Aristotle Poetics

Aristotle proposes to discuss poetry, which he defines as a means of mimesis, or imitation, by means of
language, rhythm, and harmony. As creatures who thrive on imitation, we are naturally drawn to poetry.

In particular, Aristotle focuses his discussion on tragedy, which uses dramatic, rather than narrative, form,
and deals with agents who are better than us ourselves. Tragedy serves to arouse the emotions of pity and
fear and to effect a katharsis (catharsis) of these emotions. Aristotle divides tragedy into six different
parts, ranking them in order from most important to least important as follows: (1) mythos, or plot, (2)
character, (3) thought, (4) diction, (5) melody, and (6) spectacle.

The first essential to creating a good tragedy is that it should maintain unity of plot. This means that the
plot must move from beginning to end according to a tightly organized sequence of necessary or probable
events. The beginning should not necessarily follow from any earlier events, and the end should tie up all
loose ends and not produce any necessary consequences. The plot can also be enhanced by an intelligent
use of peripeteia, or reversal, and anagnorisis, or recognition. These elements work best when they are
made an integral part of the plot.

A plot should consist of a hero going from happiness to misery. The hero should be portrayed consistently
and in a good light, though the poet should also remain true to what we know of the character. The misery
should be the result of some hamartia, or error, on the part of the hero. A tragic plot must always involve
some sort of tragic deed, which can be done or left undone, and this deed can be approached either with
full knowledge or in ignorance.

Aristotle discusses thought and diction and then moves on to address epic poetry. Epic poetry is similar to
tragedy in many ways, though it is generally longer, more fantastic, and deals with a greater scope of
action. After addressing some problems of criticism, Aristotle argues that tragedy is superior to epic
poetry.

Summary
Aristotle proposes to approach poetry from a scientific viewpoint, examining the constituent parts of
poetry and drawing conclusions from those observations. First, he lists the different kinds of poetry: epic
poetry, tragedy, comedy, dithyrambic poetry, and most flute-playing and lyre-playing. Next, he remarks
that all of these kinds of poetry are mimetic, or imitative, but that there are significant differences
between them.

The first kind of distinction is the means they employ. Just as a painter employs paint and a sculptor
employs stone, the poet employs language, rhythm, and harmony, either singly or in combinations. For
instance, flute-playing and lyre-playing employ rhythm and harmony, while dance employs only rhythm.
He also addresses the question of non-poetic language, arguing that poetry is essentially mimetic, whether
it is in verse or in prose. Thus, Homer is a poet, while Empedocles, a philosopher who wrote in verse, is
not. While Empedocles writes in verse, his writing is not mimetic, and so it is not poetry. In tragedy,
comedy, and other kinds of poetry, rhythm, language, and harmony are all used. In some cases, as in lyric
poetry, all three are used together, while in other cases, as in comedy or tragedy, the different parts come
in to play at different times.
The second distinction is the objects that are imitated. All poetry represents actions with agents who are
either better than us, worse than us, or quite like us. For instance, tragedy and epic poetry deal with
characters who are better than us, while comedy and parody deal with characters who are worse than us.

The final distinction is with the manner of representation: the poet either speaks directly in narrative or
assumes the characters of people in the narrative and speaks through them. For instance, many poets tell
straight narratives while Homer alternates between narrative and accounts of speeches given by
characters in his narrative. In tragedy and comedy, the poet speaks exclusively through assumed
characters.

Analysis
The very first paragraph of the Poetics gives us a hint as to how we should approach the work: it is meant
to be descriptive rather than prescriptive. That is, Aristotle is not so much interested in arguing that poetry
or tragedy should be one thing or another. Rather, he wants to look at past examples of poetry—tragedy
in particular—and by dissecting them and examining their constituent parts to arrive at some general
sense of what poetry is and how it works.

This is the same scientific method that Aristotle employs so successfully in examining natural
phenomena: careful observation followed by tentative theories to explain the observations. The
immediate and pressing question, then, is whether Aristotle is right in applying his scientific method to
poetry. Physical phenomena are subject to unchanging, natural laws, and presumably a careful study of
the phenomena matched with a little insight might uncover what these natural laws are. Aristotle seems to
be proceeding with the assumption that the same is true for poetry: its growth and development has been
guided by unchanging, natural laws, and the Poetics seeks to uncover these laws.

The results are mixed. In some cases, what Aristotle says seems quite right, while in others his
conclusions seem very limiting. We will examine this question further when Aristotle delves deeper into
the elements of tragedy.

Before going any further, we might do well to clarify some terms. When Aristotle talks about "art" or
"poetry" he is not talking about what we might understand by these words. "Art" is the translation of the
Greek word techne and is closely related to "artifice" and "artificial." Art for Aristotle is anything that is
made by human beings as opposed to being found in nature. Thus, poetry, painting, and sculpture count
as "art," but so do chairs, horseshoes, and sandals.

Our conception of "art" is more closely (but not exactly) approximated by what Aristotle calls "mimetic
art." The Greek word mimesis defies exact translation, though "imitation" works quite well in the context
of the Poetics. A chair is something you can sit in, but a painting of a chair is merely an imitation, or
representation, of a real chair.

Paintings use paint to imitate real life, and sculptures use stone. Poetry is distinguished as the mimetic art
that uses language, rhythm, and harmony to imitate real life, language obviously being the most crucial
component.

This raises the question of in what way poetry imitates, or "mimics," real life. The events in Oedipus
Rex did not actually happen in real life. In fact, it is important that tragedy be fictional and that there be
an understanding that the events taking place on stage are not real: no one should call the police when
Hamlet kills Polonius. Still, tragedy deals with humans who speak and act in a way that real humans
conceivably could have spoken and acted. It is important that there be an understanding that the account
is fictional, but it must also be close enough to reality that it is plausible.

There are significant differences between the kind of poetry discussed here and our conception of poetry.
In modern times, the definition of poetry is closely linked to its being written in verse. Aristotle directly
contradicts that definition, pointing out that Empedocles' philosophical verses are not poetry; they present
ideas rather than imitate life.

Further, narrative is essential to Aristotle's definition of poetry. Not only comedy and tragedy, but also the
epic poetry of the Greeks tells stories, as we find in the Iliad and the Odyssey. Both drama and epic poetry
are fictional accounts that imitate real life in some way. On the other hand, a great deal of poetry in the
modern world does not imitate life in any obvious way. For instance, the Robert Burns line, "My love is
like a red, red rose" may be said to "imitate" or represent the poet's love for a woman, but by that token,
Empedocles' verses might be said to "imitate" or represent certain philosophical concepts.

Aristotle is not trying to condemn Robert Burns for writing love poems; he is simply trying to catalog the
different kinds of poetry that existed in his time. They all employ language, rhythm, and harmony in some
way or another, they all deal with people who are engaging in certain kinds of action, and they all involve
some sort of direct or indirect narrative. Whether something is an epic poem, a comedy, or a tragedy
depends on how it fits within these categories. For instance, a tragedy is a composite of language, rhythm,
and harmony that deals with agents who are on the whole better than us, and the poet speaks directly
through these agents.