Mythos (Aristotle)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Introduction

According to Aristotle's Poetics, Tragedy contains 6 parts: plot, character, diction, reasoning, spectacular, and lyric poetry. “Plot (mythos) is the source and soul of tragedy followed in decreasing order of importance by the character (ethe), thought (dianonia), language (lexis), and music and stagecraft”[1]. The mythos, thus, makes up the principle aspect of the tragedy, the exterior element, more easily discernible as it is not subordinated to any other element. It corresponds closely to the idea of tragedy itself in the sense of a dramatic narration. Significantly, Aristotle applies to his initial definition of mythos the same formula employed for tragedy, namely “imitation of action” (mimesis praxeos). The exposition of its general attributes leads one to think of the mythos not as a given static concept, but, in a dynamic perspective, as a result of a process of elaboration of the primary material [2].

[edit] Plot as the Central Element of Drama

Aristotle has many parts that compose poetry and stories. However, according to Aristotle Plot is the most important part. “Of the six parts of tragedy, plot, characters, diction (speech), thought, spectacle, song (cf. VI, 1449b 31–1450b 21)[3] the plot is not only the "most important part" but even "the first principle, and, as it were, the soul of a tragedy; the characters come only in second place" [4]” [5]. The plot makes the story complete. It brings everything together and makes everything a whole. “The prominent quality of the mythos is, in fact, as mentioned by Aristotle through the concept of the ‘whole of a certain magnitude’”[6]. The plot needs to be throughout the entire story. For it to be a good story it must have the plot throughout it and not in just the beginning. “The plot must be "complete" and "whole" in that it must have a clearly recognizable beginning, middle, and end. That is why good plots should "neither begin nor end haphazardly" [7], but be linked by causal necessity or probability; one criterion for the "completeness" of a plot is "that the whole plot will be disjointed and disturbed if any one of its parts is displaced or removed" [8]” [9]. If there are many different things going on throughout the story, the plot should not get lost in the other things that are going on. “The plot should not get lost in trivialities and episodes; such plots are made by "bad poets," who are not able to relate the individual actions to one another "in accordance with the probable or necessary" [10]” [11]. The plot also needs to be a certain length. Plots must be as long as they need to be so that it becomes full and keeps the reader involved. “Just as an organic whole such as the body of an organism "needs a certain magnitude which may be easily embraced in one view; in the same way the plot needs a certain length which can be easily embraced by the memory." [12]” [13]. To get a reader involved the plot must also have an emotional effect over the reader to keep them reading. If there is no emotion then the reader will not want to keep on going. “The emotional effect peculiar to the tragic action is therefore that of promoting the experience of feelings such as pity and terror, which constitutes the ultimate end at which the representation of the mythos aims” [14].


[edit] Parts of the Plot

In Aristotle’s Poetics 11, it tells us that there are three parts of a tragic plot. The three parts include pathos (a destructive and painful action), peripeteia (reversal), and recognition. Aristotle states that all plots have a pathos, but only complex plots have peripeteia, recognition, or both. According to Elizabeth S. Belfore, “to understand Aristotle’s views on pathos, peripeteia, and recognition, one needs to understand their role as parts of the organized structure of the plot that contributes to its function: the production of pleasure and katharsis (clarification) from pity and fear” [15].

Plot is a movement or change between the end points of good and bad fortune, arousing pity and fear, according to probability or necessity. Each of the parts of the plot contributes in its own way to the change arousing pity and fear. A pathos (a destructive and painful action) arouses fear and pity because it involves bad fortune. Recognition and peripeteia also arouse pity and fear because they lead to good or bad fortune. The plot and its parts also arouse pity and fear because they represent unexpected suffering. As a whole, the tragic plot and each of its parts individually arouse pity and fear on circumstances of someone suffering when this is least to be expected. The best tragedy arouses pity and fear from the conflicts between family members, or philoi in Greek, who are least expected to do harm to each other. “Recognition and peripeteia also arouse pity and fear because they occur when not expected because of other events” [16]. “All three parts of the plot contribute to the lesson tragedy teaches the audience: that human suffering is likely even when it appears unexpected” [17].

[edit] Variations on Plot

“In Poetics 13 and 14, Aristotle turns from the discussion of the three separate parts of the plot to a consideration of the plot as a whole composed of these three parts” [18]. In Poetics 13, Aristotle states his idea that the purpose of tragedy is the arousal of pity and fear. According to Belfiore, even though Aristotle uses one set of criteria for good plots in Poetics 13 and a different set in Poetics 14, “these two accounts are more consistent with one another than is often thought” [19]. Aristotle defines plot in chapter 13 of Poetics as a variation of two different “change types” and three different “character types”. A tragic plot is a movement or change between the end points of good and bad fortune, because of that there are two possible kinds of change. The two changes include, change that which begins on good fortune and ends in bad fortune, and change that which begins in bad fortune and ends in good fortune. The three possible “character types” are the characters of “decent” people, people “outstanding in excellence and justice”; “evil people”; and the “in-between man”. Of the six logically possible outcomes, Aristotle lists only four. Aristotle contends in Poetics 13 that the most desirable plot involves ‘An in-between person who changes from good to bad fortune, due to hamartia, “error.” Additionally, Aristotle states that the plot in which ‘An evil person changes from bad to good fortune,’ is the most untragic of all because it is not philanthropic, pitiable, or fearful.’ Poetics 13 deals with good and bad combinations of character types and change. Conversely, Poetics 14 discusses good and bad combinations of a pathos with the knowledge or ignorance of the agent. “Ranked from worst to best, by Aristotle, these are the four logical possibilities of pathos:

