按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
fault if a thing is inconsistent with their own fancy。
The question about Icarius has been treated in this fashion。 The
critics imagine he was a Lacedaemonian。 They think it strange；
therefore； that Telemachus should not have met him when he went to
Lacedaemon。 But the Cephallenian story may perhaps be the true one。
They allege that Odysseus took a wife from among themselves； and
that her father was Icadius； not Icarius。 It is merely a mistake；
then； that gives plausibility to the objection。
In general； the impossible must be justified by reference to
artistic requirements； or to the higher reality； or to received
opinion。 With respect to the requirements of art； a probable
impossibility is to be preferred to a thing improbable and yet
possible。 Again； it may be impossible that there should be men such as
Zeuxis painted。 'Yes；' we say； 'but the impossible is the higher
thing； for the ideal type must surpass the realty。' To justify the
irrational； we appeal to what is commonly said to be。 In addition to
which； we urge that the irrational sometimes does not violate
reason； just as 'it is probable that a thing may happen contrary to
probability。'
Things that sound contradictory should be examined by the same rules
as in dialectical refutation… whether the same thing is meant； in
the same relation； and in the same sense。 We should therefore solve
the question by reference to what the poet says himself； or to what is
tacitly assumed by a person of intelligence。
The element of the irrational； and； similarly； depravity of
character； are justly censured when there is no inner necessity for
introducing them。 Such is the irrational element in the introduction
of Aegeus by Euripides and the badness of Menelaus in the Orestes。
Thus； there are five sources from which critical objections are
drawn。 Things are censured either as impossible； or irrational； or
morally hurtful； or contradictory； or contrary to artistic
correctness。 The answers should be sought under the twelve heads above
mentioned。
POETICS｜26
XXVI
The question may be raised whether the Epic or Tragic mode of
imitation is the higher。 If the more refined art is the higher； and
the more refined in every case is that which appeals to the better
sort of audience； the art which imitates anything and everything is
manifestly most unrefined。 The audience is supposed to be too dull
to comprehend unless something of their own is thrown by the
performers； who therefore indulge in restless movements。 Bad
flute…players twist and twirl； if they have to represent 'the
quoit…throw；' or hustle the coryphaeus when they perform the Scylla。
Tragedy； it is said； has this same defect。 We may compare the
opinion that the older actors entertained of their successors。
Mynniscus used to call Callippides 'ape' on account of the
extravagance of his action； and the same view was held of Pindarus。
Tragic art； then； as a whole； stands to Epic in the same relation as
the younger to the elder actors。 So we are told that Epic poetry is
addressed to a cultivated audience； who do not need gesture；
Tragedy； to an inferior public。 Being then unrefined； it is
evidently the lower of the two。
Now； in the first place； this censure attaches not to the poetic but
to the histrionic art； for gesticulation may be equally overdone in
epic recitation； as by Sosistratus； or in lyrical competition； as by
Mnasitheus the Opuntian。 Next； all action is not to be condemned…
any more than all dancing… but only that of bad performers。 Such was
the fault found in Callippides； as also in others of our own day；
who are censured for representing degraded women。 Again； Tragedy
like Epic poetry produces its effect even without action； it reveals
its power by mere reading。 If； then； in all other respects it is
superior； this fault； we say； is not inherent in it。
And superior it is； because it has an the epic elements… it may even
use the epic meter… with the music and spectacular effects as
important accessories； and these produce the most vivid of
pleasures。 Further； it has vividness of impression in reading as
well as in representation。 Moreover； the art attains its end within
narrower limits for the concentrated effect is more pleasurable than
one which is spread over a long time and so diluted。 What； for
example； would be the effect of the Oedipus of Sophocles； if it were
cast into a form as long as the Iliad？ Once more； the Epic imitation
has less unity； as is shown by this； that any Epic poem will furnish
subjects for several tragedies。 Thus if the story adopted by the
poet has a strict unity； it must either be concisely told and appear
truncated； or； if it conforms to the Epic canon of length； it must
seem weak and watery。 ＇Such length implies some loss of unity；＇ if；
I mean； the poem is constructed out of several actions； like the Iliad
and the Odyssey； which have many such parts； each with a certain
magnitude of its own。 Yet these poems are as perfect as possible in
structure； each is； in the highest degree attainable； an imitation
of a single action。
If； then； tragedy is superior to epic poetry in all these
respects； and； moreover； fulfills its specific function better as an
art… for each art ought to produce； not any chance pleasure； but the
pleasure proper to it； as already stated… it plainly follows that
tragedy is the higher art； as attaining its end more perfectly。
Thus much may suffice concerning Tragic and Epic poetry in
general； their several kinds and parts； with the number of each and
their differences； the causes that make a poem good or bad； the
objections of the critics and the answers to these objections。。。。
…THE END…
。