Aristotle - Poetics - Sep 2019 Buddy Read

[Cynda]

Pondering this Quote from Chapter 8:

[P]oetry is some something more philosophic and of graver import than history, since its statements are of the nature rather than of universals.

hmmmm. . . . I pondered this for a day or so, but am now thinking that this quote is a bit like comparing apples and oranges.

[Cynda]

I have more notes to post. But I am tired by the thoughts. I am finding myself wanting to read and think, putting the thoughts into the mental mill and letting them work out. So I am needing to slow down our reading--or at least mine. I have read through 13 and have started 14 and find many thoughts to consider. I will be reading and thinking into the Catch Up and Final thoughts Week. But i do not think yet to expand reading time. I just maybe reading after you.

Thank you for reading with me Kathleen and for helping us Ian.

[Kathleen]

Excellent thoughts, Cynda! I stopped in case you wanted to wait, so now I will go on to reading Chapter 6.

I have a couple comments though on what you brought up.

Regarding description of comedy, from my translations, Golden: “What we mean by ‘the ridiculous’ is some error or ugliness that is painless and has no harmful effects.” Or Potts: “The causes of laughter are errors and disgraces not accompanied by pain or injury.” I rather like this distinction! Never thought of it that way before.

And as to thought, this from Potts commentary: “’Thought’ in Aristotle’s system, is the personal part of man’s inner life: his reasonings (What is the truth of the matter?); his sentiments; his mental images.”

So yes, musing thoughts—one of my favorite aspects of novels. I think of Eliot too, but primarily Virginia Woolf. But I am thinking in terms of a broader definition of tragedy, for modern day purposes, to include all fiction that isn't comedy.

I'll be back with more about melody after I read. I see a reference connecting it with the sensual, which I find really intriguing. More soon.

[Cynda]

(My Tablet is Back. Joy is Mine.)

Yes! to the melody of tragedy being connected to the tragedy--at least sometimes. I am thinking of 20th/21st-century movie production tragedies. Our tragedies are not so dramatic, not where all main characters die.

Titanic movie of 1997
Dancing in 3rd class then bedding in the cargo area

The Green Mile movie of 1999
Paul Edgecomb (Tim Hanks) and his wife dance and go to bed together.

Mystic River movie of 2003
The organized crime men and their wives dance at a party they organized, or some party they attend.

Good Catch Kathleen.

[Cynda]

Reading Chapter 12.

Seems that the Parts of Tragedy listed above--please me if I am wrong--are the main sections and within thise main sections are

Prologue
Episode
Exode (Exodus?)
Choral Section.

It seems that some of these elements were used in the The Trojan Womenby Euripides which I reread earlier this year. I borrowed it from the library, so I can only use memory to access that ancient play.

I do remember backstory being told/indicated about the the two daughters of Hecuba and of Helen of Troy, three backstories which would serve as prologues.

Then the action of each of the three women separately having her drama or her separate episode. After which the three women each separately exited the stage for their exodes

Finally came the choral section during which a group of Trojan women tormented Hecuba with their grief and fear.

That is ancient drama. For contemporary drama, I will have to ponder.

[Cynda]

Reading Chapter 13.
I have gained a hint of personal rather than just intellectual appreciation for Aristotle. He defends Euripides who I have a basic appreciation of. According to Aristotle, critics of Euripides are right in saying that Euripes does not always follow the received and perceived guidelines to the writing of tragedies. (Rhetorical: Is that true?) Yet Euripides is the most tragic of the writers of tragic writers. I would have to agree against what I have read and watched. The Trojan Women movie (1971) floored me when I first watched as a young mother. I had a visceral reaction to much of the play.

[Cynda]

Reading Chapter 14.
I smirk the smallest bit when Aristotle says which stories a writer of tragedies should seek to write. I smirk because while I can tell the Universe that I want to write such-and-such type of small literary piece/s, the Writers' Universe will send the stories it chooses to send. Elizabeth Gilbert tells the story of how a story came to her as she was driving on a freeway, the story completely unbidden and demanding to be written. A tradegian, as any writer, only has so much control. Yet Aristotle is correct: What the writer requests, the Writers' Universe will often provide a positive answer in its own good time. (Sound familiar to other sayings?)

