I have been studying this essay for years. I consider it one of the most significant pieces of writing ever written.
References and Further Reading 1. Poetry as Imitation The first scandal in the Poetics is the initial marking out of dramatic poetry as a form of imitation.
We call the poet a creator, and are offended at the suggestion that he might be merely some sort of recording device. As the painter's eye teaches us how to look and shows us what we never saw, the dramatist presents things that never existed until he imagined them, and makes us experience worlds we could never have found the way to on our own.
But Aristotle has no intention to diminish the poet, and in fact says the same thing I just said, in making the point that poetry is more philosophic than history. By imitation, Aristotle does not mean the sort of mimicry by which Aristophanes, say, finds syllables that approximate the sound of frogs.
He is speaking of the imitation of action, and by action he does not mean mere happenings. Aristotle speaks extensively of praxis in the Nicomachean Ethics. It is not a word he uses loosely, and in fact his use of it in the definition of tragedy recalls the discussion in the Ethics.
Action, as Aristotle uses the word, refers only to what is deliberately chosen, and capable of finding completion in the achievement of some purpose. Animals and young children do not act in this sense, and action is not the whole of the life of any of us.
The poet must have an eye for the emergence of action in human life, and a sense for the actions that are worth paying Brave at heart essay to.
They are not present in the world in such a way that a video camera could detect them. An intelligent, feeling, shaping human soul must find them. By the same token, the action of the drama itself is not on the stage. It takes form and has its being in the imagination of the spectator.
The actors speak and move and gesture, but it is the poet who speaks through them, from imagination to imagination, to present to us the thing that he has made.
Because that thing he makes has the form of an action, it has to be seen and held together just as actively and attentively by us as by him.
The imitation is the thing that is re-produced, in us and for us, by his art. This is a powerful kind of human communication, and the thing imitated is what defines the human realm. If no one had the power to imitate action, life might just wash over us without leaving any trace.
How do I know that Aristotle intends the imitation of action to be understood in this way? There is the perception of proper sensibles-colors, sounds, tastes and so on; these lie on the surfaces of things and can be mimicked directly for sense perception.
But there is also perception of common sensibles, available to more than one of our senses, as shape is grasped by both sight and touch, or number by all five senses; these are distinguished by imagination, the power in us that is shared by the five senses, and in which the circular shape, for instance, is not dependent on sight or touch alone.
These common sensibles can be mimicked in various ways, as when I draw a messy, meandering ridge of chalk on a blackboard, and your imagination grasps a circle. Skilled mimics can imitate people we know, by voice, gesture, and so on, and here already we must engage intelligence and imagination together.
The dramatist imitates things more remote from the eye and ear than familiar people. Sophocles and Shakespeare, for example, imitate repentance and forgiveness, true instances of action in Aristotle's sense of the word, and we need all the human powers to recognize what these poets put before us.
So the mere phrase imitation of an action is packed with meaning, available to us as soon as we ask what an action is, and how the image of such a thing might be perceived. Aristotle does understand tragedy as a development out of the child's mimicry of animal noises, but that is in the same way that he understands philosophy as a development out of our enjoyment of sight-seeing Metaphysics I, 1.
In each of these developments there is a vast array of possible intermediate stages, but just as philosophy is the ultimate form of the innate desire to know, tragedy is considered by Aristotle the ultimate form of our innate delight in imitation.
His beloved Homer saw and achieved the most important possibilities of the imitation of human action, but it was the tragedians who, refined and intensified the form of that imitation, and discovered its perfection. The Character of Tragedy A work is a tragedy, Aristotle tells us, only if it arouses pity and fear.
Why does he single out these two passions? Some interpreters think he means them only as examples--pity and fear and other passions like that--but I am not among those loose constructionists. Aristotle does use a word that means passions of that sort toioutabut I think he does so only to indicate that pity and fear are not themselves things subject to identification with pin-point precision, but that each refers to a range of feeling.
It is just the feelings in those two ranges, however, that belong to tragedy. Why shouldn't some tragedy arouse pity and joy, say, and another fear and cruelty? In various places, Aristotle says that it is the mark of an educated person to know what needs explanation and what doesn't. He does not try to prove that there is such a thing as nature, or such a thing as motion, though some people deny both.
Likewise, he understands the recognition of a special and powerful form of drama built around pity and fear as the beginning of an inquiry, and spends not one word justifying that restriction. We, however, can see better why he starts there by trying out a few simple alternatives.
Suppose a drama aroused pity in a powerful way, but aroused no fear at all.Rhetorical Analysis of Speeches in to Kill a Mockingbird, Battle of Falkirk, and Brave Heart - We should study spoken language as it is truly unique and we can see the effect and beauty of spoken language in works of great orators and writers.
braveheart essays There's a philosophy that states, " The best things in life are worth fighting for." In the movie Braveheart staring Mel Gibson this philosophy is the basis for the entire film. Braveheart is based on the true story of a Scottish farmer, William Wallace.
THE FOLLOWING IS Ralph Waldo Emerson's essay, Self-Reliance, translated into modern English.I have been studying this essay for years. I consider it one of .
Search Essay Examples > Get Expert Essay Editing Help > Build Your Thesis Statement > Log in. Search. Author’s note: This essay originally appeared in The Baffler web-zine July The following was my original submission draft.
It may contain some typos. The Future of the City by James Howard Kunstler One spring day not so long ago, I had a low-grade epiphany walking across New York’s Central Park from my hotel on the more». Braveheart is a American epic war film directed by Mel Gibson, who stars as William Wallace, a late 13th-century Scottish warrior who led the Scots in the First War of Scottish Independence against King Edward I of attheheels.com film also stars Sophie Marceau, Patrick McGoohan and Catherine attheheels.com story is inspired by Blind Harry's epic poem The Actes and Deidis of the Illustre and.