|
(2016
midterm assignment) Sample Student Midterm Answers 2016 Essay 2. Learning about Tragedy |
LITR 4370 Tragedy
|
 |
(Authors & titles in alphabetical order; scroll down to see essays)
Angela Copper,
Tragedy: Complex yet Evocative
Tedra Mendoza
Adrian Russell,
Life is Tragic
Cassandra Parke,
Tragedy: The Invocation of Humanity
Angela Copper
16
June 2016
Tragedy: Complex yet Evocative
Tragedy, in its conversational usage, refers to an unfortunate, sad, and
perhaps unanticipated event. The academic definition of tragedy refers to a
genre which finds its roots in Greek drama. Even though I had a general
understanding of this latter meaning to tragedy – I knew of Medea and Hamlet,
Oedipus and Othello – for most of my student career I have still incorporated
the informal definition with the formal, meaning that in my mind a tragedy was
simply a “sad play.” Upon taking this class, however, I have learned a lot about
the meaning of tragedy as a literary genre. I have learned about the importance
of plot to a tragedy, as opposed to the importance of individual
characterization found in romance. I have learned of the “mixed” characters that
are found in tragedy – and how the unfolding of events upon these characters
intends to inspire catharsis, a strong release of emotions brought on by pity
and fear. Perhaps the most important thing that I have learned is that tragedy
is constantly evolving, growing. As an extremely complex genre which exhibits
human suffering as its primary design, tragedy will never “fall out of fashion.”
It is too near and dear to us. It is not looked down upon as a “lesser” genre,
as may occur with comedy and satire, and it does not make man out to be better,
as in romance. Tragedy strikes a chord with humanity in a way that other genres
fundamentally cannot.
As described in the Tragedy course website written by Dr. Craig White,
while tragedy is interesting and complex and often shocking, it is not perfect.
Dr. White writes that “the same qualities that make tragedy great may also limit
in complementary ways,” because tragedy, as any other genre, has its
confinements. While it certainly will not fall out of fashion, tragedy is not
particularly popular to start with. Tragic works do not make us joyful or
inspired in the same way that comedies and romances do. Especially in America,
tragedies are not as popular due to the tragic plot seeming to revolve around an
unavoidable chain of events. Whatever the “tragic hero” does to resolve a
situation only sows his fate deeper into the field. In an individualistic
culture, it is hard to relate to classic Greek tragedies wherein man is a puppet
or an insect, writhing in futility against the will of fate and the Gods.
On individualism and American ideals: in this class we have discussed
that tragic characters may be more “noble,” yet this does not correspond with
America’s “bring yourself up by your boot straps” culture. If a tragic hero is
born into wealth and power, has the gifts of wit and strength, yet still finds
themselves in a downward spiral, many modern audiences may find themselves
unsympathetic to the hero’s plight. When Oedipus constantly talks about how
“great” and “clever” he is and flies off the handle at any dissent, you almost
want to see the guy taken down a peg. This interferes with the goal of inspiring
pity and fear which Aristotle describes in
Poetics. Additionally, tragedies
often focus on larger societal issues or psychological problems, which the
average individual may feel distant from. Comparatively, comedies and romances
find themselves personalizing problems, with relatable characters who are often
“everyday” people.
Within this class I have learned that the complexity of tragedy comes
from its mimesis, or imitation. Tragedy imitates life, in all of its
complexities. This is what makes tragic characters less flat. Instead of being
fully “good” or “evil,” tragic characters are “mixed.” In our approach to the
distinctions of tragic characterizations, we discussed in class the notion that
tragic characters are just people doing the best they can with the cards that
they are dealt. No tragic character thinks themselves evil – they are all doing
what they believe is just or necessary. In this way, tragic characters resemble
ourselves. We can empathize with their struggle.
As
Scott Agruso said in his 2014 essay “Tragedy is Not Just a Sad Story,” while I
still do not know even half of all there is to know about tragedy, our class
discussions act as a “sort of Rosetta Stone for understanding and comprehending”
tragic plays. I find myself explaining to my friends and family how interesting
tragedy is, and how it’s not so depressing as it is engrossing and remarkable.
