Understanding Shakespearean Tragedy with Aristotle by Louisa Dreisin
English Association Bookmarks No. 31
English Association Bookmarks Number 31
Understanding Shakespearean Tragedy with Aristotle by Louisa Dreisin
Scope of Topic The nature of tragedy and the tragic protagonist, outlined by Aristotle, and how to apply his guidelines to modern drama, particularly Shakespeare’s tragedies. BOOKS TO READ The texts mentioned in this Bookmark are Aristotle’s Poetics (either the Penguin translation by T S Dorsch published as Aristotle/Horace/Longinus - Classical Literary Criticism or the Ingram Bywater translation Aristotle - On the Art of Poetry published by Oxford at the Clarendon Press); Shakespeare’s tragedies: Macbeth, Othello, Hamlet, King Lear, Antony and Cleopatra and Sophocles’s Oedipus Tyrannus (the King) and Oedipus at Colonus (published by Penguin Classics and translated by Robert Fagles). NOTES Aristotle is our most influential early literary critic. Lecturing in Athens in the fourth century BC on drama and the functions of time, character and plot, his legacy of the Poetics has influenced and shaped writing by dramatists and novelists to the present day. It is generally agreed that the Poetics, dated about 330BC, is a set of lecture notes on the nature of tragedy and how it is constructed. Aristotle is concerned with the poetic and rhythmic influences that are effective as dramatic writing, but also with the construction and nature of plot and character as foundations of a play. He also comments extensively on the response of the audience and of the playwright’s ability to engender feelings of pity and fear in the watchers, the function of which will be discussed below. The Poetics has been shaped into chapters by subsequent translators; when I refer to chapter numbers, it is to those of the translated text I have used. So, how do we define a tragedy? It is separate from that which is ‘tragic’ and has specific elements that make it what it is. Frank, a character in Willy Russell’s Educating Rita sums up the difference neatly for us: “Macbeth is flawed by his ambition . . it’s that flaw which forces him to take the inevitable steps towards his own doom. ‘Man Killed by Falling Tree’, is not a tragedy . . . in the way that Macbeth is a tragedy. Tragedy in dramatic terms is inevitable, pre-ordained . . . he’s warned in the play. But he can’t go back. He still treads the path to doom. But the poor old fellow under the tree hasn’t arrived there by following any inevitable steps . . . You see [Macbeth] goes blindly on and on and with every step he’s spinning one more piece of thread which will eventually make up the network of his own tragedy”. The difference between what is a chance disaster and what is a dramatic tragedy is that the protagonist in the drama is himself the cause of his downfall. He is not able to control his end because the path of his fate has been decided by that element in his character which determines his actions. So Macbeth is driven by ambition and Lear by pride. What happens to them during the course of the plays is a result of them having acted typically and they must follow the inevitable steps that these paths present. Gilbert Murray, in his preface to Ingram Bywater’s translation of the Poetics says that “the typical tragic hero is one who falls from high state or fame, not through vice or depravity, but by some great hamartia. © English Association and Louisa Dreisin, 1996 and 2007
2
English Association Bookmarks Number 31
Hamartia means originally a ‘bad shot’ or ‘error’, but is currently used for ‘offence’ or ‘sin’. Aristotle clearly means that the typical hero is a great man with ‘something wrong’ in his life or character.” It is this ‘something wrong’ which causes him to commit the offence or sin knowingly or unknowingly, he has no control - which is his undoing. One such flaw of the tragic protagonist’s character is that he suffers from hubris or an excess of ambition or pride. As we have seen, for Macbeth and Lear this hubris is their ruin and they can no more change their characters as they can avoid their downfall. In Greek tragedy the protagonist who suffers from hubris also meets his nemesis, or retribution. (The mythical goddess of retribution and vengeance was called Nemesis and it is from her that the term originates.) As we see below, the protagonist experiences a reversal in his fortunes which leads to his downfall, but first he must realise his hubris. It is this realisation, or awareness of his predicament, that makes the tragedy ‘tragic’; that the protagonist who has erred by virtue of his hamartia meets his nemesis and as a result his end. We see Shakespeare’s ‘heroes’ become aware of their flaws. Othello learns of Iago’s manipulation of him and Lear of his excess pride and Cordelia’s true love too late for them to rectify their transgressions. It is vital to understand the construction of the ‘hero’ or protagonist in order to ascertain the nature of his downfall and how we - the audience - react to it. Aristotle clearly lists the elements of the tragic protagonist in chapter 15. First, the tragic character must be ‘good’. However, this ‘moral goodness’ may be found in any class of person, be it servant or master, but the tragic protagonist will be of noble stock or nature - a prince or king, or a high-ranking member of court. The second criterion is that the attributes suit the character. Thus - and we twentieth century critics may question this, applying our social values as they are - a protagonist may possess ‘manly qualities’ but it is not appropriate that a female character should be given ‘manliness’ as a characteristic. (In the literary climate contemporary to Aristotle, female characters, whilst contributory to the plot, do not detract from the central nature of the predicament of the protagonist himself. Jocasta’s plight of marrying her estranged son and bearing him children is part of