[Cynda]

I will do some more reading before returning to post. I will be back in a couple of days.

[Ian]

Cynda wrote: "Reading Chapter 13.
I have gained a hint of personal rather than just intellectual appreciation for Aristotle. He defends Euripides who I have a basic appreciation of. According toAristotle, critics of Eurioes are right in saying that Euripes does not always follow the received and perceived guidelines to the writing of tragedies. (Rhetorical: Is that true?)..."

Euripides had a reputation as an innovator: how well deserved we can't tell, because the great mass of Athenian tragedy, by many hands, has perished, and we are left to compare him to the remnants only of Aeschylus and Sophocles, who perhaps were already "classics" in Euripides's time -- although in fact he was in competition with the elderly Sophocles. (There are some fragments and plot outlines of plays by others, but nothing that gives an impression of what they might have been like in performance.)

Some have in fact blamed Euripides for the "death" of Athenian tragedy, which doesn't seem to have had a rebirth, unlike the "New Comedy" that followed Aristophanes and his contemporaries. But he could hardly have prevented other tragedians from writing in the old style if they had wanted to, and audiences were receptive.

Walter Kaufmann, better known for his work on Nietzsche -- see The Birth of Tragedy / The Case of Wagner -- pointed out that perhaps what needs explanation is not why great tragedies *stopped* being written, but why Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides had appeared in such close -- overlapping -- succession.

[Cynda]

Thanks for the input Ian. What you say tempers what I said. Yet I can keep in my hearts of hearts my appreciation of Euripides as I plan to continue to read his plays. What impresses my socks off my feet: His seeming deep understanding of women's experience, a lovely change from so many of the other ancients who know recognize somewhat but do not love women like Euripides seems as though he does. (Maybe that is why the other writers of tragedy did not approve, because of Euripides' understanding of women? Possibly?)

I have already shown myself how Euripides followed the established form within Trojan Women. I will continue to read and may find other plays he write less worthy of the respect of the ancients.

[Cynda]

I know I once read some books of NIETZSCHE because I spouted quotes and discussed his writing with coffeeshop friends many years ago. I just don't think I can manage reading Nietzche again. The ennui that drove me has long ago subsided.

I wonder. Can one read Nietzsche without having a large dose of ennui?

[Kathleen]

Cynda wrote: "Like this Quote from Chapter 7:

The limit, however, set by the natural nature of the thing is this: the longer the story, consistently with its be comphensible as a whole, the finer it is by reaso..."

I liked this explanation from my commentary, that the idea of proper size or length being "natural" is that it is driven by the plot, that it should consist of the number of incidents needed to move from good fortune to bad, or vice versa.

That really helps me understand the word epic. You have your journeys, and then you have your epic journeys!

And Chapter 8 seems to elaborate on this, that the necessary parts are the ones that move the plot along that up or down line. to good or bad fortune.

I'm only through chapter 8, and won't be able to read much for a few days. Enjoying the posts, though!

[Kathleen]

Cynda wrote: "Pondering this Quote from Chapter 8:
[P]oetry is some something more philosophic and of graver import than history, since its statements are of the nature rather than of universals.
hmmmm. . . . I ..."

I love this idea, actually. It certainly is apples and oranges, but I think his point is that poetry, an "imitation" of an actual "doing," unlike a straight historical account, requires some analysis of what it takes to get from here to there (plot). If I remember right, he said it is more philosophical. All very interesting.

[Anisha Inkspill]

Ian wrote: "Cynda wrote: "Reading Chapter 13.
I have gained a hint of personal rather than just intellectual appreciation for Aristotle. He defends Euripides who I have a basic appreciation of. Ac..."

Thanks Ian for insights on Euripides & Greek Tragedy.

[Kathleen]

Nietzsche is on my "tried, failed, and hope to try again" list, but Euripides is definitely a "must read soon," particularly Medea and The Trojan Women.

I've been running behind, but have caught up through Chapter 13 and should finish before the end of the month.

