|
(2016
final exam assignment) Sample Student Final Exam Essays 2016 Essay 2. Learning about Tragedy |
LITR 4370 Tragedy
|
 |
Ty Beverly
Tragedy: the Immortal Genre
Tragedy is not generally described as a favorite genre by many people and
attempting to bring it up in friendly conversation usually results in the
changing of topics or the relocation of people away from your presence. Despite
one’s initial aversion to topics that can be considered a “buzzkill,” Tragedy
has always been an unchanging reality of the world and is realistically still
around in many art forms. In classical Tragedy, we are given great men; kings,
princes, and conquers, not peasants and everyday folk, who face trials that
permanently scar their former sense of greatness. These prominent characters are
faced with challenges that involve the fates of not only themselves, but their
families and society as a whole. By learning about Tragedy, we are able to
accept the world for what it is and not only what we feel it should be.
Tragedy begins with “an imitation of an action that is serious, complete,
and of a certain magnitude” (Poetics
VI), it must start off with a problem that is large enough to encompass the fall
of a great man. Agamemnon murdering his daughter and Oedipus unknowingly falling
in love with his mother and killing his father are substantial problems,
problems that no one is likely to scoff at in a “not a big deal, get over it”
sort of way. The problems are serious
enough to inspire “pity and fear” in the Audience, which will enable “the proper
purgation of these emotions” (Poetics
VI), or catharsis. The death of Ezra Manning in
Mourning Becomes Electra modernizes
the cathartic emotion found in Agamemnon
by having the cause of his murder be through his living daughter’s love for him
rather than an infanticide, while the death of the baby in
Desire Under the Elms causes a
similar terror. Both parties subjected to death in these modernized stories are
shown to be innocent, which may lessen the Audiences inclination to pity and
spark more of an outrage of injustice. In classical Tragedy, the characters that
fall at the end should remain in a middle area, between fault for their actions
and their inability to escape their fate.
Aristotle believed Catharsis to be the true goal of Tragic works, this idea that
submitting oneself to negative emotions in order to be free from them is also
used in psychology, as a person must recognize the basis of their problems in
order to move on and heal from them. Although Nietzsche does not view pity as a
positive element to humanity, he does agree in the essence of suffering leading
to wisdom. He claims that “the whole world of torment is necessary so that the
individual can create the redeeming vision” (Nietzsche 26). Before the presence
of Dionysus, the Apolline created an illusory art form that shielded humanity
from experiencing the darker truths about life. The greatness of Tragedy remains
in its ability to show humanity in all its forms, with the Apolline and
Dionysiac working together to achieve this aim.
The Tragic Hero lives in a grey area, he “is a man who is not eminently
good and just, yet whose misfortune is brought about not by vice or depravity,
but by some error or frailty” (Poetics
XIII), he is, at the same time, responsible for his outcome and yet considerably
blameless. The worst outcomes of life, even to this day, are often blamed on
ignorance. In multiple cases after WWII, the remaining Nazis pled either
ignorance to the horrors perpetrated by their cause or cast themselves as
unwilling victims that were forced to aid in the destruction. The defense of
being powerless to not aid in genocide, or being bound to follow orders,
attempts to displace the blame of the soldiers by placing it on the
organizations that led to their crimes. While putting people in positions of war
will lead to death, we have “a common human impulse to isolate or localize blame
in the faults of individuals instead of larger social systems or institutions”
(Tragic Flaw Page), and find it easier to blame a person for their own downfall
rather than the society that helped lead them to their fate.
Unlike the Nazi defense, Oedipus and
Agamemnon follow the courses they feel will lead them to their best outcome but
end up foiled by their Tragic Flaws. Agamemnon’s sense of pride is a part of his
strength, an asset in leading his people, however it also leads him to believe
that his wife loves him as much as his followers.
