LITR 4533 TRAGEDY Midterm Samples 2012 Essay Answers to Topic 2

2. Write an opening draft of Part A (overall learning experience) on final exam (3-4 paragraphs, 1.5-2 double-spaced page equivalent)

Authors & titles (scroll down for essays):

• Umaymah Shahid, "The Beauty of Tragedy"

• Jennifer Hamilton, "The Nature of Imitation"

• Kat Henderson, "Tragedy: The Great and Despised"

• Andy Feith, "What I’ve learned about the Greatest Genre (In two weeks)"

• Susan Newman, "Peeling back the layers of Tragedy"

• Sarah Hardilek, "Solving Societal Problems through Tragedy"

Umaymah Shahid

The Beauty of Tragedy

          Every genre has its own appeal, and while some might be inviting, others might be quite repelling. For me, Tragedy was a genre I had to convince myself to take a class for. My idea of tragedy was always of blood, death, and grief. I could not understand why someone would take interest in something that only caused sadness and where in the end all the characters would die. Yet, while taking this class, I have learned so much about Tragedy and how there is beauty in even the darkest plot.

          During the course of the semester, I have learned that there is more to Tragedy then death and grief. Tragedy is a slightly exaggerated form of human behavior and reality. Tragedy teaches the audience what is truly happening in families and societies, and how the ills within these structures affect our society. It not only depicts reality, but invites the audience to look at human psychology which shows that humans are not black and white but that their personality is shaped through experience. In Tragedy, the characters are not only good and evil, but most characters are a mix of both and though one might have more evil than good, there is always an explanation of that character’s attitude. For example, when looking at the Greek play, Agamemnon, the audience feels a strong sense of repulsion at the way Clytemnestra welcomes her husband, yet when they understand that her reason for killing her husband was to avenge her daughter’s sacrifice, there is a sense of understanding even if there is no sympathy. The real world is not like Romance where there is good and bad, yet it is a mix of the two where one’s personality is shaped through experience.

          What struck me throughout the class is the difference between different genres despite the fact that they interweave at certain points. Comedy, Tragedy, and Romance, each differ in their plot, setting, and character attitude. In Romance, for example, the story goes along the lines of a problem occurring where two people are kept apart and the story just moves along till they get together again. There is a distinct difference between good and bad, and in the end, there is usually a “happily ever after”. In Tragedy on the other hand, there is a societal ill which plagues the society and the story ends with the silencing or banishment of the hero. There are no good or bad characters in Tragedy, instead, each character is a mix of both and though in the end the hero dies or is banished, the audience feels a sense of grief as well as contentment that the hero was rid of his/her pain and was honored by others. As Nietzsche states in The Birth of Tragedy that true tragedy gives a “metaphysical consolation that whatever superficial changes may occur, life is at bottom indestructibly powerful and joyful” (Nietzsche 39).Though Tragedy is very hard to swallow, it is a reminder that despite all unfortunate events, life will remain on its course and will continue to thrive. And though the hero might have died, there is peace in his/her death. For example, in Hamlet, though Hamlet dies in the end, the audience feels a peace that the evil King died, Hamlet died knowing everything was well, and Fortinbras honored Hamlet for his heroism.

          Tragedy is especially striking because when studying it, one comes to see that it is not all blood and gore. Though there are some very disturbing scenes, such as Oedipus stabbing himself blind, tragedy is about the conflict, the solution, and the method of finding the solution which usually ends in the hero’s life ending. Throughout this class thus far, we have discussed the different aspects of tragedy and how though it is a very sad genre, there is a lot more to it.

Works Cited

Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Birth of Tragedy. England: Penguin Classics, 1993. Print.

Jennifer Hamilton

Essay 2: The Nature of Imitation

          When I began the course on tragedy I initially believed I had a decent understanding of the genre. However, after only a few weeks I realized there is so much more to this subject than I originally thought. The common preconception of tragedy is that everyone dies at the end. While that may be true in many tragedies, that is not the ultimate meaning to be taken away. While I have read quite a few of our texts in other courses, it is only now that I have been able to begin piecing together the information. In mythology I had become familiar with Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides but only as a primary source to Greek culture. In philosophy we covered Plato, Aristotle, and Nietzsche but only insofar as their theories related to one another. It is tragedy that allows all of these great writers to form a connection that unifies their differences.