I love the emphasis from Chapter 9, that in a good plot, incidents need to occur not episodically, but logically as well as unexpectedly. Definintely! Difficult to do, however. Like your comment about Chapter 14, Cynda--the universe must provide. :-) Maybe Aristotle will shed more light on the process in further chapters.

About the chorus and how it divides the "episodes," that made me think of the movie The Four Seasons, split into those four sections, and we get the scenery of each season with the great Vivaldi music in the background between each one. Wonderful. My writer brain is trying to imagine ways of achieving this type of interlude with words only--without the benefit of music or images …

[Cynda]

I am starting up again tonight with Poetics.

Yes, philosphocal, Kathleen. This new book I bought says that this book is more philosophical. I am glad to have that confirmed as I wondered where the rhetoric was. Some articles I have visited have made a rhetorical argument, but they seem to be forced arguments.

I will now be reading from two books. I think I might be once again finding my long and winding way to that magical place where my young brain would allow me to dump in information an the brain would process the information in automatic model. Oh if I do find it, how sweet that would be.

I have Euripides on my list for next years Old & New Challenge. We will see if we want to hook up for buddy reading next year. I am open to it and want to. And I am needing to focus on Poetics tonight.

[Cynda]

As I now read Poetics from Ancient Literary Criticism: The Principal Texts in New Translations, I take the opportunity to read more carefully.

Chapter 1.
I see my limitations as a English reader and never-will-be a Greek reader. I will never know the different qualities of wriitten/written versions of the ancients named here. Will simply have to glean what I can.

Considering Idea: In tragedy the people depicted are worse than what they are and in comedy they are better than what they are.
My Thought: I knew that acting was a matter of highlighting aspects of character. I did not realize that playing people as being better or worse than they are changed the nature of the drama. I had been told--my theatrical training is only as good as basic college course allowed--that a movie can be reset with different lighting and different music to change it from drama (maybe our version of tragedy) to comedy. I don't know. Just considering.

[Cynda]

In the Ancient Literary Criticism: Chapter 1, Section B
In the Modern Library: Chapter 4

In the Ancient Literary Criticism, the translation more clearly speaks of social class differences showing up in writing styles. Basically, the quality of poetry depends on the character of the authors. The better charactered authors seem to write of more dignified, more noble actions than the lower-charactered authors. I am thinking education and opportunity might also be a contributing element.

To be more fair, the translators Russell and Winterbottom have translated Aristotle who did like the older, more traditional ways better.

[Cynda]

In the Ancient Literary Criticism: Chapter 2, Section B, part 3
In the Modern Library: Chapter 7

The parts of the plot should be well-ordered.
In the Ancient Literary Criticism, the translators use the word "amplitude" while in the Modern Library, the translator uses the word "magnitude". "Magnitude" is a better choice for the New York City publishers.
So what was Aristotle talking about? Either amplitude or mangnitude of Beauty. Seems that Aristotle is arguing for the right-sized beauty for the plot. Aristotle is writing of length of play but also something else, not so easily measureable.
About Word Choice. Being modern-day coastal city folk, I understand/can grasp the magnitude of the height of skyscrapers as well as the magnitude of destruction of a major hurricane. Aristotle, however, understood amplitude as refers to either physics or astronomy, subjects more easily grasped when one lived closer to the Earth.

[Cynda]

What I do like better about the Ancient Literary Criticism.
While the Modern Library barely indicates any chapter breaks, the Ancient Literary Criticism published by Oxford Press in New York City, has the text laid out as though it were a detailed outline or well organized handbook.

[Kathleen]

Cynda wrote: " …Considering Idea: In tragedy the people depicted are worse than what they are and in comedy they are better than what they are.
My Thought: I knew that acting was a matter of highlighting aspects of character. I did not realize that playing people as being better or worse than they are changed the nature of the drama. I had been told--my theatrical training is only as good as basic college course allowed--that a movie can be reset with different lighting and different musoi to change it from drama (maybe our version of tragedy) to comedy. I don't know. Just considering. "

Lots of interesting ideas, Cynda! I just have a few minutes, so I'll just comment on this one.

