn is very deeply embedded in human nature. As he puts it in Part IV of The Poetics (in the Samuel Butcher translation),
. . . the instinct of imitation is implanted in man from childhood, one difference between him and other animals being that he is the most imitative of living creatures, and through imitation learns his earliest lessons . . . . to learn gives the liveliest pleasure, not only to philosophers but to men in general . . . .
- Aristotle assumes that audiences expect works to be complex unities in which all the parts fit together to produce a complicated but coherent whole. Works that satisfy this desire for complex unity give pleasure to audiences. Thus Aristotle is explicitly concerned with the aesthetic pleasure a work of art can give.
- As he puts it in Part VI,
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 . . .
“Catharsis,” the word which is translated here as “purgation,” has been interpreted in significantly different ways over the years. Perhaps the most persuasive interpretation of Arisotle’s meaning can be found in the edition of the Poetics prepared by Leon Golden and O. B. Hardison, who argue that the word really means something like “clarification,” so that the effect of a great tragedy is not completely emotional but significantly intellectual.
Horace’s theory of poetry, as expressed in his Ars Poetica, takes for granted many ideas similar to those found in Aristotle’s Poetics. Horace assumes, for instance, that a work must be unified to be effective, although his view of unity is simpler than Aristotle’s. For the most part, Horace argues that the work of art must appeal to an audience if it is to be considered successful. Its appeal is often rooted in following custom and tradition, since these are codifications of what has proven successful in the past.
At one point in the Ars Poetica, Horace famously writes (in the A. S. Kline translation), that
Poets wish to benefit or to please, or to speak
What is both enjoyable and helpful to living.
Notice that Horace here gives poets three options: to teach, to please, or to do both. By the time of the Renaissance, these options had been combined, so that it was common by that time to say that poetry should teach and please or teach by pleasing.
Aristotle`s Poetics provides a complex psychological account of literature. It argues that humans naturally derive pleasure from imitation, and thus that poetic mimesis is enjoyable in and of itself. Secondly. he famously states that through fear and pity tragedy achieves the catharsis of the pathemata, in some way purifying the audiences emotional responses. This is part of a larger argument, also advanced to a degree in his Politics and Nicomachean Ethics that art can serve to educate the emotions of the populace. Horace does less in the way of complex psychological analysis, but he does suggest that art should delight and be useful or instruct (dulce et utile).