Aristotle's poetics

why poetry matters ; aristotle's take on art and imitation

                                             

                                        

                                                          ARISTOTLE
         

         This blog discusses Aristotle’s views on poetry and tragedy as explained in his famous work Poetics. It covers how Aristotle responded to Plato’s criticism of poets, his idea of imitation or Mimesis, his definition of tragedy, and why he believed that plot is the soul of tragedy. It also reflects on some modern texts in light of his and Plato’s ideas given by prof. dilip sir barad

Understanding Aristotle’s Poetics: A Response to Plato and the Soul of Tragedy

               Literary criticism, as we understand it today, has its foundation in the classical philosophies of Plato and Aristotle, two of the most influential thinkers in the history of Western thought. While both were philosophers, they had opposite views regarding poetry and artistic expression. Plato was suspicious of poetry and its influence on emotions and society, whereas Aristotle defended its value, especially in his seminal work Poetics. This blog explores Aristotle’s views on poetry, how he responded to Plato’s objections, his theory of Mimesis, his definition of tragedy, and the importance of plot as the soul of tragedy. The second part of the blog answers four reflection questions based on B.A. level literary studies.

Who Was Aristotle?

Aristotle (384–322 BCE) was a great Greek philosopher and scientist. He was born in Stagira, a town in ancient Greece. He was a student of Plato and later became the teacher of Alexander the Great.

           Aristotle wrote on many subjects like philosophy, logic, politics, science, ethics, and literature. He believed in observing the real world and using logic to understand it. Unlike his teacher Plato, who focused on ideal forms, Aristotle focused on the physical world and human experience.

Aristotle and Literature – Poetics

One of Aristotle’s most famous works is Poetics. It is the first known book of literary criticism in the Western world. In this book, he explains:

• What tragedy is

• Why poetry is important

• How stories should be written and judged

             He defends poetry against Plato’s criticism and says it helps us understand life and emotions.

Plato’s Charges on Poetry and Poets

                                                  

            Plato’s objections to poetry were deeply rooted in his philosophy of idealism. He believed in a perfect world of Forms or Ideas, and saw our physical world as just a shadow of that perfection. Therefore, he thought poetry, which imitates this shadow world, is twice removed from the truth. According to Plato, poetry misrepresents reality and misguides the audience by stirring emotions like pity, fear, and love, which distract from logical thinking. He also argued that poets do not possess real knowledge—they rely on inspiration, not reason. Furthermore, he believed poetry often depicts immoral or irrational behavior, especially in the portrayal of gods and heroes in epics like Homer’s Iliad. In Plato’s view, such content could corrupt the minds of the youth and weaken the moral fabric of society. Hence, in his vision of an ideal Republic, Plato suggested that poets should be banned or censored.

Aristotle’s Response to Plato’s Charges

         While Aristotle was a student of Plato, he had a more practical and balanced view of poetry. In his treatise Poetics, Aristotle directly replied to many of Plato’s charges and presented poetry as a valuable human activity. Instead of seeing poetry as harmful, Aristotle argued that poetry is a form of Mimesis or imitation, which is natural to humans. We learn and understand the world through imitation from early childhood. According to Aristotle:

         Imitation is not mere copying, but a creative process that helps us understand human actions, emotions, and morality.

        Poetry, especially tragedy, does not misguide us. Instead, it helps us process deep emotions through catharsis a term Aristotle introduced to describe the purification of emotions like pity and fear.

       Unlike history, which tells what actually happened, poetry explores what could happen, making it more philosophical and universal.

       Tragedy presents moral lessons through action, showing the consequences of human flaws and decisions.

Aristotle’s Theory of Mimesis (it's means Imitation)

        One of Aristotle’s core ideas is the concept of Mimesis. He agreed with Plato that poetry is imitation, but he gave the term a positive meaning. For Aristotle:

       Mimesis is a natural instinct and the foundation of all artistic creation.

      Through imitation, poets present life, human behavior, and emotions in a structured and artistic way.

       A poet does not simply copy reality but selects and reshapes events to create meaning and emotional impact.

Aristotle’s Definition of Tragedy

       In Poetics, Aristotle offers a famous and detailed definition of tragedy:

        “Tragedy is the imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with artistic ornament, in the form of action, not narration; through pity and fear effecting the proper catharsis of these emotions.”

    --Let us break it down into key points:

      Serious and complete action: The story must be important and whole, with a clear beginning, middle, and end.