So glad you pointed out about the difference between comic and tragic characters. I thought this idea of better or worse people was foreign to my way of thinking about characters. I think what finally made sense to me was when he gets into the need for pity from the audience, and even more importantly, the need for surprise. So if a bad person does a bad thing, we don't relate and we aren't surprised. The character in a tragedy has to be good (so we can have pity) and do a bad thing that is something we can see ourselves doing (so we can relate).

So interesting about the music and lighting changing something from comedy to tragedy and vice versa. I certainly think I've seen that plenty of times in movies. And now that you say that, something else Aristotle said makes more sense to me. He says that using mise en scene, setting the stage a certain way, is not the best way to create this drama. It's better to do it with plot.

That makes me think of scary stories. There are some that spook you in the moment, with special effects. Then there are some that keep spooking you, because the whole idea behind the story is frightening.

Thanks for sharing and sticking with this with me. I'm enjoying it, and appreciate your thoughts so much! More soon.

[Cynda]

In the Ancient Literary Criticism (ALC): Chapter 2, Section B, part 3
In the Modern Library: Chapter 11

The ACL uses the word "Recognition" while the Modern Library uses "Discovery".
Aristotle cites Oedipus Rex and speaks of how Oedipus learned of his family history. The ACL calls the information provided a "Recognition" while the Modern Library calls it "Doposcovery". Maybe in 1954 whe thisModern Library edition was published, researchers were already "discovering" facts. So the Modern Library went with "discovery". I tend to agree with the ACL. The sensation I get when I read Oedipus os a a sense of Recognition, not Discovery. "Discovery" is about fact-finding, not awareness of the a Truth. For an awareness of a Truth, I would use "Recognition.

[Cynda]

I will start up again tomorrow.

[Cynda]

Kathleen wrote: "Cynda wrote: " …Considering Idea: In tragedy the people depicted are worse than what they are and in comedy they are better than what they are.
My Thought: I knew that acting was a matter of highl..."

Agreed. Understanding this text takes time.

[Cynda]

Kathleen wrote: "Cynda wrote: "Pondering this Quote from Chapter 8:
[P]oetry is some something more philosophic and of graver import than history, since its statements are of the nature rather than of universals.
h..."
Kathleen, maybe you can help me. Ian, too, if he is reading along.
I have been reading and reading what you posted in message 63. I understand half of what you say--the important half. I understand how poetry--what we might call poetry/drama/fiiction--is more philosophical. So thanks for that clarification.
Question: How is poetry graver than history.
Two Ideas: 1. Poetry must maintain some sort of honesty/honor some sense of Truth of history and this honesty/Truth can be challenging to maintain. 2. No field of histiography was in existence. And only starting skme time in the 20th century did professional standards start shaping historian's writing and lectures. So To the contemporary worldview of Aristotle is Aristotle's Truth, not mine, not today's historians'.
Got It.
Thanks for letting me work that out. And what you wrote in 63 got my thoughts going in the right direction. Thanks again.

[Cynda]

Kathleen wrote: "Cynda wrote: "Like this Quote from Chapter 7:

The limit, however, set by the natural nature of the thing is this: the longer the story, consistently with its be comphensible as a whole, the finer ..."

I like this explanation much better than the ones provided by the Modern Library or the Ancient Literary Criticism. The Naturual Nature than the difficult to wrap the brain around amplitude and magnitude.

[Kathleen]

Cynda wrote: "Kathleen wrote: "Cynda wrote: "Pondering this Quote from Chapter 8:
[P]oetry is some something more philosophic and of graver import than history, since its statements are of the nature rather than..."

And a third thought (and like you say, Aristotle's, not mine) is that by showing a story, a plot, you can actually examine more than you can with a straight account. It's so hard for me to grasp, but in a sense it does appeal to my fiction-loving self. I think the idea is that you can imitate people in a story. They're not real people, but they are realistic (and in that sense truthful) situations. And by doing that imitation, you play out a deeper understanding of why people do what they do. When you tell a history, you can't play around with it like that. You can't really show this historical figure as being good or bad and motivated by this or that (like you can with fiction). You can only state the facts.

