LITR 4370 TRAGEDY Final Exam Samples 2017 (final exam assignment) Model Answers to Part 3. Complete Research Report

Part 3. Complete Research Report

Katie Morin

2/22/2017

Then and Now: The Evolution of Tragedy 

          With time comes change, and literature is no exception to this rule. While certain characteristics of tragedy have remained true to the original genre throughout the years, others have evolved or been abandoned altogether in order to give us the more contemporary brand of tragedy we have grown accustomed to see today. The genre’s evolution over time is also more evident when taking into consideration the transition from Dionysian concepts to those of the Apolline. While modern-day tragedy narratives still have their merit, when in comparison to original works of tragedy, their deviation from “the classics” becomes more apparent and their modifications have the potential to either detract from or enhance a work of tragedy’s intended meaning or purpose.

          I opted to write about this topic because of how much I enjoyed reading Eugene O’Neill’s Mourning Becomes Electra, a retelling of the Oresteia by Aeschylus. While I can certainly appreciate Agamemnon, the first segment of the Oresteia, I found myself much more engrossed in The Homecoming, the first installment of Mourning Becomes Electra. While both stories follow a similar storyline, their differences (some subtle and some less so), are indicative of just how much tragedy has evolved over the years. 

          In order to fully comprehend just how much tragedy has evolved over time, it is important to first note the two literary concepts seen within the genre: the Apolline and the Dionysian. Each concept, named after either one of the gods Apollo or Dionysus, respectively, shares the same attributes exhibited by its namesake. Each of the two styles is radically different from its counterpart, but the two opposing forces come together to complement one another, creating balance. Elements from both concepts are necessary to the genre, but as the modernization of tragedy progresses, some of the aspects found among classical works of tragedy have gradually diminished or been lost altogether.  On page 14 of his Birth of Tragedy, Nietzsche writes:

“To the two gods of art, Apollo and Dionysus, we owe our recognition that in the Greek world there is a tremendous opposition, as regards both origins and aims, between the Apolline art of the sculptor and the non-visual, Dionysiac art of music.”

There is a clear distinction between the two concepts and the Dionysian style of art, with its focus on the chorus, unity, chaos, and music/dance, is opposed by the Apolline, with its individualism, order, and visual arts. This division between Dionysian and Apolline styles has become especially distinct when analyzing the evolution of tragedy over time. The chorus, a Dionysian concept, gradually faded and was ultimately replaced altogether with individual actors—individuation instead of unity. This change is seen in Mourning Becomes Electra, whose “chorus” is made up of a trio of townspeople, each having their own name, identity, thoughts, ideas, etc. However, in Agamemnon, members of the chorus are unnamed, and whenever one speaks, they are speaking for the entirety of the group. Essentially, the part represents the whole, but with modernization the chorus breaks down into individual narrators who are active participants in the play’s drama. This change is also noted on our course’s website, which states: “Choral functions of background information and commentary may be reassigned from ‘community of elders’ to marginal groups or individuals.” This is especially evident in Mourning Becomes Electra, where the townspeople are described as being similar to a chorus, but really are distinct individuals as opposed to being a “true” chorus.

          As tragedy continues to evolve, a potential danger to its modernization is the “loss of the myth.” According to our course’s site, this is commonplace among modern works of tragedy because “Characters' motivations or drives become internal and psychological instead of external forces like divine curses or prophecies.” Modern-day tragedies are more relatable because characters are self-motivated and have the ability to exercise free will, but without an otherworldly presence orchestrating the narrative’s conflict, characters’ actions run the risk of seeming unjustified and/or trivial. In Agamemnon, for instance, Clytaemnestra’s motivation to kill her husband, Agamemnon, derives from her resentment towards him for sacrificing their daughter, Iphigenia, to the goddess, Artemis. The magnitude of his crime against kin is so great that audience members may feel sympathy for Clytaemnestra, and perhaps consider her killing of her husband to be just. Alternatively, in Mourning Becomes Electra, Ezra Manning’s wrongdoings are never explicitly stated, so his murder might not seem justified to some. One of the benefits of modern-day tragedies is that they might be easier to relate to given their more recent or realistic settings/contexts. However, in instances like this, the magnitude of Ezra Manning’s wrongdoing, whatever it may be, pales in comparison to that of Agamemnon’s, which can be attributed to the loss of the “myth” as seen in classic tragedies.

          While classical works of tragedy tend to have more of these mythological aspects where the gods play active roles in the play’s conflict, surprisingly enough the grandeur of these works is not necessarily experienced visually in the form of spectacle. According to our course’s website, spectacle is defined as being an “old-fashioned word for a concept that, in different words, lives today in popular speech—e.g., ‘special effects,’ ‘costume design,’ ‘stunts,’ and ‘computer graphics.’” More specifically, when concerning works of tragedy spectacle is commonly associated with scenes depicting exaggerated behavior, blood, gore, violence, or death. The site goes on to read that “The genre of Tragedy usually (but not always) represses spectacle, or at least manages it so that its sensational appeals don't overwhelm the subtler, more spiritual or intellectual qualities of plot and character.” In essence, original works of tragedy shied away from spectacle because they believed it detracted from the overall meaning of the narrative. However, in modern tragedies, the presence of spectacle has gradually become more prevalent and acceptable.

          This transition from the absence to the presence of spectacle is especially noticeable when comparing Agamemnon’s murder to that of Ezra Manning’s. In Agamemnon, the story’s protagonist is murdered off-screen, and although his dead body is show to the audience, the “spectacle” of his murder is hidden. In contrast, Ezra Manning’s death in Mourning Becomes Electra is fully displayed to the audience from start to finish. The whole ordeal is somewhat exaggerated and graphic, leaving little to the imagination unlike Agamemnon’s demise. An interesting aspect of tragedy that has seemingly remained the same, though, is its relatively “tame” depictions of spectacle in its modern-day adaptations. In her 2016 essay, “Tragedy and its Updates: Human Beings under the Microscope,” Angela Copper also reflects this sentiment and writes that while “Ezra’s onstage death involves an increased level of spectacle from the events of Agamemnon, the spectacle is still repressed in a sense—instead of stabbing her husband to death as Clytaemnestra does in Agamemnon, Christine poisons Ezra and he dies without a drop of blood spilt.” Although the presence of spectacle has become more prevalent among modern-day tragedies, it would appear that old conventions concerning spectacle still affect tragedy’s modernizations as well. In this instance, there seems to be somewhat of a balance: classic conventions with a modern-day twist.

          In reviewing the modernization of tragedy over the course of the semester, the genre’s departure from its classical roots is noticeable, but does not necessarily detract from the overall meaning of a given work. It is only when comparing a more contemporary narrative to the piece it was inspired by that I have noticed any significant changes. This can be primarily attributed to the loss of myth, which is something we have discussed in class frequently and what tends to bother me the most about the modernization of tragedy. While a lower type of character base is understandably more relatable than the nobility depicted in earlier works, fate and the will of the gods are replaced by free will and personal motivation making modern works of tragedy appear to be somewhat exaggerated and therefore less effective. This is not something solely restricted to tragedy, though, which is why classic literature, regardless of genre, is still taught today. Although more contemporary works of tragedy do not quite compare to some of the genre’s more original pieces by which they are inspired, they are still valuable as they offer a relatable, perhaps more audience friendly means to introduce students to the genre. As with most forms of literature, it is difficult to compete with the classics, but that does not at all mean that these modernizations lack merit.