   Artistic language: The language must be elevated and suitable to the emotions and style.

   Dramatic presentation: Tragedy should be acted, not simply narrated.

Emotional effect: It should arouse pity and fear, and lead to catharsis, or emotional purification.

Thus, tragedy has a powerful emotional and moral purpose. It helps people confront fear, loss, and flaws in a reflective way, rather than avoid or suppress them.

Plot Is the Soul of Tragedy

Among the six parts of tragedy Aristotle mentions Plot, Character, Thought, Diction, Melody, and Spectacle he considers Plot  the most important. He says:

“The plot is the soul of tragedy.”

This means:  The sequence of events in the story gives structure and meaning.

Characters serve the plot, and their actions must follow logically.

A good plot includes peripeteia (reversal of fortune) and anagnorisis (recognition or discovery).

Without a strong plot, tragedy becomes weak and meaningless.

Even if the characters are powerful or the theme is important, without a well-structured plot, the audience will not feel engaged or moved. Hence, a great tragedy depends on a well-developed, logically connected plot.

Here are the questions given .....

  1. To what extent do you agree with Plato's objection to the freedom of expression and artistic liberty enjoyed by creative writers? Identify texts (novels, plays, poems, movies, TV soaps, etc.) that can be justifiably objected to and banned based on Plato's objections.

Answer:

Plato believed that poets and creative writers should not have full freedom because he thought their work could mislead people, encourage emotions over reason, and corrupt moral values. To some extent, I agree with Plato’s concern, especially when literature or media promotes false ideas, violence, or immoral behavior without any deeper purpose or message.

1. Plato’s Main Objections:

_Poetry is an imitation far from truth

_It appeals to emotions, not reason

_It can corrupt morals, especially in the young

##Poets speak without true knowledge

2. Examples from Literature That Support Plato’s View:

a. D.H. Lawrence’s Lady Chatterley’s Lover

            This novel was banned for many years due to its open discussion of sexual relationships and use of explicit language. Plato would object because it promotes emotional pleasure and physical desire, which he saw as dangerous for society.

 b. Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses

          This novel caused religious controversy around the world. Plato would say such a book disrespects sacred truths and confuses people’s faith, especially when written by someone who is not a religious scholar.

c. Marquis de Sade’s Writings (e.g., 120 Days of Sodom)

            His works are filled with extreme violence, cruelty, and sexual abuse. Plato would strongly object to such literature because it celebrates immoral actions and could damage the reader’s ethical sense.

3. Popular Media That Reflects Plato’s Concerns:

a. TV Shows like Game of Thrones

            While the show is popular and dramatic, it includes graphic violence, betrayal, and sexual content. Plato would say it makes people addicted to sensationalism and encourages emotional chaos.

b. Movies like Joker (2019)

              This film explores the mental breakdown of a man who becomes a criminal. While it is artistically strong, Plato might argue that it justifies violence and creates sympathy for a villain, which can confuse moral thinking.

4. Classical Texts Plato Would Also Ban:

a. Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey

           Even though Plato admired Homer, he criticized these epics because they show gods behaving badly, heroes crying, and violence as glorious. Plato believed such stories could mislead the young.

b. Greek Tragedies like Medea by Euripides

            In this play, Medea kills her own children for revenge. Plato would object because the play shows a terrible act in a sympathetic way, possibly disturbing the audience’s moral compass.

Conclusion:

             So yes, in some cases, I agree with Plato. Certain creative works, especially those that glorify evil, twist the truth, or encourage emotional imbalance, can harm society if not handled carefully. However, I also believe that literature should be free to explore difficult topics — as long as it helps people think deeply, not just entertain them with shock or confusion.

2. Referring to the literary texts you studied during your B.A. program, write a brief note on the texts that followed the Aristotelian literary tradition (i.e., his concepts of tragedy, catharsis, tragic hero with hamartia, etc.).

Answer:

1. King Lear by William Shakespeare

             King Lear is one of the most touching tragedies I read. Lear is a king, a father, and a man who simply wants love and loyalty. But his tragic flaw is his pride and poor judgment. He misjudges his daughters—he rewards the ones who flatter him and banishes the one who truly loves him. This mistake leads him into a storm—both in nature and in his life.