the Delphic prediction in Oedipus the King by Sophocles. Although this discovery is too painful for her to bear and she hangs herself when she discovers the true identity of her ‘husband’, Jocasta’s death is not central to the plot. She is regal, but is not portrayed as having any particular individuality, taking instead the supportive role to the male lead. Oedipus finally discovers and accepts his heritage through her death but the tragedy is his alone.) Equally, a male protagonist who holds a position of authority must display leadership qualities and not those of a servant. Even though Hamlet is in a predicament that compromises his moral consciousness, he behaves in a manner towards his inferiors that is suitable to his status as Prince and does not compromise his authority at any point during the play. Third, the characters should be lifelike - which is not the same as making them ‘good’ possessing human qualities which imitate life. This is central to the effectiveness of the tragic plot as it provides the audience with characteristics that imitate reality. This imitation, or mimesis, reflects life and is therefore effective in portraying drama realistically. Thus Hamlet is indecisive about whether he will be able to murder his uncle Claudius. As he is a morally sensitive character, it is a natural dilemma, the character torn between avenging his father’s murder and committing an equally odious sin himself in the name of revenge. We, as an audience, are sympathetic to his plight and we pity his predicament because he behaves in a way that is lifelike. Which of us would not prevaricate in order to avoid taking another human being’s life? Aristotle points out in chapter 4 of the Poetics that because we learn first in life by imitation, it is therefore “natural for all to delight in works of imitation”. The protagonist must, then, © English Association and Louisa Dreisin, 1996 and 2007
3
English Association Bookmarks Number 31
display mimetic characteristics that remind us of real life and therefore of our own characteristics. We are able, then, to project our fear for the protagonist’s predicament and pity for his plight and be purged of our own innate urges through katharsis or catharsis. This term originates from the Greek Kathairein - to purge or purify - and for the audience watching a tragedy this is achieved by empathising with the protagonist and experiencing his predicament. This can only be effective if the characteristics of the protagonist are lifelike. Fourth, the character must be consistent. “Even if the person who is being represented is inconsistent, and this trait is the basis of his character, he must nevertheless be portrayed as consistently inconsistent”. It would be impossible to judge as ‘lifelike’ a Macbeth who does not have as the consistent foundation of his character a desire to rule. Although he questions the moral rightness of his actions he is nonetheless persuaded to murder to achieve his ambition. Had his desire not been consistent throughout the play he would not, firstly, have been committed enough to his ambition to murder and secondly, he would not seem a realistic enough portrayal of a man driven by the desire to rule to convince the audience. We would question the conviction of the playwright and be unable to ‘relate’ to the character sufficiently to be drawn into his world and therefore his fate. Marlowe’s famous warrior Tamburlaine is such an example; bloodthirsty by nature he is a ‘larger than life’ character. However, he is incongruously gentle with his wife Zenocrate. This characteristic, when juxtaposed with his murderous nature casts an unconvincing pall over the plot of Tamburlaine the Great. Because his atrocities are so extreme we the audience can only enjoy the spectacle of his actions without becoming seriously involved in his tyranny and eventual death. In short, the tragic protagonist must be presented as morally good and of a significant position in society. He must have characteristics which suit his social status and which reflect lifelike traits. He must also be consistent in his behaviour, reflecting these traits throughout the action so that his peripety, or reversal of fortune, is convincing. The nature of the protagonist is linked inextricably with the structure of the tragic plot, which charts his actions and their consequences. Aristotle points out that “the unravelling of the plot should arise from the circumstances of the plot itself” - that the action should develop as a result of the situation which opens the play (for example in Hamlet) and the subsequent actions of the dramatis personae, or characters in the drama. (A particularly unsatisfactory dénouement, says Aristotle, is the intervention of a god figure or deus ex machina who ‘sorts out’ the plot by taking the responsibility away from the protagonists. This type of dénouement works well in a comedy such as A Midsummer Night’s Dream because we have suspended our disbelief and are enjoying the spectacle of humans being manipulated by fairies, but it bears no resemblance to the ‘human drama’ or mimesis of tragedy.) Thus, the tragic protagonist must experience a change in his awareness of his own predicament and, as discussed, be cognisant of his hamartia or flaw before he meets his nemesis. “Every tragedy has its complication and dénouement”. The complication is part of the initial status quo which leads, at the end of the play, to a dénouement, a ‘sorting out’ of the plot. This is the case with most dramatic plots but for a tragedy to be of its nature tragic, the precept, or principle for action, must be consistent with the predicament of the protagonist. Aristotle points out that a good plot must be complex and “must imitate actions arousing pity and fear”. Thus the protagonist is inextricably bound up with his own tragic end, following the inevitable process of his own doom because of an unavoidable flaw in his character.
