poetics- 第3部分

constructed　plot；　therefore；　must　neither　begin　nor　end　at



haphazard；　but　conform　to　these　principles。



　　Again；　a　beautiful　object；　whether　it　be　a　living　organism　or　any



whole　composed　of　parts；　must　not　only　have　an　orderly　arrangement



of　parts；　but　must　also　be　of　a　certain　magnitude；　for　beauty



depends　on　magnitude　and　order。　Hence　a　very　small　animal　organism



cannot　be　beautiful；　for　the　view　of　it　is　confused；　the　object



being　seen　in　an　almost　imperceptible　moment　of　time。　Nor；　again；



can　one　of　vast　size　be　beautiful；　for　as　the　eye　cannot　take　it　all



in　at　once；　the　unity　and　sense　of　the　whole　is　lost　for　the



spectator；　as　for　instance　if　there　were　one　a　thousand　miles　long。



As；　therefore；　in　the　case　of　animate　bodies　and　organisms　a　certain



magnitude　is　necessary；　and　a　magnitude　which　may　be　easily　embraced



in　one　view；　so　in　the　plot；　a　certain　length　is　necessary；　and　a



length　which　can　be　easily　embraced　by　the　memory。　The　limit　of　length



in　relation　to　dramatic　competition　and　sensuous　presentment　is　no



part　of　artistic　theory。　For　had　it　been　the　rule　for　a　hundred



tragedies　to　compete　together；　the　performance　would　have　been



regulated　by　the　water…clock…　as　indeed　we　are　told　was　formerly　done。



But　the　limit　as　fixed　by　the　nature　of　the　drama　itself　is　this：



the　greater　the　length；　the　more　beautiful　will　the　piece　be　by　reason



of　its　size；　provided　that　the　whole　be　perspicuous。　And　to　define　the



matter　roughly；　we　may　say　that　the　proper　magnitude　is　comprised



within　such　limits；　that　the　sequence　of　events；　according　to　the



law　of　probability　or　necessity；　will　admit　of　a　change　from　bad



fortune　to　good；　or　from　good　fortune　to　bad。



POETICS｜8



　　VIII







　　Unity　of　plot　does　not；　as　some　persons　think；　consist　in　the



unity　of　the　hero。　For　infinitely　various　are　the　incidents　in　one



man's　life　which　cannot　be　reduced　to　unity；　and　so；　too；　there　are



many　actions　of　one　man　out　of　which　we　cannot　make　one　action。



Hence　the　error；　as　it　appears；　of　all　poets　who　have　composed　a



Heracleid；　a　Theseid；　or　other　poems　of　the　kind。　They　imagine　that　as



Heracles　was　one　man；　the　story　of　Heracles　must　also　be　a　unity。



But　Homer；　as　in　all　else　he　is　of　surpassing　merit；　here　too…　whether



from　art　or　natural　genius…　seems　to　have　happily　discerned　the　truth。



In　composing　the　Odyssey　he　did　not　include　all　the　adventures　of



Odysseus…　such　as　his　wound　on　Parnassus；　or　his　feigned　madness　at



the　mustering　of　the　host…　incidents　between　which　there　was　no



necessary　or　probable　connection：　but　he　made　the　Odyssey；　and



likewise　the　Iliad；　to　center　round　an　action　that　in　our　sense　of　the



word　is　one。　As　therefore；　in　the　other　imitative　arts；　the



imitation　is　one　when　the　object　imitated　is　one；　so　the　plot；　being



an　imitation　of　an　action；　must　imitate　one　action　and　that　a　whole；



the　structural　union　of　the　parts　being　such　that；　if　any　one　of



them　is　displaced　or　removed；　the　whole　will　be　disjointed　and



disturbed。　For　a　thing　whose　presence　or　absence　makes　no　visible



difference；　is　not　an　organic　part　of　the　whole。



POETICS｜9



　　IX







　　It　is；　moreover；　evident　from　what　has　been　said；　that　it　is　not　the



