Page 33 - DENG501_LITERARY_CRITICISM_AND_THEORIES

Unit 2: Aristotle: The Poetics: Introduction, Tragedy

consists in the somewhat childish pleasure of realising that one thing is like another; in revealing Notes
unseen similarities between the unlikeliest objects in the vast, treasure-house of the Universe.
“This gift of metaphor is, indeed, one of the hardest thing to preserve, when literature becomes
literary; and writers like Burns and Synge have succeeded in breathing fresh life into the jaded
style of convention, simply by going back to the plain vigour of the poor and uneducated, whose
minds and vocabulary, instead of dealing in ghostly abstractions, cling still to the concrete”
—(F.L. Locus).
Aristotle’s treatment of Metaphor is clear, concise and inspired.
Ch. XXIII: The Epic

Having examined tragedy in detail, Aristotle now comes to the epic, which narrates in versified
language, and does not imitate as tragedy does. But there are a number of points of resemblance
between the epic and the drama. In epic, as in drama, the unity of the story is a point of capital
importance. It is not enough that it should relate the events of a single period or of one man’s
career. The story must have, ‘a beginning, a middle, and an end’, the parts must be subordinate
and coherent to the whole.
Although in this chapter Aristotle says that in the unity of his two epic stories, Homer shows his,
‘marvellous superiority’ he admits in chapter XVIII that the Iliad with its, ‘plurality of stories’
cannot be successfully dramatised, and in Chap. XXVI that less unity is required in an epic than in
a drama.
Aristotle also praises Homer for the skill with which he uses episodes to increase the length of his
epic, and impart variety to it.
Ch. XXIV: Epic and Tragedy
In this chapter, Aristotle continues with his discussion of the Epic, and compares it with the
tragedy to highlight its salient features.
The epic has as many kinds as the tragedy. It may be simple or complex, its effect may be
predominantly due either to character-drawing or to tragic, ‘suffering’. But obviously there can be
no species of epic, as of tragedy, which depends for its effect on ‘spectacle’. The constituent
elements of an epic are the same as those of a tragedy, with the exception of spectacle and choric
song.
An epic poem can be longer than a tragedy and can present events occurring simultaneously at
different places, which adds to the richness and variety of interest; and it has another advantage
in being able to describe ‘marvels’ which cannot be represented on the stage. It differs also in
metre, since experience has proved that there is only one metre in which epic poetry can be
written—the ‘heroic’.
As in his treatment of drama, Aristotle is practical here also. He keeps in view the application of
his theory in practice. And for this purpose, he takes Homer as the supreme model of artistic
unity, of dramatic construction, of the author’s role in epic (he should speak as little as possible in
his own character), and above all of the art which is essential both in epic and dramatic poetry, the
art of, ‘telling lies in the right way’. Homer, for example, knows how to make the improbable look
probable and convincing. He introduces only probable improbabilities.
The effect of poetry, Aristotle tells us, is due to a logical fallacy so used by the author and the
reader or spectator accepts as real, events which could not possibly happen. It all depends upon
illusion, on what Coleridge calls, ‘a willing suspension of disbelief’. It is futile to present events
which are possible or, indeed, historically true, if in the representation, they become unconvincing.
Probability (i.e. convincingness) is the criterion of success.
The marvellous and the irrational may be introduced, but it should be done sparingly. Plots which
require frequent use of the marvellous must be avoided. The greatness of Homer is seen in the
way in which he hides the improbabilities of his plots by the poetic charm with which he invests
them.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 27