© English Association and Louisa Dreisin, 1996 and 2007
4
English Association Bookmarks Number 31
The three principle elements which comprise a good tragedy are the protagonist’s movement from ‘a state of grace or happiness’ (eudaimonia) to discovery (anagnôrisis) of his hamartia or offence, that leads in turn to his reversal of fortune (peripeteia) and downfall. Lear is an excellent example of this process. He lives richly in a state of grace as a well-loved ruler with his daughters around him. He decides to ask them how much they love him, and rewards Goneril and Regan’s reply of material comparison, but his hubris will not tolerate Cordelia’s inability to measure her love by the same examples as her sisters have given. He chooses to believe that she does not love him at all and she is banished from his sight. For his pride - the flaw in his character that causes him to behave in this manner - he loses his truest daughter and as a result of the realisation or discovery of this fact, falls from grace. Aristotle is careful to point out that the reaction of his audience is particularly important to the success of a plot and the credible nature of the protagonist. He advises that dramatists should not portray a morally ‘bad’ man falling from happiness into misery because our “pity is awakened by undeserved misfortune”. That the protagonist is in a position of authority or respect contributes equally to our horror at his downfall and the loss of eudaimonia is the more poignant. It is much more effective that the audience witnesses Othello’s predicament as an innocent victim of Iago’s manipulation because he has been introduced to us initially as a respected, courageous, and honest man. Had he been less of a morally ‘good’ character and, for example, taken Desdemona by force, we would have been less able to pity his destruction. As I have mentioned before, it is the realisation or discovery by the protagonist of his flaw or hamartia that makes the tragedy tragic. The Greek tragic anagnôrisis is of four types and is discussed in chapter 16 of the Poetics, but we shall concentrate here on the effect that ‘realisation’ has on the protagonist. It is important to remember that a character who has behaved in a manner which has negatively and irreversibly affected himself and his environment will realise his fault, at which point his fortunes must change. Whilst Lear is proud and dismissive of his third daughter he is destroying the tenuous love and respect of Goneril and Regan by assuming their tolerance, whatever his behaviour. His pride will not allow him to see that the material favours he lavishes on his two eldest daughters are simply that - material. When he realises that the basis of his relationship with the two princesses rests solely on their desire to receive and not to give he experiences the discovery or anagnorisis that his is an empty fatherhood because of his excessive pride. He goes mad and, having given away his kingdom suffers a complete reversal of fortune, wandering the countryside at the mercy of anybody who is compassionate enough to assist him until he is united with Cordelia. It is interesting to compare Lear’s blind plight with that of Oedipus, who mutilates his own eyes with Jocasta’s brooch pin crying to them “you’ll see no more the pain I suffered, all the pain I caused!”. The idea that the protagonist becomes physically blind as a consequence of discovering his hamartia implies that he ‘sees’ his faults more clearly, unencumbered by sight of the world around him. (It is worth noting that the Greek prophet or seer Teiresias was blind.) Oedipus, too, wanders the countryside in Oedipus at Colonus until he is aided by King Theseus and finds peace in the presence of his daughter Antigone. “The most effective form of discovery is that which is accompanied by reversals . . . for a discovery of this kind in combination with a reversal will carry with it either pity or fear, and it is such actions as these that . . . tragedy represents”. For what is anagnôrisis without peripeteia? We would not pity our tragic hero if he did not experience a reversal in his fortunes after having learned of his ‘flaw’. The effectiveness of a drama lies in our ability as an audience to experience some form of emotion in response to the plight of a character or characters in the play we are watching. As I have mentioned, we are purged of our suppressed desires or fears through katharsis but this is not the sole effect of the drama. We may experience exasperation at Hamlet’s inability to make a firm resolution about avenging his father’s murder, or silently will Juliet to wake early from her “two-and-forty hours” death © English Association and Louisa Dreisin, 1996 and 2007
