Student Research Report sample a

 . . . While Aristotle’s definition of the classical genres (tragedy, comedy and epic) is still useful as a tool for comparison, several new sub-genres that defy classical definition have also emerged over time.  These new styles share the characteristics of two or more of the classical genres.  Examples of these new genres include mystery, dark comedy, and romantic/festive comedy.  Because of this societal-evolution the classical definitions found in Aristotle’s Poetics, regardless of their usefulness, are not as applicable to modern literature.  The same holds true for tragedy.  The Bedford Glossary of Critical and Literary Terms defines tragedy as “A serious and often somber drama, written in prose of verse, that typically ends in disaster and that focuses on a character who undergoes unexpected personal reversals,” (483).  This is slightly different from Aristotle’s definition and it shows how tragedy has evolved to a point of division between modern tragedy, which does not always follow the Poetics, and classical tragedy, which usually adheres to the Poetics.

            Many scholars insist that modern tragedy is rare.  This is because, “the Poetics was for centuries the gospel of dramatic criticism,” (Noyes, 14).  One of the requirements of tragedy, according to this “gospel”, is a hero or heroine of high station who falls at the hands of their greatest strength.  “Krutch writes: “We can no longer tell tales of the fall of noble men because we do not believe that noble men exist.  The best that we can achieve is pathos...’ Such feelings cannot be tragic…” (Zink, 169) This is the first and largest difference between modern and classical tragedy.  Most modern works of literature that claim to be tragedies do involve a hero, but he or she does not usually have a high station.  For instance, Troy of August Wilson’s Fences was a garbage-truck driver, not a military officer or politician, and Jessie of Night Mother is an unemployed epileptic.  The other important difference between modern and classical tragedy is not quite so obvious:

Greek tragedy had its beginnings in religious rites; it continued, through all its history, to be represented at solemn public festivals; and it almost invariably chose its subjects from the national semi-religious myths.  Thus it received a religious character, which permeates its very essence.  Noyes, 13

Granted, there are many modern tragedies with religious overtones, like Angels in America, but the element of divine retribution for those that go against divine will is not an issue like it is in Antigone.

            While the aforementioned differences are significant, they are not strong enough to dismiss modern tragedy as merely pathetic.  The similarities between modern and classical tragedy are enough to classify more modern works as truly tragic.  The main reason for this is that tragedy, by definition, “…is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete and of a certain magnitude; …in the form of action, not of narrative,” (Noyes, 13).  When viewed from this perspective, the position of the hero and the method of his fall become secondary when compared to the purpose of tragedy.  For example, O’Neill’s A Long Day’s Journey into Night (LDJ) is a serious play that imitates life while it deals with important aspects of familial relationships.  Thus, LDJ falls under the rubric of tragedy even though the audience would debate who the hero/heroine is and how he or she falls.  Wallace defines this style of tragedy as, “a tragedy about bourgeois life, ‘a tale of private woe’…” (Wallace, 123).

            The other major similarity between modern and classical tragedy is catharsis, the purgation of sadness, fear, and pity.  Classical tragedy achieves catharsis by showing the greatest figures, like heroes and kings, destroying their lives through something like pride or jealousy (handout).  This worked on the general population of classical Greece because their religious orientation since tragic plays showed these heroes as favored by the gods until their mistake.  However, with the advent of movements like realism, catharsis is more likely to be achieved by showing the fall of someone that the audience can relate to.  In Miller’s Death of a Salesman the hero is just a traveling salesman who never reaches his goals; yet the effect that this play has on the audience is truly profound based on the play’s popularity.  Thus, despite it’s differences, modern tragedy achieves the same basic goals as classical tragedy regardless of mechanics. 

            Even though modern and classical tragedy is usually separated by time, it is not unusual to see a modern tragedy written according to the classical guidelines found in the Poetics.  According to Zink though, “To present such a modern hero of disbelief, the artist requires special devices.  These devices belong not to the stage…but to the novel,” (Zink, 170).  This is an interesting concept because 19^th century tragedies, like The Brothers Karamazov or Anna Karenin had heroes and heroines of high station.  However, the ultimate distinctions between modern and classical tragedy, while nebulous and difficult to argue, are still distinct enough to warrant classification and not dismissal. 

Noyes, George R.  “Aristotle and Modern Tragedy.”  Modern Language Notes Vol. 13, No. 1. (Jan., 1898): pp. 6-12.

“Tragedy”.  The Bedford Glossary of Critical and Literary Terms.  2^nd ed.  2003.

Wallace, David.  “Bourgeois Tragedy or Sentimental Melodrama? The Significance of George Lillo's The London Merchant.”  Eighteenth-Century Studie. Vol. 25, No. 2. (Winter, 1991-1992): pp. 123-143.

Zink, Sidney.  “The Novel as a Medium of Modern Tragedy.”  The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism  Vol. 17, No. 2. (December, 1958):  pp. 169-173.

[DC]