          The first day of class we had to consider the question, “Is tragedy the greatest of all genres?” Without a doubt, tragedy is truly the deepest, most thought provoking genre, but the greatest? With each day that passes, I become even more convinced that it must be. So, what about tragedy makes it so meaningful that it tends to remain in our mind? We have learned that there are certain elements in tragedy that tend to make it stand out. First, tragedies tend to deal with moral or social problems that are considered important to the culture. These problems that the characters struggle with resonate with the audience, inspiring feelings of pity and empathy that can be related to. Aristotle writes in Poetics, “[A perfect tragedy should] imitate actions which excite pity and fear [catharsis], this being the distinctive mark of tragic imitation” (XIII (a)).

          It is the imitation of real life that makes a tragedy so intense. The characters are neither all good nor all bad, but reside somewhere in between, similar to reality. Sadly, the tragic hero will commit some sort of fatal flaw or mistake which will spiral into a series of uncontrollable events in which he will suffer. For example, in Oedipus the King by Sophocles, it was prophesized that the son of Laius, King of Thebes, would kill his father. As a result, Laius orders his son to be killed but he secretly was saved. The play, like many others, toys with the idea of free will versus fate when Oedipus returns to Thebes and unintentionally fulfills the prophecy when he murders his father and marries his mother not knowing he was their son.

          It is through his mistakes and suffering that the audience connects with Oedipus. His pain and mistakes make him real, human, and that is something everyone can identify with. Nietzsche writes on the acceptance of reality in The Birth of Tragedy, “Both have truly seen to the essence of things, they have understood, and action repels them; for their action can change nothing in the eternal essence of things, they consider it ludicrous or shameful that they should be expected to restore order to the chaotic world” (39).

Work Cited

Aristotle. “Poetics on Tragedy.” Tragedy Course webpage. University of Houston, summer 2012. Web. XIII (a).

Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Birth of Tragedy. New York: Penguin Books, 2003. 39

Kat Henderson

Tragedy: The Great and Despised

Tragedy is rightly called the greatest of all literary genres. It shows humanity at its most genuine and realistic level—a level that comedy, romance, and satire can never wish to achieve. Through the heart-wrenching tales of family conflict, loss, and revenge, we as humans can experience emotional connection with the world around us. Despite the great catharsis that can be obtained from tragedy, it is also the least enjoyed of genres, and ironically this is because of all the same reasons it is great. Tragedy requires us to look inside ourselves to the motives and dark desires we would rather ignore. It is much easier to choose something less mentally exhausting to spend our time reading or watching. However, this class, along with my previous experience with tragedy, is allowing my appreciation for this literary genre to grow.

Before starting this class my knowledge of tragedy as a narrative form centered mostly on exposure to Shakespeare. Because of this, my understanding of tragedy led me to one conclusion: in tragedy everyone dies and it seems like a waste of the decent and not-so-decent alike. However, after reading Agamemnon, I understand that the significance of tragedy is not placed on the actual deaths, but why the characters must die. For example, Agamemnon himself is murdered by his wife as atonement for his murder of his daughter Iphigenia.  Understanding this makes it much easier to understand the deaths of Romeo and Juliet. Their deaths show the end result of the follies of their feuding houses.

Another major aspect of tragedy that I previously misunderstood is the catharsis involved in the resolution of the tragedies. Whenever I thought of tragedy, I assumed it would end with tears. Movies such as The Notebook, and Autumn in New York seemed to have no other purpose that to make women cry. Needless to say, I still vehemently avoid any movie resembling these. However, in The Eumenides, Orestes is ultimately pardoned for continuing the bloodshed of his family, allowing the generations of feuding to cease. This almost peaceful ending to the Oresteia’s previous endings shocked me. It filled me with a sense of relief that all of the previous deaths of the House of Atreus were not just wasted bloodshed. The ending of the Furies being given a new name of the “Kindly Ones” gives the tragedy a higher significance.

The final concept of tragedy that I am beginning to understand is that characters in tragedies are not good or bad, but a realistic combination of both. While I wished to hate Clytemnestra for heartlessly killing her husband and marrying his cousin, it is impossible to overlook her sense of betrayal that he would kill their daughter. As Aristotle points out, tragic heroes suffer from a fatal flaw. While Aristotle is referring to pride, arrogance, or a trait along those lines, I feel that what each tragic hero suffers from is humanity. To be human is to be torn between what is right and what is wrong and to not always know which is which. I’ve always felt that Tybalt in Romeo and Juliet is the villain and the cause of the lovers’ deaths but now I must admit that his actions were driven by his upbringing and his fanatical desire to uphold the honor of his family. Needless to say, the more I study tragedy, the more I must admit to becoming increasingly fascinated by it and the way it makes me question my previous assumptions about the genre. 

