Thomas Hardy's Tragic Stories
For centuries, various writers have endeavored to encapsulate the constituents of tragedy, and create works of literature that adhere to their understanding of an ostensibly universal system of tragic structure, tragic plot, and tragic theme. Nevertheless, the etymology of the word, "tragedy," proves to be as elusive and arcane as the tragic construct is seemingly concrete and unequivocal; indeed, the word, "tragedy," can be traced to the Greek word, "tragoidia," which literally means, "goat-song." We do not know whether actors in the Choral Odes read their lines clad in goatskins, or if goats were bestowed as prizes; we do know, however, that Aristotle reconfigured the more bucolic play tradition, and,
…show more content…
He reformulates his tragedies based on the idea of the Immanent Will, even while he incorporates, so tenaciously, the tragic elements of his predecessors: Aristotle, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, the mystery play tradition, and, of course, Shakespeare. Hardy, therefore, is a figure who stands on the abyss of modern tragedy even while he plants himself firmly in the embrace of his literary antecedents.
Perplexity surrounding Hardy and tragedy is compounded when we consider that he was neither atheist nor religious, and ascribed to the school of meliorism, whose basic tenet was to improve the world through the sympathetic balance of optimism and pessimism, love and loathing, and happiness and pain; indeed, sympathy typifies Hardy's perspective on the world, and we must extend this perspective to his own meliorist vision of tragedy. For Hardy, the tragic stage is none other than Nature herself, and this natural stage ultimately consumes the very characters that he places upon it. If we peer closely into the world of Edgon Heath, the stage that comprises, in some form or another, Hardy's three major novels - The Return of the Native, The Mayor of Casterbridge, and Tess of the d'Urbervilles - we see that the protagonist of each story unites with this mysterious entity by each novel's
Most readers are aware of the many famous deaths or acts of death within the Shakespearean plays. And when the main characters die in Shakespeare’s plays, indeed, the readers would categorize the play as a tragedy. The problem with any tragedy definition is that most tragic plays do not define the tragedy conditions explained or outlined by Aristotle. According to Telford (1961), a tragedy is a literary
Tragedy is an element of literature. It is rooted in Greek mythology and ancient Greek society. Its definition is “A literary piece that consists of a courageous noble character who must confront powerful obstacles, either external or from within”, and “the protagonist usually has a tragic
In literature, a tragedy is defined as a drama where the main character in the end suffers extreme sorrow because of their mistakes or poor judgment. The characters that are fated to suffer the extreme sorrow, the tragedy, are (called) tragic characters. These tragic characters, however, must follow Aristotle’s principles which include:
Aristotle provided us with a Greek theory of what is tragedy; he defines it as “a form of drama exciting the emotions of pity and fear. It is the imitation of an action that is serious and also having with it a magnitude complete in itself. On the other hand the English, Elizabethan, Shakespearian culture had a total different perspective from the
The task of tragedy is to bring ‘Catharsis’ to all its spectators, the belief of witnessing a spectacle consisting of tragic themes, is to provide the spectators a feeling of being cleansed and renewed which purges the spectators’ emotions. However, the idea was to strike pity and fear to all who go to see it. Tragedy is commonly defined as a play involving a main character who is born of royal blood with good intentions, the mistakes they commit leads to their downfall. However, what makes Oedipus The King a highly-regarded piece of Greek Theatre is due to Oedipus not realising that he has already fulfilled his fate by committing the deeds that were
Characters within a Greek tragedy should follow a basic set of guidelines in order to fit the premise of Aristotle’s poetics. The characters presented to the viewer should “be consistent, good, likeable, and of high status and reputation, but do not need to perfect” (Connelly).
Shakespeare’s concept of tragedy is one of which inescapable fate merges with character flaws and harrowing sorrow, which ultimately leads the protagonists’ to their untimely death. The well-known tragedy, Romeo and Juliet, is one of many that fulfils this definition. There is fate as well as character flaws and great sorrow in Romeo and Juliet. It displays these traits through its themes, personality flaws and foreshadowing.