Tedra Mendoza
All about Tragedy
When I enrolled in this class, I believed that this class was going to be
depressing but I have come to quickly realize that there is so much more within
it. I used to believe that a tragedy was just an unfortunate accident although
it is not an “accident but causes and consequences” that lead up to the tragedy”
(White, Tragedy notes, 2016). Also, as Fariah Khalil states in her paper,
“according to Aristotle’s Poetics,
Tragedy is an imitation of life and confronts problems; it shows humanity in its
most realistic way possible making it the greatest literary genre.” While also
being in this class, I have come to find out that majority of tragedy happens
within families because of the difficult decisions that have to be made as well
as the Oedipal Conflict and Electra Complex.
The Oedipal Conflict and Electra Complex have a major role in tragedy
because usually, a lot of the issues stem from these two concepts.
The Oedipal Conflict is when “a male child yearns for his mother and opposes his father's attentions to
the mother” (White, 2016). This is seen in
Mourning Becomes Electra when Christine’s son Orin arrives after his father
is murdered. The bond Christine and Orin have is much more than just a mother
and son relationship. He seems to have an unhealthy fixation with his mother.
The Electra Complex is when “a young girl feels rivalry with her mother for the
affections of her father” (White, 2016). This can also be seen in
Mourning Becomes Electra when Lavinia
wants to take the place of her mother whenever her father comes back home.
Something else that I have come to notice within tragedy is the spectacle
that is made throughout the plays. A spectacle is often referred to as “special
effects.” In the Oresteia trilogy,
Cassandra predicts what will happen between Clytemnestra, Agamemnon, and
herself. The audience hears everything that is taking place behind closed doors
but does not see anything. When Clytemnestra comes out of the house she is
covered in Agamemnon and Cassandra’s blood. The spectacle was repressed in this
scene but it was described in detail by Cassandra before she entered the house
and fell to Clytemnestra’s revenge.
The way the Oresteia trilogy
modernizes is by being recreated into
Mourning Becomes Electra. The two parallel with one another allowing the
readers to see these plays are able to be modernized in order for the next
generation to put them into perspective. The characters from the
Oresteia are given different names in
Mourning Becomes Electra but they are playing very similar roles.
The same plot happens in both but the names and the way they act are modernized.
Also, the character’s “motivations
or drives become internal & psychological instead of external forces such as divine curses or prophecies” (White, 2016). An
example of this is that the characters in
Mourning Becomes Electra do not necessarily receive prophesies like the way
Cassandra gives prophesies. They are using their emotions to where we are able
to interpret their psychological reasoning for their actions.
I really enjoy learning about tragedy because in a sense, it is relatable
to everyone. What takes place is loss, sacrifice, and growth which allows the
reader to have a better understanding of the readings and the genre. Learning
this much about tragedy in only two weeks has made me excited to see what else
is to come through this course.
Cassandra Parke
Tragedy: The Invocation of Humanity
Tragedy is unlike any other genre in that in that it presents humanity
both at its worst and at its best. Tragedy’s sublimity and poignancy stems from
the fact that it is an art of contrast and proximity. According to Nietzsche in
The Birth of Tragedy, tragedy is the
product of dialogue between the Apolline and the Dionysiac, between aesthetic
forms, and the formless will. It is also the product of the mingling of nobility
and twistedness, of the beautiful and the grotesque, of enduring virtue and
incomprehensible sin. Tragedians are remarkable in that they can cause these
opposites to coincide within their characters and their plots, to create a
balance that is not necessarily enjoyable, but moving, haunting, and healing.
Tragedy is also striking in that it details violence or betrayal amongst those
who are close to each other, such as family members (Poetics
13c).