function　of　the　poet　to　relate　what　has　happened；　but　what　may　happen…



what　is　possible　according　to　the　law　of　probability　or　necessity。　The



poet　and　the　historian　differ　not　by　writing　in　verse　or　in　prose。　The



work　of　Herodotus　might　be　put　into　verse；　and　it　would　still　be　a



species　of　history；　with　meter　no　less　than　without　it。　The　true



difference　is　that　one　relates　what　has　happened；　the　other　what　may



happen。　Poetry；　therefore；　is　a　more　philosophical　and　a　higher



thing　than　history：　for　poetry　tends　to　express　the　universal；　history



the　particular。　By　the　universal　I　mean　how　a　person　of　a　certain　type



on　occasion　speak　or　act；　according　to　the　law　of　probability　or



necessity；　and　it　is　this　universality　at　which　poetry　aims　in　the



names　she　attaches　to　the　personages。　The　particular　is…　for



example…　what　Alcibiades　did　or　suffered。　In　Comedy　this　is　already



apparent：　for　here　the　poet　first　constructs　the　plot　on　the　lines



of　probability；　and　then　inserts　characteristic　names…　unlike　the



lampooners　who　write　about　particular　individuals。　But　tragedians



still　keep　to　real　names；　the　reason　being　that　what　is　possible　is



credible：　what　has　not　happened　we　do　not　at　once　feel　sure　to　be



possible；　but　what　has　happened　is　manifestly　possible：　otherwise　it



would　not　have　happened。　Still　there　are　even　some　tragedies　in



which　there　are　only　one　or　two　well…known　names；　the　rest　being



fictitious。　In　others；　none　are　well　known…　as　in　Agathon's　Antheus；



where　incidents　and　names　alike　are　fictitious；　and　yet　they　give　none



the　less　pleasure。　We　must　not；　therefore；　at　all　costs　keep　to　the



received　legends；　which　are　the　usual　subjects　of　Tragedy。　Indeed；



it　would　be　absurd　to　attempt　it；　for　even　subjects　that　are　known　are



known　only　to　a　few；　and　yet　give　pleasure　to　all。　It　clearly



follows　that　the　poet　or　'maker'　should　be　the　maker　of　plots　rather



than　of　verses；　since　he　is　a　poet　because　he　imitates；　and　what　he



imitates　are　actions。　And　even　if　he　chances　to　take　a　historical



subject；　he　is　none　the　less　a　poet；　for　there　is　no　reason　why　some



events　that　have　actually　happened　should　not　conform　to　the　law　of



the　probable　and　possible；　and　in　virtue　of　that　quality　in　them　he　is



their　poet　or　maker。



　　Of　all　plots　and　actions　the　episodic　are　the　worst。　I　call　a　plot



'episodic'　in　which　the　episodes　or　acts　succeed　one　another　without



probable　or　necessary　sequence。　Bad　poets　compose　such　pieces　by　their



own　fault；　good　poets；　to　please　the　players；　for；　as　they　write



show　pieces　for　competition；　they　stretch　the　plot　beyond　its



capacity；　and　are　often　forced　to　break　the　natural　continuity。



　　But　again；　Tragedy　is　an　imitation　not　only　of　a　complete　action；



but　of　events　inspiring　fear　or　pity。　Such　an　effect　is　best



produced　when　the　events　come　on　us　by　surprise；　and　the　effect　is



heightened　when；　at　the　same　time；　they　follows　as　cause　and　effect。



The　tragic　wonder　will　then　be　greater　than　if　they　happened　of



themselves　or　by　accident；　for　even　coincidences　are　most　striking



when　they　have　an　air　of　design。　We　may　instance　the　statue　of　Mitys



at　Argos；　which　fell　upon　his　murderer　while　he　was　a　spectator　at　a



