The Basic Works of Aristotle (Modern Library Classics) (250 page)

⁸⁰
one should consider the possible senses of ‘was stopped there’—whether by taking it in this sense or in that one will best avoid the fault of which Glaucon speaks: ‘They start with some improbable presumption; and having so decreed it themselves,
(35)
proceed to draw inferences, and censure the poet as though he had actually said whatever they happen to believe, if his statement conflicts with their own notion of things.’
[1461b]
This is how Homer’s silence about Icarius has been treated. Starting with the notion of his having been a Lacedaemonian, the critics think it strange for Telemachus not to have met him when he went to Lacedaemon.
(5)
Whereas the fact may have been as the Cephallenians say, that the wife of Ulysses was of a Cephallenian family, and that her father’s name was Icadius, not Icarius. So that it is probably a mistake of the critics that has given rise to the Problem.

Speaking generally, one has to justify (1) the Impossible by reference to the requirements of poetry, or to the better, or to opinion.
(10)
For the purposes of poetry a convincing impossibility is preferable to
an unconvincing possibility; and if men such as Zeuxis depicted be impossible, the answer is that it is better they should be like that, as the artist ought to improve on his model. (2) The Improbable one has to justify either by showing it to be in accordance with opinion, or by urging that at times it is not improbable; for there is a probability of things happening also against probability.
(15)
(3) The contradictions found in the poet’s language one should first test as one does an opponent’s confutation in a dialectical argument, so as to see whether he means the same thing, in the same relation, and in the same sense, before admitting that he has contradicted either something he has said himself or what a man of sound sense assumes as true. But there is no possible apology for improbability of Plot or depravity of character,
(20)
when they are not necessary and no use is made of them, like the improbability in the appearance of Aegeus in
Medea
⁸¹
and the baseness of Menelaus in
Orestes.

The objections, then, of critics start with faults of five kinds: the allegation is always that something is either (1) impossible, (2) improbable, (3) corrupting, (4) contradictory, or (5) against technical correctness. The answers to these objections must be sought under one or other of the above-mentioned heads,
(25)
which are twelve in number.

26
     The question may be raised whether the epic or the tragic is the higher form of imitation. It may be argued that, if the less vulgar is the higher, and the less vulgar is always that which addresses the better public, an art addressing any and every one is of a very vulgar order. It is a belief that their public cannot see the meaning,
(30)
unless they add something themselves, that causes the perpetual movements of the performers—bad flute-players, for instance, rolling about, if quoit-throwing is to be represented, and pulling at the conductor, if Scylla is the subject of the piece. Tragedy, then, is said to be an art of this order—to be in fact just what the later actors were in the eyes of their predecessors; for Mynniscus used to call Callippides ‘the ape’,
(35)
because he thought he so overacted his parts; and a similar view was taken of Pindarus also.
[1462a]
All Tragedy, however, is said to stand to the Epic as the newer to the older school of actors. The one, accordingly, is said to address a cultivated audience, which does not need the accompaniment of gesture; the other, an uncultivated one. If,
(5)
therefore, Tragedy is a vulgar art, it must clearly be lower than the Epic.

The answer to this is twofold. In the first place, one may urge (1) that the censure does not touch the art of the dramatic poet, but only
that of his interpreter; for it is quite possible to overdo the gesturing even in an epic recital, as did Sosistratus, and in a singing contest, as did Mnasitheus of Opus. (2) That one should not condemn all movement, unless one means to condemn even the dance, but only that of ignoble people—which is the point of the criticism passed on Callippides and in the present day on others, that their women are not like gentlewomen.
(10)
(3) That Tragedy may produce its effect even without movement or action in just the same way as Epic poetry; for from the mere reading of a play its quality may be seen. So that, if it be superior in all other respects, this element of inferiority is no necessary part of it.

In the second place, one must remember (1) that Tragedy has everything that the Epic has (even the epic metre being admissible), together with a not inconsiderable addition in the shape of the Music (a very real factor in the pleasure of the drama) and the Spectacle.
(15)
(2) That its reality of presentation is felt in the play as read, as well as in the play as acted. (3) That the tragic imitation requires less space for the attainment of its end; which is a great advantage, since the more concentrated effect is more pleasurable than one with a large admixture of time to dilute it—consider the
Oedipus
of Sophocles, for instance, and the effect of expanding it into the number of lines of the
Iliad
.
[1462b]
(4) That there is less unity in the imitation of the epic poets, as is proved by the fact that any one work of theirs supplies matter for several tragedies; the result being that, if they take what is really a single story,
(5)
it seems curt when briefly told, and thin and waterish when on the scale of length usual with their verse. In saying that there is less unity in an epic, I mean an epic made up of a plurality of actions, in the same way as the
Iliad
and
Odyssey
have many such parts, each one of them in itself of some magnitude; yet the structure of the two Homeric poems is as perfect as can be,
(10)
and the action in them is as nearly as possible one action. If, then, Tragedy is superior in these respects, and also, besides these, in its poetic effect (since the two forms of poetry should give us, not any or every pleasure, but the very special kind we have mentioned), it is clear that, as attaining the poetic effect better than the Epic, it will be the higher form of art.
(15)

So much for Tragedy and Epic poetry—for these two arts in general and their species; the number and nature of their constituent parts; the causes of success and failure in them; the Objections of the critics, and the Solutions in answer to them.