In addition, the story of Oedipus Rex is another outstanding tragic literature. However, compared to Tim O’Brien’s writing style, Sophocles’ work inspires the emotions of pity and fear, and not depression. Normally a person with status, the tragic hero can be placed with sins of the gods or be a victim of given situations. Their fate often establishes an advanced social rank, often based upon exile. Tragedy illustrates the manner in which pride can overturn even the strongest characters, as it makes the readers aware of human suffering.
In the Poetics, Aristotle provides an outline of how the artist is to portray or represent the perfect Tragedy. A Tragedy, of course, was nothing more than a drama, in which the characters appeared "better" than in real life (in a comedy, they appeared "worse," according to Aristotle). Aristotle's Poetics makes several references to other dramatic works to illustrate his points, but he most commonly calls upon The Odyssey to support his argument for how a dramatic structure should be designed. However, along with the Odyssey, Aristotle extensively references Sophocles' Oedipus Rex. Both poetic works were enormously popular in their time (the former had been passed down orally for generations, and the latter won the top prizes at the dramatic festivals). Therefore, Aristotle is comfortable using both to support his viewpoint concerning Tragedy and the Tragic Hero. This paper will analyze the standards that Aristotle sets out concerning the definition of the Tragic Hero and show how Sophocles' Oedipus exemplifies Aristotle's definition of a Tragic Hero.
When hearing the word Tragedy, it would not be surprising if several different individuals would immediately think of several unique examples of the word. Perhaps one is an opera enthusiast who immediately thinks of Puccini’s La Boheme. Another is a war enthusiast that thinks about History Channel’s new episode highlighting the harshest and bloodiest battles of World War One. Even a third one obsessed with Greek mythology could generate a handful of examples of tragedy. Tragedy, like love or comedy is a universal theme that can be used to entertain, enlighten and excite its audiences. William Shakespeare, a world renown writer, was a master of this genre writing works, including Romeo and Juliet, Othello, and Hamlet. Another lesser known
Oedipus is one of the most famous tragic heroes in drama history. His bizarre fate leads him to a tragic defeat that leaves the audience and reader feeling emotionally overwhelmed. According to Aristotle’s definition, Oedipus’ story makes him as a tragic hero. Oedipus is the personification of Aristotle’s characterization of a tragic hero through his ability to maintain and keep his virtue and wisdom, despite his shortcomings and situation in life. Aristotle’s observation of a tragic hero does not reveal the lack of morality or the evil of the character, based on an error in judgment. The tragedy and drama fit the Aristotelian characteristics of Oedipus.
Aristotle defines a tragedy as “an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude”. However, it is his claim that a story must contain six parts in order to be a tragedy that causes much controversy. Many critics argue that William Shakespeare does not follow the guidelines for a tragic story in his famous piece Romeo and Juliet. Their main argument is with the way he presents his tragic elements. But as Lois Kerschen says, “Shakespeare may have altered the classic form of the Greek tragedy, but that does not mean he totally ignored the Greek formula”(261). It is his strong emphasis on certain elements that prove his case. Shakespeare’s contribution of harmatia,
The exact origin of the Greek tragedy genre is not known, and is often debated amongst scholars. Some scholars ha e linked it to the earlier form of lyrical performances of poetry and others equate its arrival from rituals
However, for the Elizabethans, more specifically for Marlowe and Shakespeare, tragedy is not a restrictive view of human excellence or weakness as the Greeks are often inclined to present but an affirmative view of human aspirations whose pursuit brings a glory to the definition of a man. Struggle, conflict, suffering and failure may be the inescapable attendants but the human spirit is not stifled in its pursuits by what attends to them. The ability to withstand
Tragedy comes from the word “tragoidia,” which means “goat song.” In Ancient Greece, the goat was an animal that was widely associated with Dionysus (Powell 68). Tragedy is, according to Aristotle, “an