festival；　and　killed　him。　Such　events　seem　not　to　be　due　to　mere



chance。　Plots；　therefore；　constructed　on　these　principles　are



necessarily　the　best。



POETICS｜10



　　X







　　Plots　are　either　Simple　or　Complex；　for　the　actions　in　real　life；　of



which　the　plots　are　an　imitation；　obviously　show　a　similar



distinction。　An　action　which　is　one　and　continuous　in　the　sense



above　defined；　I　call　Simple；　when　the　change　of　fortune　takes　place



without　Reversal　of　the　Situation　and　without　Recognition



　　A　Complex　action　is　one　in　which　the　change　is　accompanied　by　such



Reversal；　or　by　Recognition；　or　by　both。　These　last　should　arise



from　the　internal　structure　of　the　plot；　so　that　what　follows　should



be　the　necessary　or　probable　result　of　the　preceding　action。　It



makes　all　the　difference　whether　any　given　event　is　a　case　of



propter　hoc　or　post　hoc。



POETICS｜11



　　XI







　　Reversal　of　the　Situation　is　a　change　by　which　the　action　veers



round　to　its　opposite；　subject　always　to　our　rule　of　probability　or



necessity。　Thus　in　the　Oedipus；　the　messenger　comes　to　cheer　Oedipus



and　free　him　from　his　alarms　about　his　mother；　but　by　revealing　who　he



is；　he　produces　the　opposite　effect。　Again　in　the　Lynceus；　Lynceus



is　being　led　away　to　his　death；　and　Danaus　goes　with　him；　meaning　to



slay　him；　but　the　outcome　of　the　preceding　incidents　is　that　Danaus　is



killed　and　Lynceus　saved。



　　Recognition；　as　the　name　indicates；　is　a　change　from　ignorance　to



knowledge；　producing　love　or　hate　between　the　persons　destined　by



the　poet　for　good　or　bad　fortune。　The　best　form　of　recognition　is



coincident　with　a　Reversal　of　the　Situation；　as　in　the　Oedipus。



There　are　indeed　other　forms。　Even　inanimate　things　of　the　most



trivial　kind　may　in　a　sense　be　objects　of　recognition。　Again；　we　may



recognize　or　discover　whether　a　person　has　done　　a　thing　or　not。　But



the　recognition　which　is　most　intimately　connected　with　the　plot　and



action　is；　as　we　have　said；　the　recognition　of　persons。　This



recognition；　combined　with　Reversal；　will　produce　either　pity　or　fear；



and　actions　producing　these　effects　are　those　which；　by　our



definition；　Tragedy　represents。　Moreover；　it　is　upon　such　situations



that　the　issues　of　good　or　bad　fortune　will　depend。　Recognition；　then；



being　between　persons；　it　may　happen　that　one　person　only　is



recognized　by　the　other…　when　the　latter　is　already　known…　or　it　may



be　necessary　that　the　recognition　should　be　on　both　sides。　Thus



Iphigenia　is　revealed　to　Orestes　by　the　sending　of　the　letter；　but



another　act　of　recognition　is　required　to　make　Orestes　known　to



Iphigenia。



　　Two　parts；　then；　of　the　Plot…　Reversal　of　the　Situation　and



Recognition…　turn　upon　surprises。　A　third　part　is　the　Scene　of



Suffering。　The　Scene　of　Suffering　is　a　destructive　or　painful



action；　such　as　death　on　the　stage；　bodily　agony；　wounds；　and　the



like。



POETICS｜12



　　XII







　　The　parts　of　Tragedy　which　must　be　treated　as　elements　of　the



whole　have　been　already　mentioned。　We　now　come　to　the　quantitative



parts…　the　separate　parts　into　which　Tragedy　is　divided…　namely；



Prologue；　Episode；　Exode；　Choric　song；　this　last　being　divided　into



Parode　and　Stasimon。　These　are　common　to　all　plays：　peculiar　to　som