UNIT 4 ARISTOTLE'S THBORY OF TRAGEDY-

Part I I

Structure
Objectives
Introduction
4.2 -.
The Six Elements of Tragedv
Myth (Plot) and Ethos (Character)
4.3.1 Myth or Plato as an Organic Whole
4.3.2 Two kinds of Myths, Simple and Complex
4.3.3 Pathos or suffering
4.3.4 Ethos or Character
4.3.5 Hamartia or the Tragic Failing
4.4 Dianoia and Lexis
4.4.1 Dianoia and the Protagonist
4.4.2 Lexis
4.4.3 Kinds of Style
4.5 Melopoiia or the Musical Element
4.5.1 Application of Music in Theatre
4.6 Opsis or the Visual Content
4.6.1 The Totality of Opsis
4.6.2 Visual Parts of a Tragedy
4.6.3 Greek Gesture and Dance
4.6.4 Dances in the Orchestra of Theatre
4.7 Let Us Sum Up
4.8 Questions
4.9 Glossary
4.10 Suggested Reading

In this unit we shall

look at Aristotle's view of tragedy

analyse the six elements of tragedy
look at the way music was used in ancient Greece
study the concept of catharsis

4.1 INTRODUCTION
It is worthwhile to note that unlike modem theatre, ancient Greek theatre was
religious. Plays were performed only during festivals, a time when society
communicated with its ancestors and gods. This choice of timing influenced the
nature of theatrical performances and the techniques of presentation. For instance,
Greek theatre, not only grew out of dance, it also retained dance and music as
major activities. The strong emotions generated while worshipping the gods and
the ancestors also provided an aesthetics of emotional arousal which we find at its
core. This aesthetic value was formulated as catharsis. These dramatic festivals
were often held at sites such as the temple of Asklepios at Epidauros where
patients were also treated for diseases.

The dramatic theory in the Poetics of Aristotle can be said to consist of four
principles of the ancient classificatory system. Firstly, the concept of mimesis,
which is common to all fine arts; secondly, the treatment of the various genres of
poetry, namely epic, tragedy and comedy; thirdly, the division of tragedy into six
elements-plot (muthos), character (ethos), thought (dianoia), language (lexis),
music (melopoiia), and spectacle (opsis); and fourthly, cryptic statement about
catharsis upheld by Western critical tradition as a principle of Aristotelian
aesthetics. The subject of mimesis can be considered in two ways, as a principle
and as a practice. As a principle, mimesis is a kind of human urge that creates
drama and is endowed with aesthetic values. As a practice mimesis is a way of
handling theatrical devices to reflect the principle.

In the history of western literature and aesthetics, all these four concepts, namely
mimesis, genre classification, the six elements of tragedy or drama, and finally
catharsis have become the focal point of discussion right from the Renaissance to
the present day. The Aristotelian principles of art are none other than these four.
All the theories of art such as the Elizabethan, the Neo-Classical, the Romantic
and the Modernist have taken up the issues of debate from here. The westen
notions of the real, the natural, the good and the beautiful or the moral have
related and re-interpreted Aristotle. It is, therefore, very essential that we clearly
understand the primary notions of mimesis, genres, tragic elements and catharsis
as initially defined by Aristotle so that we can see their evolution in the later
developments in Western culture.

In the last Unit, we explored the concepts of mimesis and commented on the
genres, now we shall examine the six elements of tragedy (by extention of all
drama) that make up the structure of the play. In other words, we shall see how
through the six elements, a play makes an imitation or mimesis of life and brings
about catharsis.

4.2 THE SIX ELEMENTS OF TRAGEDY

The six elements of tragedy are to be seen as separate only for the sake of
analysis. On the stage they form a unity. Again for the sake of convenience they
have been defined by Aristotle as internal and external. Plot, character and
thought are subjective, hence internal. They are not as obvious as the visual and
auditory content of theatre such as diction, music and spectacle. Nor is it to be
imagined that any one of them is more important than the other. When Aristotle
calls myth 'the soul of tragedy', he does not mean that other elements are
dispensable or less essential. The myth only holds together the other elements
of the play structurally. In terms of the total performance, a play has a very
complicated structure which consists of all the speaking, gesturing, dancing,
singing and moving that goes on in the performing area. Yet the series of
episodes or the story, has been regarded as the basic structure of a play even
though it is merely the ground upon which many complex patterns are raised.

