A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe, from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 1 (of 3), Classical and mediæval criticismSaintsbury, George
History
A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe, from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 1 (of 3), Classical and mediæval criticism
Saintsbury, George
Criticism -- History; Literature -- History and criticism; Literature, Medieval
Comedy he dismisses very briefly. He thinks that it ἔλαθε διὰ τὸ μὴ
σπουδάζεσθαι—little attention was paid to it, as not being taken
seriously. Epic and tragedy must be treated first—tragedy first of all.
And then he plunges straight into the famous definition of tragedy,
discussion of which had best be reserved. The definition itself is this:
“An imitation of an action, serious, complete, and possessing magnitude,
in language sweetened with each kind of sweetening in the several parts,
conveyed by action and not recital, possessing pity and terror,
accomplishing the purgation of such[39] emotions.” Tragedy will require
scenic arrangements, musical accompaniments, and “words,” as modern
actors say; his own term, “lexis,” is not so very different. But it will
also require character, “thought,” and plot or story. The most important
of all is the last, which he also describes by another name, the
“setting together of incidents,” the Action—to which he thinks character
quite subsidiary, and indeed facultative. There cannot, he says
categorically, be tragedy without action; there may be without
character. “The most powerful elements of emotional interest,” as
Professor Butcher translates οἷς ψυχαγωγεῖ, “the things with which
tragedy leads souls,” are revolutions and discoveries, and these are
parts of action. Novices can do good things in diction and in character,
not in plot. Still Character is second. Thought is third, Diction
apparently a bad fourth. Song is only a chief embellishment or
“sweetening,” and Scenery is the last of all, because, though
influencing the soul, it is inartistic and outside poetry. So he turns
once more as to the principal or chief thing, to the plot or action.
This is to be a complete whole, and of a certain magnitude, with a
beginning, middle, and end. A very small animal organism[40] cannot be
beautiful, as neither can one “ten thousand stadia long.” Then he comes
to the great question of Unity—or, since that word is much blurred by
usage, let us say “what makes the story one.” It is not enough to have a
single hero; life, even a part of a life, is too complicated for that.
We must have just so much and just so little that the action shall
present neither gaps nor redundancies. Nor need the poet by any means
stick to historical or prescribed fact—the probable, not the actual, is
his game. He may invent wholly (subject to this law of probability) if
he likes. Plots with episodes are bad.
Footnote 39:
There are strong arguments for rendering τῶν τοιούτων not “such” but
“these,” and Professor Butcher actually does so.
Footnote 40:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account