Beyond the fascination that comes from experiencing a tragic work,
tragedy evokes common fears and passions in audience members that seem to
originate at humanity’s core and produce a sense of unity that is truly
Dionysiac. For example, the revulsion elicited by the recognition that Jocasta
is Oedipus’ mother in Oedipus the King is nearly universal, indicating that abhorrence of
incest is fundamental to human nature. Through common instinct, we are reminded
that all humans are the same at their core, and that perhaps we are derived from
a common source. This experience is exceptionally appealing to modern audience
members who have been further individuated and isolated by globalization and
communicative technology. According to Nietzsche, the chorus is an integral part
of tragedy which is chiefly responsible for the Dionysiac experience.
In addition to benefiting from a sense of
unity and renewed appreciation for humanity through catharsis (Poetics
11b), audience members relate to tragic characters who possess tragic flaws
(Course website’s “Tragic Flaw” page), or else recognize and empathize with
their struggles because the plot enacts mimesis, or the imitation of real life
(Course website’s “Mimesis” page). Tragedy has more to offer than any other
genre, in that it provides both entertainment and education (Course website’s
“Dual purpose of literature” page). Because problems and faults are internalized
by tragic characters, rather than transferred to some ‘other’, as in romance,
the ways in which these negative aspects are addressed by characters have
bearing on reality (Course website’s “Tragedy” and “Romance” pages). Common
themes in tragedy include lessons about fate, faith, justice, and hubris. For
example, The Eumenides demonstrates
the distinction between revenge and justice, and advises individuals to defer to
the authority of the court system, rather than perpetuating the cycle of
violence.
As
Kaitlin Jaschek eloquently stated in her midterm paper: “Tragedy does not allow
us to “escape” our problems or feel assured that everything will always turn out
for the best; instead it shows us that sometimes evil does prevail or bad things
happen, but it helps us determine how we will navigate or respond to those
evils”. While the world of romance and comedy may be easier to enjoy, its
challenges and outcomes have little bearing on reality.
Although tragedy may not be considered “likeable”, it is a joy to study
and analyze due to the fact that characters’ fates are overdetermined, and so
tragic works are riddled with foreshadowing and meaningful diction that provides
ample material for interpretation and discussion. According to Aristotle’s
Poetics, plot is the very soul of
tragedy and characters are secondary (Poetics
6e). In tragedy, characters are instruments of the plot, while in romance, plot
is often a consequence of the characters’ actions and motivations. In tragedy,
every word, and every action has impact on the narrative.
Aristotle believed that comedy involves the imitation of characters of “a
lower-type” (Poetics V), and that tragedy imitates “noble actions, and the
actions of good men” (Poetics IV). Tragedy is somewhat elitist by nature as it
frequently features upper-class characters, extolls lessons or morals that
reflect the views of those in power (such as
Oedipus the King, which confirms the
powers of the Gods in keeping with the interests of the priest-class, which was
being challenged), and invokes mature emotions such as grief. Conversely, comedy
is the genre of the masses because it is easy to follow and riddled with
spectacle.
According to the course website’s “Spectacle” page, spectacle is that
which creates “an impressive or interesting show or entertainment for those
viewing it”. It is gore, special effects, costumes, shouting, violence, and the
sensational. According to Aristotle, of all of the elements of tragedy,
spectacle is the least artistic, and so must be repressed or managed (Poetics
6g). In practice, this repression can involve allowing violent or shocking
scenes to occur off-stage such as when Agamemnon’s murder is not witnessed, but
heard, and described through Cassandra’s prophesy. This challenges audience
members to invent their own details, allowing them to participate in the
narrative in their own way.
In conclusion, tragic works require an investment from the audience; one
must closely follow the plot in order to understand its intricacies and be open
to emotional release and learning.
This dedication requires attention and effort. However, in return, the audience
receives a taste of the sublime, a lesson to carry with them, and a renewed
appreciation for humanity. In this respect, tragedy is the greatest genre.
Adrian Russell
Life is Tragic
When something seemingly terrible happens in life, a person can feel alone.
