1

T TH HE E S SH HA AK KE ES SP PE EA AR RE EA AN N T TR RA AG GE ED DY Y I I

1. TRAGEDY: DEFINITIONS, TRAITS, THEORETICAL APPROACHES
The tragedy can be better defined, just like the comedy, in the dramatic genre, but it
is not confined to that. In very broad lines, we expect a tragedy to end in the death of the
protagonist, just as we expect a comedy to end in happy marriages and reconciliations.
However, the death of the protagonist is not confined to tragedy, just as not all the
tragedies ever written in literature end with the death of the hero. So, there must be more
than death to tragedy.
Tragedy [GR. the goat song] was, originally, a form of sacrificial ritual connected to
the rituals dedicated to Dionysus, out of which all Greek dramatic tragedy developed.
Due to that, many critics have argued that the tragedy involves a form of sacrifice, since
the death of the tragic hero is not similar to the moral satisfaction that one gets when a
villain is finally punished. So that the world can move on to a new order, the evil existing
in the society needs to be purified through ritual. The overall atmosphere in a tragedy is
gloomy and depressing, since the fall of the hero is not an individual trauma, but one that
involves the system in which he/she lives. It does not mean that all the characters who die
are tragic heroes and there are more elements to involved in the characterization of a
tragic hero, but one of the most obvious elements is the fact that there is no way of escape
from this tragic destiny, at least, not a way that the protagonist can envisage.
The Greek writers were indebted to Aristotles theories in writing their plays. The
great writers of the Greek classical age were Sophocles, Euripides and Aeschylus. Their
plays still form the basis for world tragic compositions, either in accordance to their views
or in contrast. In comparison to the Greek literature, the Roman drama is not that well-
represented, except for Seneca, who served as an example for the Elizabethan plays.
Gorboduc (1561), by Thomas Norton and Thomas Sackville, is considered today to be the
first Elizabethan tragedy composed on a Senecan model. The Elizabethan audiences
seemed to have a preference for bloody scenes, violence, ghosts, revenge plots and so the
writings of Thomas Kyd, Christopher Marlowe, William Shakespeare, John Webster, Ben
Johnson offered them what they liked to see. In Europe, the great tragic writers were Lope
de Vega, Molina and Calderon in Spain, and especially Corneille and Racine in France,
where the genre flourished after its decline in England.

ARISTOTLE ON TRAGEDY
Unlike comedy that focuses on the society, tragedy is centered on one individual
who becomes the protagonist or the hero and the plot is an imitation of an action not
like history and historical procedures, that tell us what actually happened, but placing a
particular action in a universal context, by dramatizing what may actually happen,
according to the law of probability or necessity. So, the action in a tragedy affects the
order of the universe, not just the fate or some individual beings, as it is the case of the
comedy.
The work of Herodotus might be put into verse, and it would still be a species of
history, with meter no less than without it. The true difference is that one relates
what has happened, the other what may happen. Poetry, therefore, is a more
2

philosophical and a higher thing than history: for poetry tends to express the
universal, history the particular. By the universal I mean how a person of a certain
type on occasion speak or act, according to the law of probability or necessity; and
it is this universality at which poetry aims in the names she attaches to the
personages.(Aristotle)
In a tragedy, there should be unity of action and the language of tragedy is elevated.
Tragedy, then, is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a
certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament,
the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in the form of action,
not of narrative; through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation of these
emotions. (Aristotle)
The action of the tragedy should start with an incentive moment and lead the protagonist
towards a moment of recognition seen by Aristotle as the change from ignorance to
knowledge, producing love or hate between the persons destined by the poet for good or bad
fortune. The best form of recognition is coincident with a Reversal of the Situation, as in
the OedipusThis recognition, combined with Reversal, will produce either pity or fear; and
actions producing these effects are those which, by our definition, Tragedy represents.
(Aristotle)