1. A pathos is about to occur, with knowledge, but does not occur.

2. A pathos occurs, with knowledge.

3. A pathos occurs, in ignorance.

4. A pathos is about to occur, in ignorance, but does not occur” [20].

The emotional effect peculiar to the tragic action is therefore that of promoting the experience of feelings such as pity and terror, which constitute the ultimate end at which the representation of the mythos aims [21].

[edit] Aristotle’s Mythos vs. the Modern Interpretation of Plot

Aristotle’s notion of mythos in Poetics differs from the modern interpretation of plot most prominently in its role in drama. According to Elizabeth Belfiore’s Tragic Pleasures; Aristotle on Plot and Emotion, Aristotle believed that “plot is essential to tragedy, ethos [character] is second to plot” [22]. Aristotle believes that “psychological and ethical considerations are secondary to the events themselves” [23]. Aristotle’s view focuses nearly all of his attention on the events of the plot, which, in turn, leaves the characters to become merely conveyors of situations rather than humans with convictions and motives. According to Meir Sternberg, Aristotle “restricts the well-made epic or play to a ‘whole’ (holos) action, with ‘beginning, middle, and end’ linked throughout by necessary or probable sequence, so that nothing will follow its cutoff point”[24]). Aristotle’s definition of plot states that every event portrayed and every action taken is a logical progression from previous events. Aristotle’s focuses on mythos (plot) as opposed to a focus on ethos (character) or “conflict either in the sense of struggle within a person or in the sense of the clashing of opposed principles” [25]. Aristotle explains that tragedy imitates the actions and lives of human beings rather than human beings themselves [26]. Aristotle concerns himself with the universally logical events of a plot, rather than the specific and often illogical conflicts between characters associated with those events.

Many of Aristotle’s conclusions directly oppose those of modern narratologists such as Vladimir Propp, who “reverses Aristotle's theory that ‘tragedy is imitation not of human beings but of actions,’ by writing that stories are about characters who act” [27]. Propp also argues that basic story elements, which he defines as functions, “are in fact ethically colored, either in themselves or because they are defined in terms of a character who has specific ethical qualities” [28]. Propp’s viewpoint directly conflicts with that of Aristotle in Poetics because Aristotle states that drama consists of a logical sequence of events that is not affected by ethical dilemmas. G. W. F. Hegel, a noted philosopher and narratologist, believed that tragedy consists of the conflicts between each character’s ethical justification and the resolution toward a greater rational good. [29]. Hegel’s viewpoint places character conflict as the central focus of tragedy, in clear contradiction to Aristotle’s plot-centric theory of tragedy. According to Meir Sternberg, modernist dramatic theory endorses the “open ending, and poststructuralism for preaching endless indeterminacy,” which is most noticeable in the modern absurdist theater [30]. In comparison, Sternberg asserts that Aristotle’s viewpoint directs all complex endings and forms of closure into simple cause-and-effect sequences. [31].

[edit] References

  1. ^ Rizzoli, Renato. Representation and Ideology in Jacobean Drama; The Politics of the Coup De Theatre. New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1999.
  2. ^ Rizzoli 6
  3. ^ Aristotle, W. Rhys Roberts, and Ingram Bywater. The Rhetoric and Poetics of Aristotle. New York: The Modern Library, 1984.
  4. ^ 1450a 15 and 38–39
  5. ^ Eggs, Ekkehard. "Doxa in Poetry: a Study of Aristotle's Poetics." Poetics Today 23 (2002): 395-426.
  6. ^ Rizzoli 7
  7. ^ 1450b 33–34
  8. ^ 1451a 32–33
  9. ^ Egg, 408
  10. ^ 1451b 35
  11. ^ Egg, 409
  12. ^ 1451a 3–60
  13. ^ Egg, 409
  14. ^ Rizzoli 11
  15. ^ Belfiore, Elizabeth S. Tragic Pleasures; Aristotle on Plot and Emotion. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1992.
  16. ^ Belfiore 134
  17. ^ Belfiore 134
  18. ^ Belfiore 160
  19. ^ Belfiore 161
  20. ^ Belfiore 171
  21. ^ Rizzoli 11
  22. ^ Belfiore, Elizabeth. "Narratological Plots and Aristotle's Mythos." Arethusa 33 (2000): 37-70.
  23. ^ Belfiore 40
  24. ^ Sternberg, Meir. "Universals of Narrative and Their Cognitivist Fortunes (II)." Poetics Today 24 (2003): 517-638.
  25. ^ Belfiore 64
  26. ^ 1450.a:16-17
  27. ^ Belfiore 45
  28. ^ Belfiore 46
  29. ^ Roche, Mark W. "Introduction to Hegel's Theory of Tragedy." PhaenEx 1 (2006): 11-20.
  30. ^ Sternberg 519
  31. ^ Sternberg 524