Sometimes, knowing that someone else has gone through a similar trial can bring
us out of the pain, if even for a moment. This is one way in which tragedy
serves us. In Poetics, Aristotle describes that tragedy is supposed to “bring
about a "catharsis" of the spectators” and “…arouse in them sensations of pity
and fear, and to purge them of these emotions so that they leave the theater
feeling cleansed and uplifted, with a heightened understanding of the ways of
gods and men.” As
Kaitlin Jaschek stated in her 2015 mid-term, titled “Tragedy is
real, relatable, and enjoyable”, she says, “Tragedy is relatable [to] life
because it displays the imperfections of humans, the character is not always
good or always bad; they are a mixture, and at times they are in predicaments
that lead to hard decisions and/or consequences.”
In the
beginning of the class, I understood tragedy in life, but not in literature.
Literature has the power not only to entertain, but also educate. Thus, in
learning the literary formula of tragedy, we are able to decode the mimesis of
tragedy in our lives.
In order to use literary tragedy as a rule for our lives, we must size it down
to scale. Fathers in power would hopefully not sacrifice their daughters in
order to garner wind for military travel, such as Agamemnon did. However, a
father in today’s time may neglect his children as a sacrifice to the greater
good of the family or his community. For instance, a father may not have been
able to attend a daughter’s dance recital because he is a police officer and
decided to stay on shift late in order to catch a criminal he has been vetting.
This would “kill” the daughter because she wanted her father to see her dance,
but he made the choice to catch the criminal for the greater good. This makes
him a flawed hero. Subsequently, the wife may be quite upset when the father
gets home. Fights would occur, repeat and eventually lead to divorce. Though the
daughter was upset at her father, he is her hero and no longer in her everyday
life. This puts her against her mother and whatever new male may be in their
family (Aegisthus). The children in the family would then rebel and retaliate in
order to “kill” the mother in some way. This could be running away to the
father, experimenting with hard drugs or initiating in sexual conduct against
the mother’s wishes. There we have it. The makings of a modernized Agamemnon
with less spectacle. If this family were to use literary tragedy as a moral
construct, they might see that the father was just doing his job, he loves his
daughter, the mother is rightfully upset but should not take it out on the
father, and the Oedipal/Electra complex is sure to be an issue if not paid
attention to.
One way that Agamemnon was already modernized was in Eugene O’Neil’s,
Mourning Becomes Electra. The
popularity it garnered upon release is proof that the allure of tragedy stands
the test of time. The convention of tragedy is so relatable because it typically
involves a family that loves and hates each other at the same time, much like
the Mannons. The audience can easily feel sympathy for every character in
Mourning Becomes Electra. Ezra is a
silent war hero trying his best to be a strong man. Christine cannot help she
fell out of love and her husband was gone for years. Lavinia is rightfully upset
with her mother for being unfaithful, and Orin wants to stand by his sister. We
may not agree with their actions, but we can understand and relate to their
feelings. The relatability of the characters is what makes tragedy so
enthralling.
Even if a person does not have a family, they might yearn to know them or love
them while also hating them for the fact that they are alone. Not everyone falls
in love or finds life funny. However, everyone experiences tragedy. Therefore,
tragedy’s audience is everyone. We may see a tragedy without romance or comedy,
but in terms of narrative genre, will rarely ever see a romance or comedy that
does not have some form of tragedy. Even our most beloved children’s stories are
typically born out of tragedy. Tragedy is the great equalizer. Pain and death
come for us all from the moment we are born.
Moreover, tragedy equalizes society because we are fight the duality of good and
evil within us. As Nietzche explains in The Birth of Tragedy, we all have a fight within us involving our
Apolline and Dionysiac nature. When we can understand and harness the convention
of tragedy, we may be better equipped to navigate our lives. If this is true, an
interesting idea comes to mind involving the formal genre of tragedy. Tragedy is
a literary art form. Art imitates life. Therefore, we, as human beings, are the
formal genre of tragedy. We are individually the creators of our own tragedy. We
are
tragedy. The stage directions are in our minds. The spectacle is in our actions
and reactions. The pain is in our eyes. Much like the plays of the ancient
Dionysiac festivals, we live almost as if our tragic lives are in competition
with each other. Let us see who can hurt more. So that we may applaud the
victor.
