|
(2016
final exam assignment) Sample Student Final Exam Essays 2016 Essay 2. Learning about Tragedy |
LITR 4370 Tragedy
|
 |
Nikki
Jones
6 July
2016
Tragedy: Satisfying Our Innermost Need Since 458 BCE
Throughout the history of literature, tragedy is one of the most classic
and popularized genres. Why is this so? What is it about tragedy that makes it
so that we keep wanting more? It is not that it is an easy subject to bear. We
may receive a small amount of satisfaction at the end of a tragedy simply
because the story has been finalized, but ultimately we do not get much pleasure
from a pure tragedy seeing as they typically do not bode well for the characters
involved. So why do we enjoy watching and reading tragedies so much if this is
the case?
Tragedy, just like any other genre, was created to fulfill an inherent
need in all of us. We all need to feel emotions at certain times and different
genres quench those needs. Often with comedy we satisfy our urge to feel
happiness and laugh. Romance movies fulfill our innate desire to be a leader.
This way of thinking explains why most of the time if you ask younger boys what
they want to be when they get older they will exclaim, “I want to be Iron Man
when I grow up!”. Often this is the same with little girls, except they tend to
idolize heroic female characters instead of superheroes. As a personal example,
I remember when I was younger I was convinced I could grow up to be Pocahontas
from the Disney movie. I idolized her character because she was the one who
fought the odds to be the hero and ended up saving the guy instead of it being
the other way around. Initially, I believed that this idea worked the exact same
way with tragedy.
Though I do still support my idea that tragedy serves an innate need in all of
us, I have learned since writing the midterm that what makes tragedy different
than the other genres, like romance or comedy, is that tragedy is focused more
on a harsh reality rather than simply being a means of escaping reality through
light-hearted entertainment. This statement leads into a cathartic way of
looking at tragedy that does support my original statement: that tragic
literature meets our needs by evoking emotions and promoting our sense of
empathy for a tragic character. As I learn more about Aristotle’s view on
catharsis, the more I feel justified in having this opinion. In
Poetics, he explains how tragedy
“inspir(es) fear or pity”, which reflects the emotions I mentioned previously
(LITR 4370 Terms/Themes). Tragic literature serves a purpose; it is just not the
same purpose as other genres that ultimately lead to escapism through means of
amusement.
That
being said, this does not mean that all literature that incorporates tragic
elements cannot also be entertaining. If that was true, virtually no one would
ever want to read it and certainly scholars would not promote it to be the
greatest genre. Luckily, books like H.G. Well’s
The Time Machine, Michael Crichton’s
Jurassic Park, and Stephen King’s
The Mist, are all wonderful examples
that incorporate both tragic, romantic, and even (some) comedic elements. With
modern literature, we have become accustomed to this mix of genres being present
for it to be successful. This type of literature is what makes modern tragedy
appealing and entertaining to younger viewers, which leads to the next point,
which is spectacle.
Tragedies typically contain a fair amount of spectacle in them to remain
entertaining, especially the ones in our course. As an example, there is a fair
amount of spectacle to be found in the tragedies,
Mourning Becomes Electra and
Agamemnon. We see spectacle visually
in the filmed versions of the plays that we saw portions of in class. Many of
the actors and actresses are extremely zealous in their character’s role, which
translates well into spectacle. For instance, in both plays the characters use
extremely dramatic movements that regular people would not do, like when Ezra
Mannon seems to be stalling at death’s door in order to deliver a cryptic
message to Vinnie as he reaches out to her, then dramatically collapses down
onto his bed, and we see this same effect in Clytemnestra’s movement especially.
She, the male actor, is seen making very grandiose movements with her arms.
Another element of spectacle in
Agamemnon’s filmed version is that the audience gets to see the Grecian
inspired masks and costumes, which can be very awe-inspiring if one has never
seen a tradition Greek play before. When it comes to the drama in
Agamemnon, it is true that much of
the physical action, like Agamemnon’s death, is done off-stage as opposed to
Mourning Becomes Electra, which is
present in the film. I still believe there is a fair amount of spectacle in both
though.
