Objective Features of Fine Art
In general, Aristotle’s work, “Poetics,” discusses his own accounts, ideas, and principles on poetry and how poets should craft their respective works or poems. He generals expounded on the basis of poetry, specifically its various components, elements and different genres. In general, Aristotle, like his teacher, Plato, defines art as an imitation or representation of life itself and various human events, feelings, and emotions that are often associated with it.
Basically, Aristotle’s discussion on poetry mainly revolves around an in-depth analysis of tragedy. He differentiates the types of poetry in three ways: the differences in the modes, the means, and the object of their respective imitations. The modes pertain to agents or the doers of the action, which can be good or bad; the means refer to harmony, language, and rhythm while the objects cover to the actions, which can either be cruel or righteous.
Aristotle concludes that every tragedy must be complete—having a beginning, middle, and an end—also include six integral elements which are, arranged from the most important to the least, plot-structure, character, thought, style, lyric poetry, and spectacle. He argues that the best kind of tragedy has a plot which calls complex or something that mimics or represents actions that stimulates pity, fear, and horror—human emotions that viewers or audiences can relate to. He also claims that the hero’s fortune must change from prosperity and bliss to misery and sorrow due to a tragic mistake, which is called hamartia, that he or she commits.
This tragic mistake may be done in several ways: consciously and with full knowledge; unconsciously but with full realization after the action is committed; left undone due to a sudden realization and discovery; or with having full knowledge at the exact time that the tragic deed is done. He concludes that all of these characteristics and elements, when combined will constitute a great form of tragedy. In general, it is evident that while Aristotle’s arguments may be applied, to a very limited extent, to modern fiction, it is somewhat idealistic.
However, Aristotle arrived at these conclusions due to a variety of factors and considerations. The first plausible reason is that he was schooled under the teachings of Plato who sees art the way he does. However, unlike his master, Aristotle is more involved in the arts, in particular, tragic drama, and sees it as something that complements or works with philosophy as a conveyor of truths as opposed to Plato’s belief that art competes with philosophy in portraying truths about human nature. The next major consideration behind Aristotle’s conclusions would be his readings and beliefs.
As shown in his works, he has a very high regard for Homer’s “Odyssey” and “Iliad” and he used them as prime examples of his concept of tragedy. Furthermore, historically, it is a well-known fact that most of his arguments and claims are driven by reasoning and logic and this is why he is often credited as the prime innovator of the scientific method. When he studies a certain field or discusses a certain topic, he first makes a series of steps, sequences of understanding, and deductive reasoning and analysis, among others.
The same applies to his discussions on art, particularly, tragic drama. As shown in his work above, in a way, he virtually dissected tragedy piece by piece and analyzed them individually. In his assessment, he was able to come up with very reasonable conclusions on them. Combining his past readings with his logical reasoning, he formulated his own idea of poetry, which is mainly focuses on tragedy as a form of art that conveys realities and emotions to which people can relate to. Works Cited Aristotle. “Poetics. ” 2007. The Nature of Art. Second Edition.Sample Essay of StudyFaq.com