4.3 MYTH (PLOT) AND ETHOS (CHARACTER)

For the ancients, mythos or myth simply meant the story, commonly translated
into English as plot. However, it is better to use the term myth, not only as it
retains the flavour of the original meaning, but it also keeps us away from
confusing it with the usual meaning of the modem term "plot" which implies
intricate turn of events, full of surprise and suspense. As there was no convention
in ancient times of writing on events of everyday life for the serious genre of
tragedy, the stories of only some famous houses could be the subject of tragedy.
The story, thus, came from the collective memory of the culture that created and
nutured them.

As is well known, Aristotle has called myth 'the soul of tragedy'. To understand
this we must keep in mind that dramatic action (praxis) in ancient drama
consisted not so much of characterisation or portrayal as was the case in the later
 European drama, but was an imitation (mimesis) of an action made up of a series Aristode9sTheory of
Tragedy-Part I
of dramatic events or episodes.
1
I 4.3.1 Myth or Plot as an Organic Whole
,
I

In a play, the aim was to show a passage from an earlier state of being of the
1 protagonist to hisher later state. This passage of episodes or adtion has been
called myth. The structure of this myth or plot is seen by Aristotle as an organic
whole, almost like the body structure of a living animal. This is indicated in his
definition of tragedy, which like an animal's body, must have a definite shape or a
magnitude :

"Tragedy is an imitation of an action that is complete, and whole, and of

certain magnitude, for there may be a whole that is wanting in magnitude.
A whole is that which has a beginning, a middle, and an end... Again, a
beautiful object, whether it be a living organism or any whole composed
of parts, but must also be of a certain magnitude, for beauty depends on
magnitude and order...As, therefore, in the case of animate bodies and
organisms a certain magnitude is necessary, and a magnitude which may
be easily embraced in the view; so in the plot, a certain length is
necessary, and a length which can be easily embraced by memory."
(Poetics VII:3-4)

"Magnitude is in itself the outer structure which is supported by the unity of action
and that the whole, the structural union of the parts being such that, if any one of
them is displaced or removed, the whole will be disjointed and disturbed" (
Poetics VIII:4 ). To give the poet the liberty to create magnitude and wholeness,
Aristotle allows him to make changes in the events. Thus, poetry can modify
history, as it is a more philosophical and higher form than history. Teleology, that
is the unify leading to the end, makes it even higher. The poet can even alter
traditional legends as he is a maker of plots rather than of verses.

The wholeness and magnitude provide a unity of action to the plot. We must
clearly understand that for Aristotle there is only one kind of unity, that of action.
He does not prescribe unities of time and place. These Were attributed to him by
the Reqaissance critics. In the construction of myth or the plot, events should
followlin a manner that seems credible, having an 'air of design,' even in'the
coincidences of the myth to heighten the effect of tragic wonder.

1 4.3.2 Two Kinds of Myths, Simple and Complex

Aristotle defines, two kinds of plots, the simple (aploi) and the oomplex
(peplegmenoi).The first is without reversal of fortune (peripetid) and recognition
of a past act or identity or person (anagnorisis) and the second has both. This
analysis of the myth is not applicable to tragedy alone. Just as magnitude and
unity of action would be required in any myth, tragic or comic, peripetia and
anagnorisis are not for tragedy only. Peripetia can be useful in comedy too, and so
can anagnorisis. Peripetia "is a change by which action veers to its opposite,
subject always to the rule of probability or necessity." It creates the great ironic
effect. The latter is defined as a "change from ignorance to knowledge, producing
love or hate between the persons destined by the poet to face good or bad
fortune." On the whole the system can be employed both for tragic and comic
myths, or for the tragi-comic ones like Euripides' Helen, where peripetia and
anagnorisis clearly work together towards a happy ending.