The sacrifice of his daughter to the
gods was not done out of malevolence but in his attempt to do the right thing
for his country, although it leads to his demise when he fails to see his wife’s
hidden malice. As with Oedipus, who cleverly solves the Sphinx’s riddle, his
belief of escaping his fate leads him to the false comfort of life with his
mother as his wife. The horrifying realization of his mistake is made worse for
the Audience in light of the man’s obvious cleverness and evident attempts to
change his destiny. If an intelligent and respected character like Oedipus can
end up in this position, the normal members of the Audience must fear the
possibility of their own unfortunate fates, with the direct attempt of escaping
fate through free-will leading to unfortunate ends.
Teiresias pushes Oedipus to anger for not revealing his doom, claiming “It is
not your fate to fall because of me. It’s up to Apollo to make that happen. He
will be enough” (452-454). His understanding that his words will not bring any
change to the story results from the inability of free-will to overcome what the
gods have planned. However, he is fated to have this discussion with Oedipus
even though he knew it would bring “no benefit to the man possessing it. This
[he] knew, but it had slipped [his] mind” (375-377); this forgetfulness of a man
who is gifted with prophecy further allows the Audience to accept Oedipus as a
predestined character worthy of pity; if a man who is able to actually see the
future is unable to prevent it, how can one who is simply played with by the
gods be expected to escape his fate?
In Antigone, hamartia is
evident in Anigone and Creon, leading them both to tragic ends without direct
interference from the gods. While the free-will of Oedipus is lacking in
Oedipus Rex and
Oedipus at Colonus, the characters in
Antigone are led by their personal
views of right and wrong, with Antigone sacrificing herself for the last rites
of her dead brother and Creon’s pride in the law causing the death of his wife
and son. As with Creon in Oedipus at
Colonus, after taking away Antigone, he claims that “Nothing shall curb my
will; though I be old And single-handed, I will have this man” (909-910) and he
again denies the power of the gods in
Antigone when he would refuse the burial of Polynices even if “Zeus’s eagles
should choose to seize his festering body and take it up” (Antigone
1160-1161). The actions of Antigone and Creon are not prophesied but created
through their flaws, making it appear that they had more power to avoid their
dire situations. They are pitied due to their individual feelings of right and
wrong.
Nietzsche lacks appreciation for Eurpides, believing he caused the death of
Tragedy by his comedic approach to the gods and his less important chorus. In
Hippolytus, Aphrodite claims that,
like people, the gods are compelled to want admiration, even at the cost of
human lives. The gods are given human personalities and have a more direct
influence on the plights of the characters. While Eurpides incorporates the
chorus into Hippolytus, it does not
serve the same function as it did in the plays that preceded him, it really does
not seem to serve much of a purpose at all. It is not an “integral part of the
whole” and does not “share in the action,” (Poetics
XVIII), the verses, while poetic, do
not propel the story or give deeper insight to the trouble of the characters,
they simply seem stuck in the background.
The
higher characters in Hippolytus are
placed on a level playing field with the servants, or lower characters, with the
Nurse being the cause of Phaedra’s destruction. Aristotle’s views on Catharsis
are impeded in this play, for while the characters undergo a tragic end, the
flaws of the characters are not entirely reasonable as flaws, as the only wrong
Hippolytus seems to commit is his upheld sense of virginity. It is also hard to
accept that Phaedra’s love for his stepson is her flaw when Aphrodite herself
accepts it as her own deed in the beginning.
Tragedy is perhaps not the greatest genre in the sense of simple
enjoyment; it receives greatness and power through the response of its Audience.
But while human beings are naturally inclined to be enraptured by a Comedy or
Romance, Tragedy has always held down its place in history and will likely
continue to do so in the future. In Eric Anderson’s essay “Part Two: Staying
Power: Comparing Ancient Tragedy and Comedy,” he states that “Death, the focus
of tragedy and the universal end which we all share, remains an obsession to
this day. Humanity can neither solve it nor get shut of it. A persistent
mystery, it triggers the extremest pity and fear. Learning being the greatest
pleasure, we are denied by death because it does not divulge its secrets.”
Whether human beings want to be reminded of it or not, Death is and always will
be a part of life. No matter how great or low a character may be considered, we
all face the same fate. We look at Tragedies in the form of art, as a
realization of our mortality and fragility, where our greatest strengths can
become our greatest weaknesses and our darkest fears may well become our
inescapable fate.