Quite the slippery idea and I lose hold of it every time I try to think about it! :-)

[Cynda]

Returning to and eading further in Chapter 14 and
Returning to Message 57.

Aristotle seems to somewhat agree with us Kathleen that the writer must find stories in nonlinear ways. We write of Inspiration by Universe and Aristotle writes of Accident.

From the Modern Library:

This will explain why our tragedies are restricted (as we have said just now) to touch such a small number of families. It was accident rather than art that led the poets in quest of subjects to embody this kind of incident in their Plots. They are still obliged, accordingly, to have recourse to the families in which such horrors have occurred.

[Cynda]

Kathleen wrote: "Cynda wrote: "Kathleen wrote: "Cynda wrote: "Pondering this Quote from Chapter 8:
[P]oetry is some something more philosophic and of graver import than history, since its statements are of the natu..."

I get it. You took it a step closer. So now I will see if I can show us both more concretely what we are talking about by using a real-life tragedy: Anne Boylen.

History Book might read: Anne Boylen received a letter from Henry which clearly indicated to Anne his growing ardour. That evening the Duke her uncle called a family council to determine how Anne should best respond. Since Henry stopped by unannounced, the family must immediately develop a workable plan of how to keep Henry interested yet not too interested.

Novel might read: When Anne received Henry's next missive, she sensed his quickening ardour, she stood up in concern. She had meant to play cat and mouse. Yet Henry had become a tiger. Off she ran to find her father so that together they might call on her uncle the Duke. A new game plan had to be developed. And soon. Henry could show up at Hever Castle at anytime. Disaster must be averted and the illusion of chastity maintained.

I have loved any number of dramatic Tudor novels.

[Cynda]

Chapter 15: Goal or Aim of Characters:
Modern Library:

The second point is to make them appropriate. The Character before us may be, say, manly; but it is not appropriate in a female Character to be manly, or clever.

Ancient Literary Criticism:

The characters represented should be suitable: for example, the character is brave, but it is not suitable for a woman to be brave or clever in this way.

Rather recently I reread The Aeneid. A GR friend I read with was concerned that Juno was a clown, a disrespected loony. I assured my reading friend that Juno as a disrespected wife moved the plot forward. All/Many of Juno's antics required Jove to re-evaluate how Aeneas would indeed become founder of Rome. This is true of other literary women's experience. So a lack of respect is hurtfuland damaging, but often moves plots forward.

[Kathleen]

Great example with Anne Boylen. It struck me during my reading that for our examples, we have 2000 years more of events and stories to draw from than Aristotle did!

About chapter 15, yes, that character straightjacket was certainly grating, but it was the belief of the time. I translated it in my head to a more general idea that characters need to make sense to the reader, to follow some kind of logic.

As in this, from Chapter 16: “But of all disclosures the best are those that arise out of the story itself and cause astonishment by probable events … The next best are the logical kind.”

[Cynda]

Good point Kathleen. And emotionally satisfying. Women could be valued by an individual poet, yet that poet must act as though women were less than so the larger story could be told. Sad but true.

[Kathleen]

I love the idea from Chapter 17 that the poet must have madness, but that the madness must be controlled to be able to create poetry.

I’m finding the spelling out of what may seem obvious to be very enlightening. For example, the use of the word “argument” as being outside of the plot and larger than the plot. I think he means it to be the form of the story that the plot fits into, and I might have used the word "theme," but the use of the term argument is very instructive, reminding me it should create a point of some kind.

I also loved this in Chapter 18, about complication and resolution: “Every tragedy consists in the tying and untying of a knot.”

And in Chapter 19, about "thought," this was again, obvious but very helpful to hear, that with the incidents, the parts of a plot “you have to make the point clear without stating it.” Then you use speech to reinforce it.

[Cynda]

Chapter 17 about Plots and Diction
Aristotle says his writing about Plots and Diction.
I say his talking Acting Approaches.

I will quote here only from the Modern Library:

As far as may be, too, the poet should even act his story with the very gestures of his personages. Given the same natural qualifications, he who feels the emotions to be described will be the most convincing; distress and ager, for instance, are portrayed more truthfully by one who is feeling them at the moment. Hence it is that poetry demands a man with a special gift for it, or else one with a touch of madness in him; the former can easily assume the required mood, and tge latter may actually beside himself with emotion.