The plot must be a whole, with a beginning, middle, and end. The beginning, called by
modern critics the incentive moment, must start the cause-and-effect chain but not be
dependent on anything outside the compass of the play; must be complete, having
unity of action. By this Aristotle means that the plot must be structurally self-
contained, with the incidents bound together by internal necessity, each action leading
inevitably to the next with no outside intervention; must be of a certain magnitude,
both quantitatively (length, complexity) and qualitatively (seriousness and universal
significance).
As far as the tragic hero is concerned, he should be a great man, greatness being the
main feature of the hero, distinguishing him from the others surrounding him. This
greatness can be expressed in anything, either as courage, nobility, morality, in short,
3

there should be a set of traits that distinguish the hero from all the others. That is why
the fall from that greatness produces in the public pity and fear. Aristotle argues that
this character should be neither too good, otherwise, the fall from prosperity would
produce only shock, nor a villain, whose fall would be the source happiness and would
satisfy our moral sense. So, the fall should not be produced by negative traits, such as vice
or depravity, but by an error of judgment or frailty. Aristotle calls this error hamartia
and suggests that it should not be vice or depravity, but a mistake or error in judgment
with a certain greatness of its own, or even ignorance, tragedy starting in the moment
that ignorance turns into knowledge.
A perfect tragedy should, as we have seen, be arranged not on the simple but on the
complex plan. It should, moreover, imitate actions which excite pity and fear, this
being the distinctive mark of tragic imitation. It follows plainly, in the first place, that
the change of fortune presented must not be the spectacle of a virtuous man brought
from prosperity to adversity: for this moves neither pity nor fear; it merely shocks us.
Nor, again, that of a bad man passing from adversity to prosperity: for nothing can be
more alien to the spirit of Tragedy; it possesses no single tragic quality; it neither
satisfies the moral sense nor calls forth pity or fear. Nor, again, should the downfall of
the utter villain be exhibited. A plot of this kind would, doubtless, satisfy the moral
sense, but it would inspire neither pity nor fear; for pity is aroused by unmerited
misfortune, fear by the misfortune of a man like ourselves. Such an event, therefore,
will be neither pitiful nor terrible. There remains, then, the character between these
two extremes- that of 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. He must be
one who is highly renowned and prosperous- a personage like Oedipus, Thyestes, or
other illustrious men of such families. (Aristotle)
The fall of the tragic hero, according to Aristotle, might be produced by an error of
judgment or by frailty which may cause him to overstep some limits. Thus, Aristotle
speaks of hamartia when referring to an error of judgment which may arise from
ignorance or some moral shortcoming (Cuddon) and hubris/hybris defined as a sort of
exterior limit that the tragic hero oversteps because of his shortcoming (hamartia): this
shortcoming or defect in the Greek tragic hero leads him to ignore the warnings of the
Gods and to transgress their laws and commands. (Cuddon) Thus, this limit is often
connected to FATE, as a supreme law that governs the life of the hero (fatum malus), but
the hero sometimes transgresses human laws (dike) and, in his desire and conviction that
he needs to change a governing system, commits a series of errors that cause his downfall.
It must be noted, however, that even if fate plays an important part in a tragedy, it is not
the only cause of the fall of the hero. This fall is produced by the hero himself, by his own
failure, frailty or error.
The effects of the tragedy are pity and fear and the purpose of the tragedy is the
purification of these feelings. Aristotle calls this katharsis. The public is supposed to
experience these feelings while seeing the action of a tragedy in order to bring them
under control, and to return, after the end of a play, to a sort of emotional balance:
Some persons fall into a religious frenzy, whom we see disenthralled by the use of
mystic melodies, which bring healing and purgation to the soul. Those who are
4

influenced by pity [eleos] or fear [phobus] and every emotional nature have a like
experience, . . . and all are in a manner purged [katharseos] and their souls
lightened and delighted. (Aristotle)
Aristotle, though, insists that a tragedy produces both feelings, and not only one of them.

