Poetics (Aristotle)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Aristotle's Poetics aims to give an account of poetry. Aristotle does this by attempting to explain poetry through first principles[1], and by classifying poetry into its different genres and component parts.
Contents |
[edit] Content of the work
Aristotle taught that poetry could be divided into three genres: Tragedy, Comedy, and Epic verse. Poetics focuses mainly on tragedy, while a second work by Aristotle focusing on comedy has been lost. It has been speculated that the Tractatus coislinianus was an outline of his lectures on the subject, or notes from a philosopher in the Aristotelian tradition.
The surviving text of Poetics is most likely not the entire text. The existing text was most likely transcribed by one of his students. Evidence suggests the existence of a more complete work. Many of Aristotle's texts were transcribed by his students. The clearest example of this is Nicomachean Ethics which is named after Nicomachus who is credited with editing the text.[2]
The centerpiece of Aristotle's surviving work is his examination of tragedy:
-
- 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 catharsis of these emotions.[3]
This work combined with the Rhetoric make up Aristotle's works on aesthetics.
[edit] Influence of the work
Poetics was not influential in its time, and was generally understood to coincide with the more famous Rhetoric. This is because in Aristotle's time, rhetoric and poetry were not as separated as they later became and were in a sense different versions of the same thing. In later times, Poetics became hugely influential. The conception of tragedy during the Enlightenment especially owes much to Poetics.
The Arabic version of Aristotle’s Poetics that influenced the Middle Ages was translated from a Greek manuscript dating from before the year 700. This manuscript was transmitted from Greek to Syriac and is independent of the currently accepted eleventh-century source designated “Paris 1741.”
The Syriac source used for the Arabic translations departed widely in vocabulary from the original Poetics, and it initiated a misinterpretation of Aristotelian thought that continued through the Middle Ages.[4]
There are two different Arabic interpretations of Aristotle’s Poetics in commentaries by Abu Nasr al-Farabi and Averroes (i.e., Abu al-Walid Ibn Rushd).
Al-Farabi’s treatise endeavors to establish poetry as a logical faculty of expression, giving it validity in the Islamic world. Averroes’ commentary attempts to harmonize his assessment of the Poetics with al-Farabi’s, but he is ultimately unable to reconcile his ascription of moral purpose to poetry with al-Farabi’s logical interpretation.
However, Averroes' interpretation of the Poetics was accepted by the West because of its relevance to their humanistic viewpoints, and at times, the philosophers of the Middle Ages even preferred Averroes’ commentary over Aristotle's actual meaning. This resulted in the survival of Aristotle’s Poetics through the Arabic literary tradition.
[edit] In popular culture
The Poetics -- both the extant first book and the lost second book -- figure prominently in Umberto Eco's novel The Name of the Rose.
[edit] Notes
- ^ Poetics: 1447a13
- ^ http://nicomacheanethics.net/
- ^ From Chapter 6 of Poetics:1449b24-29, SH Butcher transl.
- ^ Hardison, 81.
[edit] References
[edit] Primary sources
[edit] In Greek
[edit] In English translation
- Thomas Twining, 1789
- Samuel Henry Butcher, 1902: full text
- Ingram Bywater, 1909: full text
- William Hamilton Fyfe, 1926: full text
- L. J. Potts, 1953
- G. M. A. Grube, 1958
- librivox.org audio recording
[edit] Secondary sources
- Ari Hiltunen, 2001, Aristotle in Hollywood, Intellect Books, ISBN 1-84150-060-7
- Hardison, O.B., Jr. “Averroes.” Medieval Literary Criticism: Translations and Interpretations. New York: F. Ungar Pub. Co. 1987. 81-88.