Former: Maybe great method actors: Meryl Streep and Dustin Hoffman.
Latter: Grand dames and gallants of acting: Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton, amd Vivien Leigh.
Thought this article might also apply: backstage article

[Cynda]

I think the "argument" comes from the rhetor part of Aristotle's being a rhetor-philosopher. I am wondering if today's modern rhetors might use just as equally often the word "dialogue," as in poets/dramatists conducting a dialogue about social ills (a type of tragedy) through a series of short documentaries. . . .

I read and reread that quote, too. If it is not already recorded in GR Quotes, I am recording it now.

[Cynda]

Chapter 18
Aristotle writes of the same aspect of Tragedy, using different language and developing the idea:
From the Modern Library:

Every tragedy is in part Complication and in part Denouement; the incidents before the opening scene, and often certain of those within the play, forming the Complication; and the rest the Denouement.

[siriusedward]

Cynda wrote: "Kathleen wrote: "Cynda wrote: " …Considering Idea: In tragedy the people depicted are worse than what they are and in comedy they are better than what they are.
My Thought: I knew that acting was ..."

Its so interesting to think of what Aristotle is saying and to think of it , in terms of the books we read..all the genres and classics.. and the movies too.
The way certain things still remain same..though the technicality may change , the spirit of it remains the same.

It is really readable..and good to ponder on ...

[siriusedward]

Kathleen wrote: "Cynda wrote: "Pondering this Quote from Chapter 8:
[P]oetry is some something more philosophic and of graver import than history, since its statements are of the nature rather than of universals.
h..."

Do you think , what he means that History is an account of what happened , whereas poetry ( or the fiction of the time) is a thing of imitation based on probability, based on logic, and based on real life ( as in imitation of life) ..but dealing with the probable ..as opposed to dealing with whats happened in the case of history..its not possible to change what has already happened..you can only deal in facts.
But with poetry..you can improvise..make it epic..or not.Make it comic or tragic or the other categories, as long as the things like plot, character, setting etc are satisfied, and its based on logic and its an imitation of real life..not necessary that the names or characters be based on real person either..

[Cynda]

Chapter 19
Seems that

First came the presentation of epic poems. Maybe several days' of presentation time allowed and definitely a too-long time for many.

Later came highlighted sections or parts, such as Aristotle seems to be talking about.

Now in my lifetime, we have had prequels and sequels, retellings and POVs, making of, background, and the history/science behind.

I wonder what more dramatists will come up with.

[Cynda]

Sirisuedward, thanks for jumping in. Exactly. What is reality? What is fact? Since forever, history, philosophy, and stories we call "fiction" were all one and the same or at least not clearly differeniated. Perhaps you have come across titles commonly into the 19th century and even into the 20th.
Ancient myths could be about ancient aliens. (Refer to Gilgamesh)
Paradise Lost (retelling/deeper understanding)
The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.

Recently I came across something that intrigued me: Someone proposed that the Declaration of Independence had been actually signed July 2nd. If that is true, historians will start saying that the representatives signed a declaration dated July 4th.

Fortunately for us, we have a shared reality which allows us to act as though certain things are factual and true. Kind of.

[siriusedward]

At least in theory , Real life and Facts are exactly that what we are living now,the present. Or the past.What has happened.What is know to be true.( Not expanding to include changed histories or false histories).I mean..theoretically, if we consider all histories are based on facts and are true accounts of people and places.

While Fiction or as he says Poetry..is a kind of virtual reality..something based on logic, and is a probable scenario, an imitation of life ( as in a copy) but not life itself, makes sense as far as it goes..but its all happening in our imagination... fist of the poet who wrote it and the in the minds of the reader who reads it..how we adapt it ,for it to make sense to us..

[Cynda]

Right. Probable scenarios. And all dramatized and editorialized. Often with a kernel of the real person/real situation left

[Kathleen]

Cynda wrote: "I think the "argument" comes from the rhetor part of Aristotle's being a rhetor-philosopher. I am wondering if today's modern rhetors might use just as equally often the word "dialogue," as in poet..."