5
English Association Bookmarks Number 31
so that the ensuing disaster may be averted. The more we are ‘drawn in’ to a plot, the more effective the play. Aristotle comments that the mark of a “better dramatic poet” is one who is able to excite pity and fear “from the very structure of the action . . . [that we] shudder with fear and pity as a result of what is happening”. We experience both pity and fear whilst watching Romeo and Juliet: pity for their innocence and the need to deceive their parents because of a senseless family feud, and fear for their fate as “A pair of star-cross’d lovers”. The learning process for us, again by mimesis, is essential to our sense of the “action that is complete in itself”. We cannot learn that a kettle is too hot to touch unless we have witnessed or experienced the consequences of having touched it and being burned; equally we must see that the consequence of a character’s hubris is his nemesis. That the protagonist learns the effect of his hamartia is only half of the equation. We as an audience experiencing pity and fear for the protagonist are the other half, and it is our response which makes the peripeteia effective because we pity his downfall. Thus, a tragedy, a unity of plot, must be a whole, “that which has a beginning, middle and end”. The Poetics is a fascinating explanation of tragedy which clarifies the elements that make it into its complete form. It is difficult to state whether the construction of the protagonist is more essential to tragedy than the construction of the plot. A playwright can devise a brilliant plotline but to make it effective he must also devise suitably effective characters, and vice versa. Aristotle made it clear in the Poetics that both were of equal importance and certainly Shakespeare constructed his great tragedies so that the process of the protagonist’s downfall was inextricably linked with his characteristics. The Poetics is well worth reading and provides a sound introduction to the nature of tragedy as well as an excellent reference to effective contemporary dramas. It is particularly interesting to note the similarities between some elements of Greek and Shakespearean tragedy and once you have read the Poetics you will be armed with the fundamental conception of tragic drama which will enhance your reading and experience of being part of an audience for the rest of your life.
FURTHER READING You should read the whole of the Theban Plays by Sophocles, which include Oedipus Tyrannus, Oedipus at Colonus and Antigone; The Oresteian Trilogy by Aeschylus (published by Penguin Classics and translated by Robert Fagles) and some plays by Euripides, such as Medea and The Bacchae (also published by Penguin Classics). These texts will provide an excellent sample of extant Greek tragedy from the three principal dramatists. You might also like to widen your reading of Shakespeare’s tragedies by reading, or going to see, the plays mentioned in the text that you are not familiar with. CRITICISM Introduction to Aristotle/Horace/Longinus - Classical Literary Criticism T S Dorsch (Penguin Classics) Introduction to Aristotle - On the Art of Poetry Gilbert Murray (Oxford at the Clarendon Press) This is a very detailed account of the influences of Greek drama on Shakespeare and is really suitable for students of Classical Studies and English, or for great enthusiasts of literature.
© English Association and Louisa Dreisin, 1996 and 2007
6
English Association Bookmarks Number 31
Understanding Shakespearean Tragedy with Aristotle by Louisa Dreisin is Number 31 in the
Bookmark series, published by
The English Association University of Leicester University Road Leicester LE1 7RH UK Tel: 0116 252 3982 Fax: 0116 252 2301 Email:
[email protected] Potential authors are invited to contact the following at the address above: Series Editor Victor Hext Shakespeare Bookmarks Kerri Corcoran-Martin
Primary Bookmarks Louise Ellis-Barrett
© English Association and Louisa Dreisin, 1996 and 2007
Secondary Bookmarks Ian Brinton
7