Both
of the authors of these two plays also do a nice job in giving many descriptions
in the text that make it just as easy to get the same effect of spectacle when
we read it, just like when we watch a filmed production. Eugene O’Neill is
extremely detail oriented, which in turn helps the reader to imagine the play
and the spectacle for ourselves. He describes actions in exact and dramatic
words. For example, the words “curtly”, “forced”, “intensely”, “bitterly”, and
“coldly” come up time and again with many of the character’s movements. These
are extremely specific words that make it very easy for the reader to imagine
what the characters are like. Using my earlier example, what I mean is that,
although it is nice to actually see Ezra Mannon’s death scene for the purpose of
seeing it acted out on a screen we do actually get the same effect while reading
the text also. O’Neill’s word choice and descriptive sentences makes it almost
effortless to visualize the scenes while reading the play.
Equally, we see this same effect in
Agamemnon when very sharp words are
used. For example, the image of fire, along with the words “blaze / ablaze” and
“watch dog” are repeated multiple times. These are sensory words that help to
illustrate the play.
This
kind of descriptive writing also helps the tragic plays we have read translate
into more modern plays that help it to stay relevant. Besides literary scholars,
we must question what demographic of people are really going to be reading this
type of literature the most. Students at the high school and collegiate level
are the majority of who is reading these plays, more than likely. High school
students are certainly very impressionable, and as I have touched on in my
previous Literature of the Future essay,
Science Fiction: A Tangible Future?, in the midst of their developing
bodies, minds, and thoughts, most of their attention is focused on finding their
own identity, and as a result they crave people and characters that they can
relate to and empathize with. As tragic plays become modernized, the elements
and characters become more relatable to the younger generation creating a sense
of empathy between the two. The trio
Hippolytos, Phaedra, and Desire Under
the Elms exemplifies how elements of the same play can change over time to
become more modern and relatable. For example,
Desire Under the Elms is set
around the time that the Westward Expansion in America occurred and although
the 1850s seem nearly incomprehensible to us in 2016, in retrospect it is much
more relatable to readers than ancient Greece.
The
main variation that students tend to recognize the most though is the changes
made to the main character throughout these plays. In Euripides’ play,
Hippolytos seems like a very difficult character for anyone to personally relate
to. He is crude and harsh in his misogynistic views, but contrastingly he also
reflects a virginal and pure figure who suffers a martyr’s death. Racine’s
Hippolytus, in contrast, becomes more relatable with the addition of Aricia, but
there still seems to be something transcendent and inhuman about his character.
It is O’Neill’s adaptation that more appropriately conveys a very humanistic
character. Through Eben, the audience receives both of the good and bad
qualities that most people have, making him the most relatable main character.
Beyond relevancy, tragedy seems to remain in the school curriculum because it
has the potential to promote learning and growth in other areas. For example,
many of the tragedies that we have read during this course incorporate
characters that have a mythological background that the reader must be aware of
in order to fully understand the content of the play. We often take for granted
the background story, if we already know it, and assume that everyone else is
aware of it as well. Educators, on the other hand, are consciously aware that
many, if not most, of their students are new to the subject and are attentive in
providing appropriate background information. This information gives way for
potential increased student interest and additional personal learning of the
subject. This concept does not have to remain within the limits of literary
learning either. Increased interest can stretch into elements like psychology.
Students have this potential of learning through the Theban trilogy,
Oedipus the King, Oedipus at Colonus,
and Antigone which shifts to show
more psychological elements and familial ties, like the Oedipal complex, which
Sigmund Freud termed in his 1899 study
Interpretation of Dreams. Ultimately this is something that makes tragedy on
of the greatest genres. It reaches a vast audience who may not have been aware
of an interest before reading tragedy.
Literary scholars love to teach it, students come around to appreciating it, and
historians promote it; all-in-all, tragedy is one of the most popular genres
taught. Its timeless plot lines and seamless transition into more modern
adaptations helps it to stay relevant in any time period. Issues, settings, and
characters may vary from each variation, but ultimately the overarching theme
will stay the same. This makes it so that whether the reader is seventeen,
thirty-seven, or seventy-seven, we can all find something we appreciate about
tragic literature.