            As the play goes on, we see Lear suffer heartbreak, madness, and finally death. As readers or viewers, we feel deep pity for this old man who realizes his mistake too late, and fear at how quickly power and pride can lead to ruin. In the end, we experience catharsis—we are moved, we feel for him, and we learn a lesson about love, ego, and human weaknesses 

2. Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare

             In this play, the focus is not just on Caesar, but more deeply on Brutus, who is the real tragic hero. Brutus is noble, patriotic, and honest—but his flaw is his idealism and being too easily influenced, especially by Cassius. He believes that killing Caesar is good for Rome. But this one decision ruins everything—Rome falls into chaos, and Brutus loses his honor, friends, and life.

              We feel pity because Brutus wanted to do the right thing, and fear because his story shows how good people can make tragic mistakes. In the end, Brutus dies, and we are left with a heavy heart—but also a sense of emotional understanding, or catharsis.

3. Hamlet by William Shakespeare

              Hamlet is another character who deeply touched me. He is a prince who wants justice for his father’s murder, but his flaw is overthinking. He delays action, gets lost in thoughts, and that leads to more deaths—including his own.

     We connect with Hamlet because he feels real confused, emotional, intelligent, but human. His tragedy also gives us catharsis, as we witness how inner conflict can destroy even the noblest person.

Conclusion

       These texts King Lear, Julius Caesar, Oedipus Rex, and Hamlet beautifully follow the Aristotelian model of tragedy. Each story has a hero with a tragic flaw, a fall from greatness, and an emotional impact that stays with us. 

3. Referring to the literary texts you studied during your B.A. program, write a brief note on the texts that did not follow the Aristotelian literary tradition (i.e., his concepts of tragedy, catharsis, tragic hero with hamartia, etc.).

Answer:

Aristotle believed that a good tragedy should have:

• A tragic hero with a flaw (hamartia)

• A clear plot with a beginning, middle, and end

• Emotions of pity and fear

• A feeling of catharsis (emotional release)

But Waiting for Godot breaks all these rules.

1. No Tragic Hero

           The two main characters, Vladimir and Estragon, are not noble or heroic. They are just two ordinary men, wearing hats, waiting by a tree. They have no goal, no past, and no future. They don’t suffer a great fall like King Lear or Oedipus.

2. No Plot or Action

              In this play, nothing really happens. The two men wait for someone named Godot, who never arrives. They talk, argue, eat, and consider leaving—but always stay. There is no rising action, climax, or resolution, which Aristotle believed was necessary in a tragedy.

3. No Catharsis

              Instead of feeling pity and fear, the audience feels confusion, boredom, or even frustration. There is no emotional cleansing or moral lesson. The play shows the meaninglessness of human life, not the downfall of a great hero.

4. Absurdism, Not Tragedy

                  Waiting for Godot belongs to the Theatre of the Absurd, not classical tragedy. It shows that life has no clear purpose, people wait for answers that never come, and language itself often fails to make sense.

Conclusion

           So, Waiting for Godot completely goes against Aristotle’s idea of tragedy. It has no hero, no structured plot, and no catharsis. Yet, it is a powerful and meaningful play in its own way, showing the emptiness and confusion of modern life. It proves that not all great literature needs to follow old rules to make an impact.

4. Have you studied any tragedies during your B.A. program? Who was/were the tragic protagonist(s) in those tragedies? What was their 'hamartia'?

Answer:

What is Hamartia? 

       Hamartia is a Greek word used by Aristotle in his book Poetics. It means a "tragic flaw" 

Hamartia is the small weakness or mistake in a good person that leads to their downfall or suffering.

Yes, I studied a few tragedies during my B.A. program. Two of the most important ones were King Lear and Julius Caesar, both written by William Shakespeare. These plays follow the Aristotelian concept of tragedy, where the main character is a noble person who has a hamartia a tragic flaw that leads to their downfall.

1. King Lear – Tragic Protagonist: King Lear

           In King Lear, the tragic hero is King Lear, the aging ruler of Britain. His hamartia is his pride (ego) and poor judgment. At the beginning of the play, he decides to divide his kingdom among his three daughters based on how much they say they love him. He believes the fake words of Goneril and Regan and rejects Cordelia, who truly loves him but speaks honestly.

            Because of this mistake, he loses everything his power, his family, his sanity, and finally his life. The play shows his slow realization of the truth, and we feel pity and fear as we watch his suffering. His tragic flaw blindness to true love and truth brings his downfall.