, 4.3.3 Pathos or Suffering

The third part of a myth, that is the scene of suffering is called pathos and is
Classical Criticism destructive and painful action, such as death on the stage, bodily agony, wounding
and the like (Poetics XI:6 ), and is required only in the tragedies where there is a
reversal from good to bad or a final destruction. There was a view in Aristotle's
time that the best tragedies were those in which the final destruction was averted
(Poetics XIII:7). But for Aristotle such was a second rate tragedy. It is obvious
from the Poetics that such tragedies were more popular and that poets often
succumbed to the wishes of the audience. Perhaps such was the case with
Euripides's lphigenia at Aulis. The analysis of suffering, harnartia and tragic
reversal of fortune should not make us think that the unity of action, magnitude
and wholeness were only to serve the tragic purpose of arousing horror and pity.
Magnitude and wholeness are necessary for the comic plot as well, and so would
be the unity of action. These three are actually the basic properties that any plot
must have. .
4.3.4 Ethos or Character
Broadly speaking, characters in a tragedy had to be 'good men' and those in
comedy and satire, were 'mean persons.' So all characters fall into the category of
either admirable people or ludicrous folks. Aristotle has mentioned the qualities
of the protagonist of a tragedy. The first requirement was his goodness, which his
speeches must reflect in the shape of a moral purpose. This was required of even
women and slaves. The second thing to aim at, is propriety. There is a type of
manly valour: but valour in a woman, or unscrupulous cleverness, is inappropriate
(Poetics XIV: 2). Aristotle wishes women to be subdued if they are to reflect
goodness. Thirdly, a character must be true to life; this is a distinct thing from
goodness and propriety, as here described. The fourth point is consistency; for
though the subject of the imitation, which suggested the type, be inconsistent, still
he must be consistently inconsistent (Poetics XV: 3). Most of all the poet should
make a likeness which is true to life and yet be more beautiful ... preserve the
type and yet ennoble it (Poetics XV: 7). In all these externals of a character, the
most essential thing is ethos or that which reveals a moral purpose, showing that
kind of thing a man chooses or avoids (Poetics VII:I ). Putting all these into a
concrete shape Aristotle has given us a pattern of what the tragic hero should be
like. He should be a good man, though not exceptionally good but 'like ourselves.'
As he was always supposed to be of a royal household he would be valourous too.
Moral choices are made by all the protagonists without dithering. It may be a
Hippolytus, Antigone, Orestes or Hecabe. The protagonist does not take too long
to decide. S h e gives the reasons for making the choice, deliberately revealing the
thought process behind the choice.

This willful sharing with the audience was an important feature of dramatic
process and was called dianoia. In cultures which do not foster individualism, the
propgonist was obliged to explain his conduct to his family, friends, the city and
the gods. The greatness of ethos or character was judged by the courage with
which moral choices were made. A confused procrastinator like Hamlet, unable
to make a timely choice, would have been an anti-hero to the ancienkareeks.

4.3.5 Hamartia or The Tragic Failing

Reflections upon the nature of things or an analysis of the human oondition was
not the aim of dianoia. Thinking was for choosing, doing this or that. Action was
the culmination of ethos. But in spite of his best efforts and courageous choice,
Man fails. To explain the logic of failure, Aristotle has used the term harnartia
which means hitting off the mark. It is an error of judgement made inadvertently.

A large number of Greek tragedies have little room even for harnartia.
Andromache, Supplices, Antigone, Daughters of Troy, Electra, Eumenides, are all
plays in which misfortune sets in motion even before the protagonist realises its
presence. In the majority of the tragedies the events are predetermined, a god has Ahtotie's Theory of
decided to destroy someone as in Hippolytus, or family duty holds the individual Tragedy-Part I
in absolute bondage as in Oresteia, Electra or Antigone. Hamartia, then, is a brief
appearance in the action sequence of the hero, as an action which at the time of
doing does not seem that consequential such as Oedipus' killing the old man in
ignorance, or Hippolytus' rebuking the advances of his mother.

