Paper no.: 3 Literary theory and criticism


Paper no. 3
Concept of Shakespearian Tragedy and Greek Tragedy


  • Introduction:
There is definition of tragedy given by Aristotle; he breaks it in to seven parts:
  1. It involves mimesis
  2. It is serious
  3. The action is complete and magnitude
  4. It is made up of language of the “aesthetic ornaments” of rhyme and harmony
  5. This “aesthetic ornaments” are not used uniformly throughout, but are introduced in separate parts of the work, so that, for instance, some beats are spoken in verse and other beats are sung.
  6. It is performed rather than narrated
  7. It arouses the emotions of pity and fear and accomplishes a catharsis of these emotions.
In poetics Aristotle give six parts of tragedies, there is,
  1. The spectacle (opsis)
  2. Melody/songs (Melos)
  3. Diction (lexis)
  4. Character (ethos)
  5. Thought (dianoia)
  6. The plot (fable)
There are views of Aristotle, and these are consider as part of Greek tragedies. The genre of tragedy is very old and by time passing there are many changes takes place in this genre. As there is Greek tragedy, there is also another tragedy to compare with and that is Shakespearean tragedy, style of tragedy which rise by Shakespeare. There are some difference, similarities many things in between them which we discussed here.




  • Differences between Greek and Shakespearian Tragedy:


  • Greek tragedy was performed as part of religious festival-so the stories were already known to the audience, and everyone knew what was going to happen next.
  • Elizabethan theatre was commercial entertainment. The stories were usually new, and an element of suspense was nearly always present.
  • Greek actors wore elaborate costumes, and part of dialogue was sung. Murders, fights, and battles had to take place off-stage –usually happens in opera or a ballet.
  • Elizabethan actors wore ordinary clothes. They could scuffle, fight – even ‘die’ – onstage.
  • Because Greek drama was semi-official, Greek playwrights tended to be highly respected public servants. Most Greek plays take a broadly politically conservative stance.
  • Elizabethan players were seen as anti-establishment. Many Elizabethan plays are critical of official government positions – though there was rigorous state censorship to make sure they never went too far.


A study of the tragedies written by Sophocles, Euripides, and Aeschylus, shows that ancient Greek tragedy is basically modeled upon an essentially religious weltanschauung. Accordingly, Greek tragedy represents the philosophy of men’s puny insignificance in the face of a colossal divine power that controls and mostly destroys human life. The emphasis here is laid upon the inscrutable power of fate of destiny, capable of bringing about havoc and ruin to human life. The utter helplessness of men in his struggle against such a malevolent and uncontrollable divine power is the substance of classical Greek tragedy. The most obvious example is that of Oedipus in Oedipus Tyrannous who commits a sin in such ignorance that the impression of an overwhelming sinister destiny that rules and destroys his life is paramount. Similar examples are Sophocles’ Antigone or Aeschylus’ Agamemnon.


The most striking contrast in this fatalistic world view of the Greek’s found in Shakespearean tragedy where the entire emphasis is laid upon the responsibility of the individual in bringing about his ruin. Though Aristotle has pointed out that the Greek tragedies also portrayed the mistaken actions of the hero and therefore the Greek tragedies also showed an element of awareness of tragedy resulting from human flaws, the error of judgment of the hero or his hamartia is always conditioned by destiny. That is, however much the hero makes mistakes, the overall impression is that he is led to committing those errors under the snares and pitfalls of Destiny.


In Shakespearian tragedy the emphasis, however, is upon human action independent of Destiny where, however, the impression of fate working upon man is also not totally negated. For instance, there is no doubt that Macbath’s ambition leads to his sacrilegious murder of Duncan which results is his doom, but there is also the impression of the witches that precipitate his murder. Similarly othello’s tragic destiny is brought about entirely by his misjudgements resulting in his overwhelming Jealousy, but there is also the impression that Othello is so pitted against certain evil forces over which he has no control. Actually, the Greeks had a Theo centric vision while the Elizabethans, motivated by the renaissance laid stress on the vision of an anthropocentric universe. Hence crux of tragic action lay with a divine power in Greek tragedies while the individual hero and his actions were of prime importance in a Shakespearean tragedy.


In matters of structure, the Greeks were much more fastidious about the unity of action. The unity of action implies that the action represented in a play should be just one single whole without any digressions what so ever. As a natural corollary the unity of action stood the unities of time and place. The unity of time implied that the time represented in the play should be limited to the two or three hours it takes to act the play or at most to a single day of either twelve or twenty four hours. The unity of place implied that the tragic action portrayed in the play should be limited to a single location. These three unities were observed for the sake of verisimilitude, that is, for the achievement of an illusion of reality in the audience.


