“Poetry, therefore, is a more philosophical and a higher thing than history: for poetry tends to express the

universal, history the particular,” (Aristotle).

Aristotle’s Poetics (350 B.C.) laid the groundwork for the study of Greek tragedy.

The Poetics drew from Greek tragedians such as Aeschylus, Euripides, and Sophocles, and poets such as Homer.

Roman statesman, philosopher, and dramatist Seneca (4 B.C.-65 A.D.) developed the five-act form that became standard during the Renaissance. He also popularized the use of asides and soliloquies.

In the Middle Ages, tragedy was associated with the downfall of eminent people through the turning of Fortune's wheel; their fall shows the caprice of Fortune and the folly of placing trust in worldly goods rather than God's will.

Renaissance tragedy, such as Marlowe's Tamburlaine, drew on Seneca. These in turn gave rise to Marlowe's Dr. Faustus; Shakespeare’s Othello, Macbeth, Hamlet and King Lear. All of these plays dramatize the conflicts of kings, conquerors, and geniuses.

Renaissance tragedy in England was much more flexible than Greek tragedy, often adding comic elements, and in the attributes of the tragic hero. English dramatists and their audiences were fascinated by sympathetic or admirable villains (contrary to Aristotelian principles of tragedy).

Aristotle viewed drama as an imitative art (mimesis). He believed that imitation was an instinctual

tendency in human beings, and allowed us to recognize facets of our world.

“Tragedy, then, is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in the form of action, not of narrative; through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation of these emotions.”

Plot is the most important aspect of tragedy: “But most important of all is the structure of the incidents. For Tragedy is an imitation, not of men, but of an action and of life”.

Tragedy should elicit “fear and pity”.

“The change of fortune should be not from bad to good, but, reversely, from good to bad. It should come about as the result not of vice, but of some great error or frailty, in a character either such as we have described, or better rather than worse.”

A tragic hero meets his or her downfall through a combination of hubris, tragic flaw, fate, and the will of the gods.

Hubris, in modern terms, is exaggerated self pride or self-confidence, often resulting in fatal retribution.

Tragic flaw (“hamartia“) includes accidents and mistakes, wrongdoing, error, or sin.

The tragic hero should be of noble birth—a ranking politician, military figure, prince, king, etc. This produces the feeling of fear; if it can happen to someone of noble birth, it can happen to us.

The hero should not be morally better than an average person. This produces "fear" because the hero is imperfect like us, and we can identify with him. It also produces "pity" because if the hero were perfect or totally good, we would be outraged by his fate.  If he were completely evil, we would feel like he had gotten what he deserved.

1. Plot (the incidents or story line)2. Character (physical, social,

psychological, moral--people represented in the play)

3. Thought/Theme (insights into humanity and life

4. Music (all sound)5. Spectacle (scenery and other visual

elements)6. Diction/language (the dialogue and

poetry)

The noble goals of the tragic hero are blocked by his or her human nature, fate, the gods, society, or nature.

Reversal of fortunes, usually good to bad, though sometimes bad to good. Aristotle believed that the reversal from good to bad was of a “higher” and more artistic nature. Without the reversal of fortunes, the audience cannot experience true pathos.

Recognition—Through his or her experiences, the tragic hero often learns something about what it means to be human.

Catharsis, or purging, of the emotions of fear and pity. Things return to a state of balance.

Whether or not he was aware of Aristotle, Shakespeare’s tragedies generally adhere to the philosopher’s mold for good tragedy.

Free will is important in Shakespearean tragedy. Characters have the ability to choose their path but make errors in choices due to their flawed nature. They are usually more directly responsible for the downfall than an Aristotelian hero would be.

In Shakespearean Tragedy (1904), the Victorian critic A. C. Bradley divided tragedy into; 1) Exposition of the situation2) Beginning and growth of the conflict3) Catastrophe or tragic outcome

The hero’s tragic flaw is a mistake in action or omission. This error, along with other causes, brings the hero’s ruin. Shakespeare's characters bring their fates upon themselves and, in a sense, deserve what they get. Some of Shakespeare's plays (e.g. King Lear) are tragic simply because the hero suffers more than he or she should due to his or her actions.

In The Anatomy of Criticism (1957) Northrop Frye noted five stages of action in tragedy:

1) Encroachment. 2) Complication

3) Reversal4) Catastrophe5) Recognition

Like Aristotle, Shakespeare felt that men of rank (“higher” individuals) held the potential for the greatest tragedies.

Abnormal conditions—war, mutiny, feuds, etc.

Supernatural elements—ghosts, omens, witches, soothsayers, prophecies, etc.

Chance—often linked to the character’s tragic flaw (i.e., allows the flaw to affect the situation and cause the downfall).