The value of hamartia was highly rased in Christian as well as in modem

moralistic tragedy where the downfall of the hero is caused by a cardinal sin or a
serious lapse. In Christian or moralistic tragedy, pity for the protagonist and horror
at excessive suffering, are both benumbed. In the Greek world, there was no free-
will. Eyen by making the right choice the hero could not avert a calamity or
suffering, because his suffering was not always caused by his weakness. It was not
the ambition of a Macbeth, the jealousy of an Othello or the arrogance of a Lear,
nor was it the inner sin that destroyed a man, but instead it was the dilemma
imposed upon him by forces far beyond his control that caused his destruction.
His ethoslcharacter was revealed in his choosing an admirable way to death. Here
suffering comes not from within but from without. Instead of the Semitic, this
was the Indo-Greek perception of Man's destiny. Here, two tenns, moira and
hubris, often used in this context, further indicate the helplessness of mankind.
Moira, literally meaning portion or the family share, metaphorically came to
indicate the share of misfortune alloted by the gods. Hubris meant the daring,
sometimes transgression, that the hero made I committed in his desperate effort to
escape impending misfortune, Hubris and hamartia were rather intertwined in the
course of action. It should nevertheless be remembered that hubris and moira are
not terms used as categories by Aristotle. They were concepts used by the Greeks
to define human behaviour.

-4.4 DIANOIA AND LEXIS

Defining Dianoia, Aristotle says:

"Third in order is the faculty of saying what is possible and pertinent in

given circumstances. In the case of oratory, this is the function of
political art and 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 something, are not expressive of ethoslcharacter.
Thought on the other hand, is found where something is proved to be or
not to be, or a general maxim is enunciated." (Poetics VI:16 )

4.4.1 Dianoia and the Protagonist

The inner questioning that goes on in the mind of a character and makes him
choose one way or another is called dianoia. The ability to choose, the moral fibre
or the courage to choose, is called ethos, but the fennent of thoughts that leads to
the point of choice is known as dianoia. This thought process often becomes part
of the dialogue when a character bevails hislher plight and speculates on the
nature of things. 'For this reason Aristotle insists that dianoia be regarded as an
essential element of tragedy.

The general maxims that a character quotes in support of his decision are also
called dianoia. It is not just any thinking like plotting, scheming, hoping or
wishing that can qualify to be called dianoia, but only a debate which has a moral
or philosophical perspective in relation to the action of the protagonist. The
emphasis laid by Aristotle on this dialectical dianoia is.doubtless connected with
the decisive influence exercised by political debate and forensic pleading in Greek
theatre, the "agon" of ecclesia (assembly) or of the law-courts being reproduced in
the agon of the drama (Butcher 343).

4.4.2 Lexis
Lexis and melopoiia, though, among the six cardinal elements of tragedy have
been given very little notice in the Poetics. This has created the impression that
they had a poor place in Greek theatre. The fact is otherwise. As their function
was too obvious even to the average observer, Aristotle seems to have skipped
them from his serious analysis.

Lexis or language in theatre can be divided into two parts; the spoken word anu
the sung word. The spoken word in the form of natural conversational speech was
not much used in ancient theatre. It was always a studied pitch variation, ranging
from intoned speech to fully embellished song. There was also a variety of usage
in between the intoned word and the song. In Naturalistic European theatre there
has always been a gap between the spoken dialogue and the song or the sung
word.

But as there was no such gap in ancient times, theorists then did not emphasise
much on the distinction between the spoken word and the sung word. Instead,
what was more important to them, was the distinction between the linguistic
content of the word and its musical content. Sound was considered to generate
meaning in two ways, i.e., by language and by music. Language was transformed
in theatre into dramatic discourse through intonation, pitch variation, or song, and
all these three ways combined to make up the ancient actor's dialogue. On lexis,
Aristotle says:

"Next, as regards Diction, one branch of the inquiry treats Modes of

Utterance. But this province of knowledge belongs to the art of Delivery
and to the masters of that science. It includes, for instance, what is a
command, a prayer, a statement, a threat, a qr~estion,an answer, and so
forth. To know or not to know these things involves no serious censure
upon the poet3 art... We, may therefore, pass this over as an inquiry that
belongs to another art, not to poetry." (Poetics XIX,4-5).