¹
1448
^a
17; 1448
^b
37.

²
For hexameter poetry cf. chap. 23 f.; comedy was treated of in the lost Second Book.

³
1449
^b
34.

⁴
O. T.
911–1085.

⁵
By Theodectes.

⁶
Iph. Taur.
727 ff.

⁷
Ch. 6.

⁸
Med.
1236.

⁹
Perhaps by Sophocles.

¹⁰
l. 1231.

¹¹
By Euripides.

¹²
Authorship unknown.

¹³
1453
^a
19.

¹⁴
1450
^b
8.

¹⁵
A dithyramb by Timotheus.

¹⁶
(Euripides).

¹⁷
ll. 1211 ff., 1368 ff.

¹⁸
l. 1317.

¹⁹
ii. 155.

²⁰
In the lost dialogue
On Poets.

²¹
1452
^a
29.

²²
Authorship unknown.

²³
By Euripides.

²⁴
Od.
xix. 386–475.

²⁵
Od.
xxi. 205–25.

²⁶
Od.
xix. 392.

²⁷
Iph. Taur.
727 ff.

²⁸
Ib., 800 ff.

²⁹
Od.
viii. 521 ff. (Cf. viii, 83 ff.).

³⁰
ll. 168–234.

³¹
Authorship unknown.

³²
Iph. Taur.
582.

³³
Iph. Taur.
281 ff.

³⁴
Ib., 1163 ff.

³⁵
This does not agree with anything actually said before.

³⁶
By Sophocles.

³⁷
Probably Sophocles’
Peleus
is incorrect.

³⁸
By Aeschylus.

³⁹
Probably a satyric drama by Aeschylus.

⁴⁰
A loose reference to 1449
^b
12, 1455
^b
15.

⁴¹
Cf. especially.
Rhet.
1356
^a
1.

⁴²
Od.
i. 185, xxiv, 308.

⁴³
Il.
ii. 272.

⁴⁴
Empedocles.

⁴⁵
Timotheus.

⁴⁶
Alexis.

⁴⁷
Pl.,
Laws
770
A.

⁴⁸
Authorship unknown.

⁴⁹
Il.
i. 11.

⁵⁰
Empedocles.

⁵¹
Il.
v. 393.

⁵²
Cleobulina.

⁵³
Od.
ix. 515.

⁵⁴
Od.
xx. 259.

⁵⁵
Il.
xvii. 265.

⁵⁶
Soph.,
O. C.
, 986.

⁵⁷
1451
^a
23 ff.

⁵⁸
Authorship unknown.

⁵⁹
1451
^a
3.

⁶⁰
Centaur
, cf. 1447
^b
21.

⁶¹
1449
^a
24.

⁶²
Il.
xxii. 205.

⁶³
xix. 164–260.

⁶⁴
Soph.
El.
660 ff.

⁶⁵
Probably by Aeschylus.

⁶⁶
xiii. 116 ff.

⁶⁷
1452
^a
4, 1454
^a
4, 1455
^a
17, 1460
^a
11.

⁶⁸
Il.
x. 152.

⁶⁹
Il.
i. 50.

⁷⁰
Il.
x. 316.

⁷¹
Il.
ix. 202.

⁷²
Cf.
Il.
x. 1, ii. 1.

⁷³
Il.
x. 11–13.

⁷⁴
Il.
xviii. 489 =
Od.
v. 275.

⁷⁵
Cf.
Soph. El.
166
^b
1;
Il.
ii. 15.

⁷⁶
Il.
xxiii. 327.

⁷⁷
Il.
x. 251.

⁷⁸
Il.
xxi. 592.

⁷⁹
Il.
xx. 234.

⁸⁰
Il.
xx. 267.

⁸¹
1. 663.

THE MODERN LIBRARY EDITORIAL BOARD

Maya Angelou
•
Daniel J. Boorstin
•
A. S. Byatt
•
Caleb Carr
•
Christopher Cerf
•
Ron Chernow
•
Shelby Foote
•
Stephen Jay Gould
•
Vartan Gregorian
•
Charles Johnson
•
Jon Krakauer
•
Edmund Morris
•
Joyce Carol Oates
•
Elaine Pagels
•
John Richardson
•
Salman Rushdie
•
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.
•
Carolyn See
•
William Styron
•
Gore Vidal