The Architecture of Tragedy
Why does a tragedy move an audience through the arrangement of incidents rather than the virtue of its characters? The answer determines whether poetry merely represents action or gives suffering a form that can be understood.
Aristotle treats poetry as mimesis, but he refuses to measure it by resemblance alone: poets differ by medium, by the people they show, and by whether they narrate or let characters act. Against the preference for character over action, he makes plot the organizing cause of tragedy. Its strongest form joins reversal to recognition through an error by someone neither villainous nor blameless; its effect, katharsis, remains unexplained. The missing second roll leaves comedy outside the surviving account.
- aesthetics
- narrative structure
- language
- mimesis
- causality
- unity
- meaning
- representation
- narrative
- human nature
- poetics
- tragedy
- plot
- diction
- plot structure
- epic poetry
- recognition
Enter a dialogue
- When someone mistakes a decent person for a villain, can you make that error intelligible without excusing it?
- Your claim that plot outranks character seems to reduce people to what happens to them; what does tragedy gain?
- Suppose a poet arranges incidents before inventing personalities: what freedom in portraying human beings would you have them surrender?
- How would you separate a reversal that reveals a life from a surprise that merely alters events?