Interesting--still, I like the implications of "argument."

[Kathleen]

siriusedward wrote: "Kathleen wrote: "Cynda wrote: "Pondering this Quote from Chapter 8:
[P]oetry is some something more philosophic and of graver import than history, since its statements are of the nature rather than..."

I love how you explain this, Elena! I'm still a believer that fiction can be more real than facts, in a way.

[Cynda]

Chapter 20
I am mostly bypassing as elements of Greek did not match up elements of English. Yet one concept intrigues me: elements that are "non-significant" and are "not significant." Since some part of 20th century (at least) all geat writers and many good writers strive to make every word used, count. Maybe this wasn't so in ancient Greek language?

[Cynda]

Chapter 21
Having only rhetorical texts and maybe not grammar texts, perhaps that is why Aristotle includes a discussion on grammar, word choice, metaphor, nouns. Also because these various elements inform the comical/tragic elements of the poems/plays.
Can anyone think of other reasons?

[Cynda]

Chapter 22
Sometimes a writer can shape a story by writing and rewriting so that language can most appropriately be chosen for clarity and artistic reasons. Perhaps this is what Aristotle has in mind when he speaks of word choices:

Compounds in dithyrambic writing
Strange words in heroic writing
Metaphors in iambic.

I checked with texts online:

Compound Words. I see hyphenated and non-hypenated compound terms in the dithyrambic verse of the tragedy play The Trojan Women by Euripides. The chorus in Trojan Women is still dithyrambic.

Strange Words. In the heroic The Iliad by Homer, a reader encounters strange words, ones not easily understood by most readers. & The same is true of later days and another culture Beowulf.

Metaphors. If I had a copy of the (Roman) Metamorphoses by Ovid, I would have checked for iambic poetry. I did check Hamlet by William Shakespeare. I read Claudius' iambic speech in Act 1, scene ii where he tells the courtiers of his marriage to Gertrude.

Seems that these options that Aristotle proposes still worked at least into the Early Modern Period. And likely still do. Can anyone name later works?

[Kathleen]

Chapters 20-23 were the least interesting to me so far, but still full of good stuff.

About Chapter 21, in addition to these grammatically-related concepts being necessary for the poet/writer to understand, they get to the other side of the process. On one side we have plot and character and construction of narrative. Then on the other side we have the materials we use to construct that, which are the words we use to communicate it.

Word choice is really interesting to me. It's one of those magical elements that strike me when I'm reading, the way a writer can use a certain (often unusual, or as was used in my translation, "loaned") word, and that opens up a whole new way of looking at something. And I know in writing, it is one of the exciting aspects, when you ponder and try one word but it's not quite right, then you ponder and ponder some more, and eventually you find it! The perfect word for what you are trying to convey.

When he talked about nouns, I thought of Dickens, and the way he got so much mileage out of the names of his characters. And thinking of word use in general, I thought of the contemporary author Ali Smith, particularly There but for the that I read recently, which is full of word play.

[Cynda]

Good Insight Kathleen. Word Choice can be magical.

[Cynda]

Posted this message 100 and 101 in the wrong thread. So re-posting here. I will finish with Chapter 26 tomorrow.

Chapter 23
About the Construction of Tragedies
From Modern Library:

The construction of its stories should be clearly like that in a drama; they should be based on a single action, one that is a complete whole in itself. . . . .Nor should one suppose that there is ahything like them in our usual histories. A history has to deal not with one action, but with one period. . .

From Ancient Literary Criticism

Clearly one should compose the plots here [epic poetry]] to be dramatic, just as in the case of tradegies, that is, about one whole or complete action with a beginning, middle parts, and end, so that it produces its proper pleasure like a whole living creature. Its plots should not be like histories: for in histories it is necessary to give a report of a singl e p period, not of a unified action.

My Comments. I remember that list of classical tragedy unities that my high school lit teacher gave us. It is a list that was referenced in uni in a Shakespeare course when we were reading Shakespeare's tragedies. Watered down, yes. Easy to understand, definitely.