Andy Feith

What I’ve learned about the Greatest Genre (In two weeks)

          I like the fact that, in studying tragedy, we’re going all the way back to the beginnings of Western drama. We’re going back to the moment in time when drama evolved from its immediate predecessor, Dionysiac public worship involving a chorus only, into the multi-charactered storytelling we know and love even today. One might even call this moment “The Birth of Tragedy.” (At any rate, that’s what Nietzsche called it).

          Nietzsche makes the bold claim that Greek tragedy manages to transcend cultures by speaking to the concerns of men and women in their “natural” state, beneath the comparatively superficial distinctions of “state and society.” It seems to me that the same could very well be said of quality literature from any culture throughout history, and I haven’t yet come around, either, to the consensus idea that Greek tragedy is the best tragedy there is. I can appreciate that it has a certain grandness to it, but the fact that cultural references specific to the ancient Greeks are so integrally embedded into the texts, along with the obvious obstacle presented by the fact that we must read them in translation (the great majority of us, at least), subtract from its power. The play Agamemnon, which we are sometimes told is Aeschylus’ greatest work, is largely incomprehensible without significant annotation and explanation. (Actually, truth be told, I have the same problem with Hamlet and Shakespeare in general). On the one hand, I’ve heard from many different people that these works really are some of the best stuff ever written, and that they’re well worth the effort it takes to comprehend them. On the other hand, I think of Oscar Wilde’s complaint that English readers have over-idolized Shakespeare, and that holding him up as the one undisputed master of English literature has hampered English literature ever since.

          Without resolving the conflict I’ve brought up, I’ll turn to the foremost authority on tragedy, Aristotle himself. He stipulates that a tragedy must be “an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude.” The word “tragedy” itself carries a very strong hint that events “of a certain magnitude” are going to occur. This is distinct from romance, which I would characterize as often being of a comparable degree of “magnitude,” but without quite as much of the “seriousness” that Aristotle demands. This is even further removed from comedy, which need not necessarily be serious or of much magnitude at all. If by “greatest tragedy” I take to mean “the tragedy which best exemplifies Aristotle’s definition,” I could see how Oedipus Rex could qualify for the title. Our protagonist is King Oedipus, whom the Thebans have decided to trust with the safekeeping of their city, following his victory over the sphinx. A deadly “disease” is raging, and a considerable number of words are employed to dramatize its effects. The mighty and terrible gods must be consulted, and a terrible prophecy must (vainly) be defied. And the final moments of the play, when Jocasta has killed herself and Oedipus is begging to be exiled forever as the blood gushes from his mutilated eyes, is about as serious and magnitudinous as one could imagine. My “pity” may or may not have been aroused, depending on how I feel about Oedipus as a character, but my awe and fear certainly have been. The same could be said for the very similar ending of The Libation Bearers, when Orestes is tormented and driven away from the city by the Furies; both endings are terrible to behold. I haven’t quite yet arrived at the “metaphysical consolation” or the “catharsis” promised by Nietzsche and Aristotle, respectively, but I’m awed and impressed by the sheer weight of these falls from grace, and I suppose that’s half of the way there.

Susan Newman

Essay 2.   Peeling back the layers of Tragedy

   At the start of this course, I began learning valuable information about Tragedy. Tragedy contains flawed characters that are both good and evil, which is something I had not thought much about until attending lectures in this class. Layered characters, even when their actions are over-the-top (such as Oedipus stabbing out his eyes with pins), are more relatable than a perfect hero or a heartless villain found in fantasy or romance. I have recently learned that even when a character commits murder in a tragedy, oftentimes the audience senses justice in the act.

   In Orestes’ play Agamemnon, Clytemnestra might be considered a despicable wife by the audience when she is judged based solely on the fact that she cheats on her husband and plots, along with her lover, her husband’s demise. But the audience can sympathize with her anger and resentment toward Agamemnon for his sacrificing the life of their innocent daughter for his pursuit of war. His honor was more precious to him than his child’s life. In addition, the reader or watcher of the play might speculate Agamemnon was a lousy husband, and after years of her being alone while he was at war, Clytemnestra found love from another man.