This exclusion of Modes of Utterance from inquiry, reveals that Aristotle looked
upon diction only in terms of phonology, grammar and figures of speech, and not
at its conversion into dramatic discourse. If a dramatist need not know what is a
command, a threat, etc., then who else should? It is no wonder that after the
above quoted observation Aristotle proceeds to consider only the functional
aspects of language such as letters, syllables and so forth.
4.4.3 Kinds of Style
We may go on to see what he has to say on a playwright's linguistic style.
Aristotle seems to recommend a balance between the clarity produced by the
usage of current words and the loftiness achieved by extraordinary usage which
avoids obscurity or eccefitricity:
"The perfection of style is to be clear without being mean... That diction,
on the other hand, is lofty and raised above the commonplace which
employs unusual words. By unusua+;I mean strange (or rare) words,
metaphorical, lengthened anything, in short, that differs from the no~mal
idiom, yet a style wholly composed of such words is either a riddle or a
jargon; ...For by deviating in exceptional cases from the normal idiom, the
language will gain distinction, while at ithe same time, the partial
conformity with usage will give perspicuity. ( Poetics XXII, I - 5 )
Some examples of style that he takes up from the dramatic poets suggest that Aristotle's Theory of
Tragedy-Part I
loftiness was much admired by Aristotle. But on the possible ways in which
language, or rather the total verbal content may have been actually performed on
the Greek stage, the Poetics is of little help.

4.5 MELOPOIIA OR THE MUSICAL ELEMENT

4.5.1 Application of Music in Theatre
The Greek chorus and the actors had the liberty to use all the prevalent musical
forms as there was no restriction for ritual reasons. The immense variety of tunes
and melodies with the subtle nuances of tone colour could have provided a vast
area of cultural reference. Tone colour or in other words the subtle variations in
the nature of notes, on which melodic music depends for creating its effects,
entirely, is not so much a matter of universal laws as of cultural associations with
given melodies. For instance, in Indian music we believe in the association of
certain tone colours with seasons or specific emotional states. In fact, the
association is perceived only as a result of training. The Greek dramatists must
have used the same ploy.

Giving an example of cultural memory used by the composer, Stanford says, "If a
dramatist wished to evoke poignant memories from the political past of Athens he
could introduce a tune from the popular drinking songs (skolia) that went back to
the time of tyranny of Peistratids..." (52). But other than particular jingles or
tunes, the modes and their melodies must have been used to introduce new tunes
for songs by the chorus. According to Plutarch (Moralia 1136C-E) and
Aristoxenos, Aristotle believed that Sappho invented the highly emotional musical
scale called the Mixolydian and that the tragedians took it from her and used it
along with the Dorian scale (Standord 51). Aristoxenos is also the source of a
statement in the anonymous Life of Sophocles (23) that Sophocles introduced the
Phrygian scale into tragedy. And according to Psellos, Sophocles also brought in
the Lydian scale (Stanford 51). Such statements indicate that the great playwrights
improved drama by not only providing fresh scripts of high literary value, they
were composers of music and dance as well. As the famous saying goes,
Phrenikos invented "as many dance steps as the waves of the sea."

