-
The Argument
- University of Michigan Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
The Argument Based on Aristotle’s Poetics: The Argument and Plato and Aristotle on Poetry by Gerald F. Else and on the Poetics by Aristotle, translated by Gerald F. Else. David Greenspan in The Argument. Target Margin Theater/The Kitchen, New York, 2007. Photograph by Hilary McHone. The Argument First produced by Target Margin Theater and premiered at The Kitchen, New York City, from June 14 through June 30, 2007. Aristotle David Greenspan Lighting Design by Natalie Robin Costume Design by Asta Bennie Hostetter Directed by David Herskovits Character: Aristotle, a philosopher trained by Plato Setting: Athens. Note: Modern dress, no toga. 196 [18.118.166.98] Project MUSE (2024-04-18 00:08 GMT) Aristotle: The art of poetic composition in general and its various species, the function and effect of each of them; how the plots should be constructed if the composition is to be an artistic success; how many other component elements are involved in the process and of what kind; and likewise all the other questions that fall under this same branch of inquiry— these are the problems we shall discuss. Let us begin then in the right and natural way with basic principles. Epic composition and the writing of tragedy—and also comedy, composing dithyrambs and some of the making of music with the ›ute or the lyre: these are all, in point of fact, imitative processes— though they differ from each other in three ways: (1) by having different means (or media), (2) by having different objects, and (3) by having different modes of imitation. In terms of means: the aforementioned arts all carry on their imitation by means of rhythm, speech, and melody— but with the latter two (speech and melody) used either separately or together: thus, the arts of ›ute or lyre—or any similar instrument—such as the panpipes— produce their imitation using only melody and rhythm, while such arts as the Socratic dialogues or other works in prose or verse use only speech and rhythm. Parenthetically, some people lump together poetry with anything composed in verse. In fact, the title poet is at times applied to anyone who versi‹es a subject; yet Empedocles— whose treatise On Nature has pronounced artistic qualities— The Argument / 197 has nothing in common with Homer except for the fact that he writes in verse. Poets imitate, they don’t hold forth; hence Homer is a “poet,” Empedocles a “scholar.” And a scholar— no matter what he thinks— or thinks of himself—is not a poet. Now certain arts use all the media we speci‹ed (rhythm, speech, and melody): the dithyramb does so, and so does tragedy and comedy. But there is a difference: tragedy and comedy are sung at points, at some points only spoken; in the choral dithyramb— the singers sing from ‹rst to last—which makes for a great deal of singing. Objects of imitation: since those that imitate, imitate those in action—it follows those they imitate must by necessity be either worthwhile or worthless people (for clear characteristics do tend to develop in men of action— we are what we do): thus Homer imitated serious men and Hegemon of Thasos (the inventor of parody) imitated rascals. And thus, the difference between tragedy and comedy coincides exactly with this master-difference: namely, the one (tragedy) imitates noble types, while the other (comedy) imitates what we sometimes refer to as low-down no-’count types. Modes of imitation; and this is the third and ‹nal way we have of differentiating these arts; for it is possible (possible) to imitate the same objects in the same media by: (1) narrating and dramatizing 198 / The Myopia and Other Plays by David Greenspan (as Homer does), (2) only narrating, and (3) only dramatizing. So in a way Sophocles would be the same as Homer since both have imitated noble specimens, and in another way is Sophocles the same as Aristophanes, for both have imitated characters by dramatizing them. Why do humans imitate? It stands to reason there are two operative causes: (1) imitation is congenital to human beings (we learn our ‹rst lessons through imitation), (2) there is the pleasure all men take in works of imitation. A proof of this is there are things we view with horror in life, but whose images— even when executed in detail— we view with pleasure. Think of animals that frighten us or of cadavers. The cause of this? Learning is a pleasure— not only to philosophers...