Hello friends, this blog is about the definition of tragedy by Aristotle and definition of play by Dryden. I also try to put my point of view about Modern literature.
-> Aristotle's Definition of tragedy and Dryden's definition of play:
The theory of the drama concept is based mainly on Aristotle, which is the fundament of all tragedy and comedy and especially for John Dryden’s concept. Dryden used the theory of Aristotle very strictly.
Aristotle's Definition:
Aristotle defines tragedy is “the imitation of an action that is elevated, complete and magnitude; in language embellished by distinct forms in its sections; employing the mode of enactment; not narrative; and through pity and fear accomplishing the catharsis of such emotions.”
According to Aristotle the noble hero goes from good fortune to bad. For Aristotle, the tragic hero can’t be totally evil or purely good, but instead, must be a character between these two extremes. whose misfortune is brought about not by vice or depravity, but by some error or frailty, also known as “hamartia,” that is, by a fatal flaw.
According to Aristotle the story of a good tragedy should be great and the audience should be able to remember it. That means that the story should be rather simple and comprehensive. Therefore the events in that story should follow a regular change from misfortune to fortune or from fortune to misfortune. These events, which must occur very often, should only happen to one single hero or heroine.
The basis of his concept includes the theory of mimesis. Mimesis describes the imitation of the behavior of human beings. He said that all people differ in their character. They might be either evil or good. The bad and good parts in a human character make them do good or bad things, which are the basis for a tragedy or comedy.
For futher information about Aristotle click here
Dryden's definition:
Dryden lived in the Restoration era, so his thinking and his works are shaped by this time. Therefore Dryden’s theory and concept of drama will be analysed in its historical context.
“ A play ought to be a just and lively image of human nature, representing passion and humor, and the changes of fortune to which it is subject, for the delight and instruction of mankind.”
In definition, we find the word ‘just’. It means as itself, the exact and the word ‘lively’ means it involves the ‘lively’ nature of a person or in which we feel it’s real not a melodramatic type.
Comparison of definition:
Dryden is taking an influence from Aristotle’s definition of tragedy and makes it his own. How he carried over the tradition. Dryden used the words ‘Just and Lively’ image, which means real life. When real life is presented in a play one must be involved in the play. The catharsis comes which is the last part of Aristotle’s definition of tragedy.
In Aristotle ’s definition the line, ‘Tragedy, then is an imitation of an action’. Which says that tragedy is an imitation not an actual tragedy so it is copied. Where there in Dryden’ s definition. The line says ‘just and lively image’ here ‘just’ means exact. As it is real so the image is in mind but how you use it to give it a form of visual to others. So it becomes natural.
The last line of Aristotle’s definition,
"Though pity and fear affect the proper purgation- catharsis of these and similar emotions."
The last line of Dryden ’s definition,
"For the delight and instruction of mankind."
Both are connected when at the end the purgation or catharsis happens in mankind, there will be delight in one’s heart.
In short, we can say that Dryden's definition of play is an improved version of Aristotle' definition.
-> Would you be on the side of the Ancient or the Modern?
Many people must be in favour of modern literature and many people who stand for ancient literature. But I'm on the side of modern literature. There are many reasons behind it:
Modern authors are more experimenting where they take the risk to create something new and trendy. Their work is not limited to revolution or love. They have discussed that the surrounding, future, art, matter, love, sorrow, and a lot of things. They try to influence people with their work and creativity. It’s also about making people understand how to keep up with society. Modern literature is based on the foundation of classic literature which makes it more impactful.
In this both literature, we find the generation gap. Modern literature is all about what today's generation want. It is about current topics and issues. That's why people connect themselves with literature.
Modern literature includes believable stories with a base on reality. The characters are strong and believable, the setting is of the modern era. Stories in Modern literature are considered to be more character driven than plot driven.
Thus, Based on all these reasons it can be said that I'm in favour of modern literature than Ancient literature.
No comments:
Post a Comment