2. Julius Caesar – Tragic Protagonist: Brutus

              In Julius Caesar, the tragic protagonist is not Caesar but Brutus, one of the conspirators. Brutus is an honest and patriotic Roman, but his hamartia is his idealism and poor judgment. He believes that by killing Caesar, he will save the Roman Republic. However, he is manipulated by Cassius and makes the wrong choice.

           Brutus does not act out of jealousy or greed, but his moral confusion and trust in the wrong people lead to war, destruction, and his own death. His tragedy is especially painful because his intentions were good, but his decisions were flawed.

Conclusion:

So, in both King Lear and Julius Caesar, the tragic protagonists Lear and Brutus are noble men brought down by their own mistakes (hamartia). Their stories teach us about human weakness, the danger of pride, and how even good people can suffer when they make poor decisions.

5. Did the plots of those tragedies follow the necessary rules and regulations proposed by Aristotle? (e.g., chain of cause and effect, principle of probability and necessity, harmonious arrangement of incidents, complete, certain magnitude, unity of action, etc.)

Answer:

Yes, the plots of both King Lear and Julius Caesar mostly follow the rules of tragedy described by Aristotle in his book Poetics. Aristotle said that a good tragedy should have:

• A clear beginning, middle, and end
• A chain of cause and effect (one event leads to another)
• A complete story with serious action 
• Unity of action (one main story, not too many subplots)
• Events that are probable and necessary (logically connect)

1. King Lear

The play begins with Lear’s decision to divide his kingdom.

      That decision causes everything else—family betrayal, madness, war, and finally death.

       Each event is linked clearly to the one before it, which shows a strong chain of cause and effect.

      The story has a serious tone and shows the downfall of a king, which gives it great importance (magnitude).

       Although there are subplots (like Gloucester and his sons), they are connected to the main theme, so the play maintains a sense of unity.

✅ Follows most of Aristotle’s rules.

2. Julius Caesar

• The plot focuses on Brutus’s decision to kill Caesar.
• That action leads to chaos, civil war, and the fall of Brutus himself.
• Everything happens in a logical order, following the principle of cause and effect
• The play has a serious and complete structure with a clear central story (the fall of a leader and the consequences of political decisions).

✅ Also follows Aristotle’s rules quite well.

Conclusion:

Both King Lear and Julius Caesar have well-structured plots that match Aristotle’s ideas of a good tragedy. The events are logically connected, the actions feel realistic, and the stories are complete and powerful, creating a strong emotional impact.

6. Discuss a recent controversy in literature, film, or the arts that echoes Plato's objections to artistic freedom. What is your stance on this controversy? Provide an example of one such controversy.

Answer:

                                                       

One recent controversy in the world of film that echoes Plato’s objections to artistic freedom is the debate surrounding the Bollywood film "Padmaavat" (2018), directed by Sanjay Leela Bhansali.

What Was the Controversy?

          Before its release, Padmaavat faced huge protests from certain groups, especially the Karni Sena, who claimed that the film misrepresented the history of Queen Padmavati and disrespected Rajput culture. They believed the film showed romantic scenes between the queen and the Muslim ruler Alauddin Khilji, which was not true according to their beliefs.

       Protesters said the film could hurt sentiments, promote false ideas, and spoil the moral image of a respected historical figure.

       The director and actors even received threats, and the film's release was delayed.

      Some states in India banned the movie, even though it was cleared by the censor board.

How This Reflects Plato’s Objection:

Plato believed that:

• Art and literature can mislead people if it shows false or emotional content.
• Poets and artists often don’t have true knowledge of the subject they show
• Such works can corrupt minds, especially of the young and uneducated.

This controversy shows the same concern: that a creative work like Padmaavat may influence public thinking in the wrong way or disrespect truth and morality.

My Opinion:

       I believe that artistic freedom is important, but it should be used responsibly.

       Artists should research properly and respect people’s beliefs and culture, especially when dealing with real-life events or historical figures.

       At the same time, people should also understand that films and literature are creative interpretations, not always factual.

      Instead of banning or attacking, we should have open discussions, and let the audience decide with mature thinking.

Conclusion:

       The Padmaavat controversy clearly reflects Plato’s fear that art can be powerful and dangerous if misused. But in a free society, we must balance creative expression with cultural sensitivity. Artistic freedom should not be completely restricted, but it should come with a sense of duty and respect.