The value of music was pivotal in tragedy; recognising which Nietzsche observed
that, as the genius of music had fled from tragedy in modem times, tragedy is,
strictly speaking dead. As regards the actual sounding of ancient Greek music,
Leo Aylen is perhaps not too off the mark when he says :"But if an Indian
composer were to set a Sophocles chorus to the raga appropriate to the mood of
the piece, making use of the exact rhythm score that Sophocles has left and using
only a unison tune accompanied in unison by a rough reed instrument, then for
his audience he would have got very near indeed to the music of Sophocles."
(109)

4.6. OPSIS OR THE VISUAL CONTENT

4.6.1 The Totality of Opsis
It has been repeatedly pointed out that opsis has not only the last but the least
place in the Aristotelian scheme. Although opsis should be taken to mean
everything visual in theatre such as formation of dancers in the chorus, the ,
costumes, movements, gestures and hand signs (cheironomia) of the actors, still it
is commonly believed that Aristotle had limited the sense of the word to stage
scenery only. The totality ohpsis was immense in Greek theatre. Any study in
Classical Criticism this area should not underestimate its richness and function on account of
Aristotle's negligence in describing these Aspects of performance. Even though,
Aristotle has not written at length on the subject of gestures, references were
however made to it by other classical authors like Athenaeus and Lucian in the
context of dance in ancient Greece.

4.6.2 Visual Parts of a Tragedy

Let us begin by recapitulating a Greek performance. All plays began with a
prologue, spoken by a single actor or at times by two. The chorus then entered,
often from the right side (spectator's view) singing and dancing. The tragic chorus
consisted of five files (xuga) and three ranks (stoikhoi) and the comic of six files
and four ranks. Sometimes, this entry, called parodos, may have been in a single
file (Pickard-Cambridge,Dramatic Festivals of Athens, 239-40). As in all choric
arts the flute player came in with the chorus. Positioned in the orchespa, the
chorus danced till the parodos was over. Their leader, called the korypkaios, was
number three in the first file which also Was the closest to the stage area.

Then followed a dramatic episode or an act in which the actors spoke or sang to
each other to which the chorus also reacted mostly in song. At the end of the
episode the actors withdrew and the chorus sang a choral ode, a system consisting
of ssophe, antistrophe and epode. This unique feature of Greek drama was pure
song, dance and mime, with the flute player also playing and dancing. The chorus
presented a dramatic response, in continuation of the dramatic action, to the
episode, making it an expression of hope, sorrow, despair or happiness through
.
song 'and dance. The actors, then, entered again and the same cycle was repeated.

On the termination of the final episode came the part of performance called
exodos, consisting of an ode system, some dialogue and a brief song: The chorus
then went out of the amphitheatre in the same formation of files and ranks. Thus
we find that acting was sharply divided between the actors and the chorus.
Whereas the actor or actors would speak, recite or sing, the chorus with some
exceptions, only sang. As is commonly accepted now, their song was always
accompanied by dance.

4.6.3 Greek Gesture and Dance

We know that the use of gestures for orators was prescribed by the Greek
rhetoricians for arousing emotions and effective communications. Quintilian has
given an account of how the head, face, arms, body and feet can be made to
express joy, sorrow, humility, abhorrence, wonder and many other emotions. But
the orator, he suggests, should not use mimetic gestures and be as unlike a dancer
as possible. He adds that an actor should not even attempt to imitate the voice of
the character (Stanford 85).

One can infer that gestures of many kinds must have been employed as revealed
by a close reading of some plays. From Libation Bearers (lines 24-31), Suppliant
Women (lines 110-1I), Electra (lines 146-50) actions like veiling the head,
beating the hand and the body vigorously, tearing and hair pulling, gnawing the
face with finger-nails and tearing garments can be inferred easily. Supplicants
would frequently postrate themselves to touch the protector's knees and extreme
appeals of pity by women would be accompanied by the gesture of baring their
breasts, as was done by Clytemnestra in the Libation Bearers (lines 896-98) and
by Electra in Electra (line 1207). and by Polyxena in Hecuba (line 560).
Embracing, caressing, hand-clapping and even kissing, in spite of a mask, are
described in Alcestis (line 402); Trojan Women (line 763); Phonecian Women
(line 1671) and Herakks (line 186).
 Aristotle's Theory of
4.6.4 Dances in the Orchestra of Theatre Tragedy-Part I
The names of a very large number of dances from the Cretan to the Greco-Roman
are known. "As we have seen, a great deal of information has come down to us on
the dance of Greek tragedy. However, the exact appearance of those dances eludes
us. No director of a Greek tragedy can claim to set forth an 'authentic'
reproduction of the ancient dances"(Law1er 85). However, in an attempt to
vaguely visualise what the d y c e movements
*
may have looked like we can draw
upon some sources of information.