OTHER VIEWS ON TRAGEDY
Aristotles view on tragedy, however, is not the only theoretical instance to have
been followed in the writing of tragedies, and so, many critics and philosophers have tries
to reinterpret the classical definitions of tragedy.
SENECAN TRAGEDY: The Senecan tragedy was far more familiar to Elizabethan
audiences and influenced more the writings of the tragedies of the period than any other
classical writers or Aristotle. The two elements present in Senecas tragedies that
influenced the Elizabethan tragedies were the insistence on violence and the sensational,
as well as the development of an elevated rhetoric, including especially the
pronouncement of sententiae (moral and universalising statements) (Jeanette Dillon)
The Senecan tragedy, written during Neros reign and clearly influenced by it, is
characterized by a preference for horrific crimes, violence, and the abuse of power. His
heroes, driven by uncontrollable passions of love, revenge, jealousy are conscious wrong-
doers. The focus on destructive forces is heightened by the appeal to ghosts, furies,
different divinities or the presence of evil rooted in the characters past, and so, despite
their energies and their willfulness they seem more the victims than the responsible
agents of their fate. (Tom MCalindon) Senecan heroes tend to assert their self very
forcefully, they are defiant and they tend to magnify their feelings, often revolting against
the universe and the gods. Seneca also investigated the effects of power on the
individuals, examining the results of ambition, fascination for power, tyrannical impulses,
as well as the insecurity of high places as well as the mutability of fortunes.
INNER CONFLICT THE ROMANTICS: Most classical theories insist on the
relationship between the heros internal beliefs and his actions conflictingly set against
the background of the will of the gods, or the society, or other types of laws, but the
Romantics see a different conflict that can become tragic, a conflict that is consumed
inside the tragic hero, becoming an internal conflict, between the human experience and
the Spirit, the tragedy arising from the attempt of the hero to balance these forces.
The Romantics tried to trace their origins to much earlier thinkers, but the most
immediate foreshadowing of the Romantic temperament in drama was the Sturm und
Drang ("storm and stress") drama, which was written primarily in Germany in the late
eighteenth century and best known for its influence on the early plays of Friedrich
Schiller and Johann Goethe. Typically, a dimly perceived, vaguely understood external
power shaped the actions of the characters. The victim-hero, an alienated, isolated
figure, aroused admiration for fortitude in the face of largely inexplicable suffering.
Initially, the protagonist was morally good in spite of a flawed past, but as the form
matured, the central character transformed into the Byronic villain/ hero who, in a
universe of uncertainty, created his own moral standards. (Richard H. Palmer)
Hegel, the German philosopher, considers that the conflict of a tragedy arises from
the fact that both sides involved in it have proper justifications. So, it does not mean that
5

one is ethically right or wrong, but only that these two views are so powerfully defended,
that they came to clash with the other and attempt to eliminate it. The resolution of the
conflict is the instauration of a new order, just and divine.
Hegels tragic heroes, therefore,
have inseparably identified themselves with some single particular aspect of those
solid interests [], and are prepared to answer for that identification. [] The original
essence of tragedy consists then in the fact that within such a conflict each of the
opposed sides, if taken by itself, has justification [...] In this way [...] an unresolved
contradiction is set up [...] However justified the tragic character and his aim, however
necessary the tragic collision, the third thing required is the tragic resolution of this
conflict. By this means eternal justice is exercised on individuals and their aims in the
sense that it restores the substance and unity of ethical life with the downfall of the
character who has disturbed the peace [...] although the characters have a purpose
which is valid in itself, they can carry it out in tragedy only by pursuing it one-sidedly
and so contradicting and infringing someone else's purpose.
F. Nietzsche insists on this duality, but does not accept the idea of a divine order.
He sees tragedy as a conflict between opposites symbolized by Apollo and Dionysus, the
former representing reason, control and art and the former representing passionate
destructive energy, uncontrollable emotion or fantasies. The tragedy represents the union
between these two forces, with the public identifying with the energy surge represented
by the Dionysian side, but controlled by the Apollonian structure of poetry and dramatic
illusion, making these emotion part, not of life, but of the dramatic experience.
N. FRYE ON TRAGEDY: Northrop Frye identifies tragedy with the mythos of autumn/
fall. He insists on the fact that, if comedy tends to blend people into the social structure,
tragedy is centered on an individual, the tragic hero becoming isolated half way between
the human society and the world of the Gods (Prometheus, Adam). They are both
instruments and victims of the divine judgment (Samson destroys the temple and
himself, Hamlet punished his fathers murder but dies). This law that lies outside the will
of the hero received different names, according to the context (Greek, Christian,
undefined), but what unites these differences is the final recognition of the law, of what it
is and what it should be. In its primordial form, Frye argues, this vision of the law (dike)
is revenge (lex talionis), the hero provoking or inheriting a conflict. Through his actions,
the hero ruins the balance of the world.
Frye distinguishes two restrictive formulae for tragedy: 1. The tragedy of fate, with a
stress on the existence of an supreme exterior power, impersonal to human strife and
effort. However, he insists on the fact that fate becomes an antithetic force only after it
was violated by the hero who sets the tragedy in motion. 2. The tragedy is the result of a
violation of the moral, divine or human law, like a correlation between Aristotles
hamartia and hubris.
The purpose of the tragedy is to return to a sense of balance that was destroyed by
the heros act. However, the path towards resolution also implies destruction that spread
to the hero who destroys himself and to the world around him. There is however a
solution to tragedy, a moment in which tragedy can be avoided and when there are two
6

possible futures for the tragic hero, but, if the audience is capable to see these solutions,
the hero cannot do that, and goes onwards towards his fall.