Summary: Poetics

The subject of this treatise is poetic art itself: its forms, its species, and the effects proper to each. The work is intended to be not merely descriptive but also prescriptive: it sets out how the fable should be composed if poetic composition is to be beautiful ¹.

It is here that Aristotle gives his famous definition of art as imitation (mimesis). The various arts are distinguished from one another by this essential characteristic: either they imitate in different ways, or they imitate different things.

For example, painting imitates through drawing, singing through the voice; dancers imitate characters, passions, and actions through rhythm and movement.

Aristotle observes that there is no single term that designates the art of imitation in language in general—one that would encompass both Socratic dialogues and poets' verses, that is, philosophy, poetry, and literature.

On the other hand, imitation can elevate, preserve, or debase the object it imitates. Thus, while tragedy represents the superior man (through the depth and gravity of the emotions it portrays), comedy ridicules human weaknesses and delights in depicting men as inferior to what they actually are.

Where does poetry come from? Why do men enjoy writing or hearing poetry? For Aristotle, it stems from two causes:

Imitation is natural to man, and his skill in it surpasses that of animals. It is through this process that his first knowledge arises. Moreover, imitation is not only a source of knowledge but also of pleasure. Aristotle observes, for instance, the apparent paradox that while we are repelled by the sight of a corpse, we take pleasure in seeing it depicted in a painting—for example, in a war scene.

However, a work is not always appreciated purely as an imitation: it may also be valued for its colours, the technique employed in its creation, or for other reasons.

Aristotle defines comedy as the imitation of men of inferior moral quality ². Yet, above all, we find his renowned definition of tragedy as purification (catharsis). For, insofar as it arouses pity and fear, it brings about the purgation proper to such emotions ³.

The spectacle, Aristotle adds, is only incidental to art, for the power of tragedy endures even without a contest or actors ⁴ or a stagehand managing props.

Aristotle then turns to the notion of beauty. What makes one thing beautiful and another not? What is beauty?

For Aristotle, this depends on two essential characteristics: magnitude and order. He observes that a beautiful animal can be neither excessively small nor excessively large (for in that case, it escapes our gaze ⁵).

Aristotle applies this principle to art, using the example of the fable. Similarly, a fable must have a certain length to be appreciated. If it is too long, the memory fails to retain it.

A fable must, therefore, possess a certain unity. A fable that is too long loses coherence and ultimately bores the viewer. The proper length is one that allows a sequence of events, following one another according to plausibility or necessity, to carry the hero from misfortune to happiness—or from happiness to misfortune ⁶.

Aristotle calls this coherence unity of action. A successful play is one in which no part can be removed without disturbing the whole.

The poet differs from the historian in that he does not seek to recount events as they happened, but as they might happen. It is this distinction—and not the fact that one writes in prose and the other in verse—that sets them apart. (Indeed, if we were to render a historian's work, such as that of Herodotus, into verse, it would remain history.)

This distinction allows us to rank these two disciplines:

So poetry is more philosophical and of a higher nature than history, for poetry expresses the universal, while history recounts the particular ⁷.

Certain criteria can be proposed for judging the quality of a fable. For instance, a fable is successful when the succession of episodes is determined by plausibility or necessity.

Equally, when the thread of the narrative features twists and turns—namely the reversal of the action in the opposite direction ⁸.

Aristotle now turns his attention to the tragedy. What makes a tragedy successful? How can it produce its proper effects—fear and pity?

A tragedy fails to achieve its effect if it portrays a good man falling from happiness into misfortune (which provokes revulsion), a wicked man rising from misfortune to happiness, or, conversely, a wicked man falling from happiness into misfortune (which fails to inspire either fear or pity).

Instead, Aristotle asserts that tragedy (of which Œdipus by Sophocles remains the most significant example) must present the story of a man like ourselves—a man who does not deserve his misfortune. This man, though neither eminently virtuous nor entirely just, falls into misfortune not through wickedness or depravity but as the result of some error or misjudgement (hamartia)—as in the case of Oedipus ⁹.

Traditional fables must be respected (Oedipus must kill his father), but the poet must make judicious use of the inherited material ¹⁰.

Aristotle observes that every tragedy consists of two parts: the plot and the dénouement ¹¹. Both must be crafted properly—yet it is always necessary to triumph over both challenges equally ¹².

Finally, Aristotle enumerates the five types of criticism that can be levelled against a play—or indeed any work of art: that it is impossible, implausible, needlessly base, contradictory, or contrary to the principles of art.

¹ Poetics, 1, 1447a
² 5, 1449a
³ 6, 1449b
⁴ 6, 1450b
⁵ 7, 1450b
⁶ 7, 1451a
⁷ 9, 1451b
⁸ 11, 1452a
⁹ 13, 1453a
¹⁰ 14, 1453b
¹¹ 18, 1455b