~irstly,from brief descriptions of various dances that were performed during

ritual, festive and sportive occasions; from dances included in art forms like
dithyramb and tragedy, nomoi, paean; and from entertainment occasions dances
like huporkhema and pantomimi performed by professionals. Secondly, there is a
rudimentary dance theory to be found in the writings of some late authors like
Athenaeus, Lucian, Pollux, Quintilian and Plutarch. They all indicate that a
definite choreology for the purpose of teaching and practising dance existed in
Greece. Sophocles is said to have written a book on it which is now lost (Lawler
82). In Greece, as in all cultures, dances of the people may have been transmitted
informally. Dances of shrines and mysteries may have been taught in Thiasoi but
in the theatrical tradition a choreology must have been essential to sophisticate
and assimilate popular dances into theatric dance forms.

4.7 LET US SUM UP

Aristotle, provides a framework for us to see the art of tragedy in its totality and as
a theatrical experience. While Plato's primary concern was to see the function of
tragedy in the utopian state, Aristotle's aim was to analyse tragedy as it was to be
found in Greek culture. The idealistic fervour of the master comes to be
contrasted with the empirical zest of the disciple. Not that Aristotle was not keen
to define the best kind of.tragedy and suggest standards'of better writing, but his
faith in'the utility of tragedy was steady.

Aristotle not only described the genre of tragedy in its six parts, he recorded how
these diverse parts made a whole. In spite of the fact that he dwelt very little on
the musical and dance related parts of the art as they were practiced in his time,
his, enumeration of these as essential elements preserves for all future generations
the true nature of Greek tragedy. But for Aristotle's statement we would have
forgotten the input of spectacle and music and remembered only the value of plot
as what survives through time is the verbal play, text and not the practical art of
production representing the unity of word, gesture, dance and music.

4.8 OUESTIONS
1. What do you think is the purpose of Aristotle in defining tragedy ?

2. Explain hamartia, magnitude and myth.

3. Comment on the value of husic in Greek tragedy.

.4. Is there any contemporary relevance of the Aristotelian scheme of the

elements of tragedy?

4.9 GLOSSARY
komos
A festive procession with all kinds of ritual exhuberance.
Maenads
Feminine worshippers of the cult of Dionysus, who gathered in the woods outside
the city and did not allow any man to participate in the rituals.

phallika
A ritual song-dance held during the rural fesivals of Dionysus celebrating the male
organ.
4.10 SUGGESTED READING
Primary Text
Butcher, S.H. Aristotle's Theory of Poetry and Fine Art. Trans. and with notes.
Introduction by John Gassner. 4th Ed. USA: Dover Pub. Inc., 1951.

Secondary Reading
Adrados, Francisco R. Festival, Comedy and Tragedy: Thi! Greek Origins of
Theatre. Leiden: E.J. 3ril1, 1975.

Aylen, Leo. The Greek Theatre. London: Farleigh Dickinson, Udiv. Press, 1985.

Gupt, Bharat. Dramatic Concepts : Greek and Indian . A Stqdy of the Poetics
and the Natyasastra. Delhi : DK Printworld (P) Ltd. , 1994,

Halliwell, Stephen. Aristotle's Poetics . London Duckworth, 1946.

Morrison, Karl F. The Mimetic Tradition of Reform in tthe West. New Jersey:
U of Princeton, 1982.

.
Lawler, L.B. The Dance in Ancient Greece London: Adam and Charles, 1964. .

Pickard-Cambridge, A. Dramatic Festivals of.Athens . 2nd Ed. revised by John

Gould and D.M. Lewis. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973.

Stanford, W.B. Greek Tragedy and the Emotions: An Introductory Study.

London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983.

Webster, T.B.L. Greek Theatre Production . London: Methue'n, 1956.