Shakespearean tragedy completely dispenses of these three unities. A Shakespearean tragedy takes place often in two or three places, and the time taken is much more than twenty-four hours, often spurning a month or even more. Moreover, often in plays like king Lear or Hamlet there are sub plots which run counter to the Greek notion of the unity of action.
  • Unity versus Variety
Greek’s focused on a single theme and plot. The story was one that its audience would recognized and treated upon that single without any subplot. Shakespeare, on the other hand, wove a wealth of plot threads through his plays with multiple story line, themes and goal occurring in each play. Each play had secondary story lines that sometimes were directly related to the main plot and other times simply fleshed out the world of the play.


  • Characters


In Greek drama, the charecters had to considered “great” in order to be the subject of the play. They were military generals, royalty or children of gods. Also, Greek drama tended to have fewer characters with a chorus filling in all of the roles surrounding the three or four main characters. In Shakespeare’s plays, characters came from all walks of life. He even used fairy-type creatures and ghosts in several of his works. There was a larger company, and most plays have roles for at least a dozen characters, some many more.


  • Subject Matter


Greek drama was almost always instructive and dealt with great matters. The plays were political or religious. Most of the subject matter came from histories or myths that the audience already knew, removing the need for much exposition. The plays explored the meaning behind theses great events and focused on the story’s moral and ethics. Shakespeare, on the other hand, borrowed widely from as many sources as he could find. His subject matter included the stories of private individuals and lovers as well as kings and nobles. He produced histories, but he also produced pastoral plays, and the subject could be personal as a love affair or the playing of a bad debt. Shakespeare mixed comedy and tragedy within a single play, and some of his works defy an easy fit into one genre or another.






  • Staging


Greek theater was performed at religious festivals in large outdoor amphitheaters. The stages were large and the audience even larger. Greek drama made frequent use of masks, in part to amplify the voices of the actors. Shakespearean plays took place on smaller stages. They were performed in courtyards and eventually in more permanent structures such as the Globe. They also were performed in parlors and traveled during parts of the year. There was very little use of masks, though they did use a great number of costumes and wings.


  • Similarities between Greek and Shakespearean tragedy
The lovers tend to die or be torn apart from each other. For example: Romeo and Juliet; Paris and Helena.
Basically, the similarities are that the charecters starts of f doing quite well but end up not doing well at all, although in Greek tragedy they are usually miserable and in Shakespearean they are usually dead. Any other similarities are just similarities between all forms or dramas: actors, audience, script.
Shakespearean and Greek tragedies are most notably similar in that their main characters are doomed because of a singular fatal flaw. In the Greek tragedies, this is usually called “hubris”, or excessive pride. In ancient Greece, the idea was that the man could only be so powerful and so successful before he’d get too big of head, so to speak, and get put back in his place by fate. They show it as just desserts, basically. Oedipus would be an example.
Shakespeare’s tragedies feature a wider array of flaws, but these flaws are still the undoing of the main character. You have ambition, vengeance, impulsiveness, paranoia, and jealousy for instance. They both also make use of dramatic irony. Many times, the fatal flaw of the character will either result in his own death or the deaths of his family and loved once. In some cases, the biggest punishment a main character can get is to still be alive at the end of the play and have to live with what he’s done.
The classical tragedy was define by Aristotle in poetics. Within this text, Aristotle outlined the characteristics typical of the classical tragedy. These characteristics are as follows.
The protagonist must possess hamartia. The downfall of the protagonist is not fully the fault of the protagonist. The protagonist is typically of high status.
In regards to Shakespearean plays, many of the tragedies followed the characteristics donated by Aristotle. For example, in Shakespearean Macbeth, the protagonist ambition leads to his downfall. His place as king, and his fall from king, shows his downfall as being rather extreme. Macbeth is not completely at fault.


  • Comparison between Greek and Shakespearean tragedy


  • In the Greek tragedy they are believe in destiny is character and in Shakespearean tragedy they believe in character is destiny.
  • In the Greek tragedy they used to well known stories and Shakespearean tragedy they creates their own story and use the Fatal flaw.
  • Greek writers use strong religious elements and Shakespeare use supernatural elements, in the tragedy.
  • Greek’s do not like to act violence and horror on the stage on the other side they use internal and external conflicts on stage.
  • In Greek tragedy law of unity is important but in Shakespearean that is not considerable.
















Works cited












Comments

Popular Posts