   During the course of this class, I have realized that the audience often rationalizes this way because they want to find redeeming qualities in the characters and want to even like them. Of course, it makes sense that I would not be the only one desperately seeking common ground with these characters or wanting to respect or admire them but I suppose I assumed it was because I have a tendency to want to like people and seek positive attributes. I had not actually put much thought into the idea of other readers truly wanting to like tragic characters despite some of their dreadful deeds. During class discussions, I realized this to be true as I listened to other students comment about their empathy for Clytemnestra’s position and also on their wish to like the unlikeable Vinnie in Mourning Becomes Elektra.

   I read The Bacchae in a previous class but did not know that Apollo and Dionysus are considered dualities who, at the same time, can have overlapping gray areas. In The Birth of Tragedy, Friedrich Nietzsche says these opposites have “artistic powers which spring from nature itself, without mediation of the human artist” (18). Both are artistic imitators but the Apolline is a dream artist and the Dionysiac is an ecstatic artist, and some imitations are both.

   I find the terms and themes listed in the handouts to be helpful and enlightening for future reading. The conventions that are listed for genres brought to light interesting and familiar formulas to my experience with stories.

My existing knowledge of genres was not nearly this extensive as what we have encountered in this course and frankly, I am relieved to find out that almost all genres overlap with one or more other genres. This makes it easier to accurately define and describe various stories. As stated by Haylie Unger in reference to navigating genres, “I toss away the stone tablet of ‘black and white rules’” (Dr. White, Samples 2010).

Sarah Hardilek

Essay 2. Solving Societal Problems through Tragedy

          When you first hear the word “tragedy” it is common to automatically think of death and despair and possibly even incest thanks to Oedipus and the fact that he killed his father and married his mother, also known as the Oedipus complex. The last outcome you would expect to come out of a tragedy is a joyful one unless you morbidly associate death with joy. Once you have read a tragedy critically, however, it is clear to see that there is much more to it than that.  

According to the course site, tragedies begin “with a problem that is significant to society, its leaders, or its representatives” and end “with the resolution of the problem and the restoration of justice.” From this definition, it is clear to see that tragedies do not necessarily have to end in despair; rather, tragic events are more likely to occur purely from the nature of the problem. For example, the Oresteia trilogy begins with a brutal murder of a husband with numerous mentions of previous bloodshed and ultimately ends with the restoration of order. While the Oresteia is famous for the amount of familial bloodshed in the first two parts, because justice was able to be achieved without the need to kill or exile the hero, the ending remains a happy one. In this case, the story was more inclined to tragedy because of the elevated status of the characters. In killing the king, Clytemnestra basically asks for revenge to be taken upon her. In killing his mother, Orestes incurs the wrath of the Furies, which ultimately leads to the trial in front of Athena. The mere scale of the story is enough to warrant those tragic events that do occur in this history. It is fortunate, therefore, that it was able to end on a joyful note particularly since the gods are very rarely forgiving.

Why is it that stories involving so much bloodshed and awkward situations are so memorable and continue to be taught so religiously in schools? Perhaps it is because of the strange and socially unacceptable behavior of these stories that makes them so popular. They give us something to consider that is viewed as inappropriate to consider otherwise. Haylie Unger comments on this aspect in her misterm assignment by saying, “tragic heroes are a blend of the brutality and beauty of human nature, not only accurately depicting human nature, but also making it possible for tragedies to present complex social or psychological problems which are often considered ‘taboo topics.’” Tragedies give humans permission to address these problems, which enables humans to learn from possible societal problems through an enjoyable median. Aristotle writes in his Poetics, “the reason why men enjoy seeing a likeness is, that in contemplating it they find themselves learning or inferring.” In this passage, Aristotle highlights the human fascination with mimesis. By getting the opportunity to look at life from an outside point of view, humans are able to see the problems they otherwise would be ignorant to. It is similar to when you are working on a word find and a friend comes up behind you and immediately points to the word you have just spent several minutes seeking.

Since real life cannot be perfectly classified as any one particular genre and since tragedy is meant to be an imitation of life, it only makes sense that other genres would be present in tragedy. This course shows that no genre is definitively bound to the conventions associated with it. As an aspiring writer, this aspect is particularly helpful to me because it shows me that I do not have to worry about confining my books to any one genre, rather they can cross over all genres and I can focus solely on telling the story the way I want to tell it. There are witty moments in tragedies such as the conversation between Dionysus and Pentheus in Bacchae where Dionysus is trying to say that he is indeed a god, but Pentheus is too hardheaded to accept or even understand that Dionysus could be divine. Tragedy persists today because it is the closest imitation of real life.