Strictly speaking, which tragic Shakespearean characters, as we know them, would not qualify as ones by Aristotle’s definition of a tragic figure?
Depends on how you classify the play Troilus and Cressida. None of the characters seem to be a tragic figure, and the tone veers between comic and gloom.
I think it would be helpful, for this thread, to actually include what “Aristotle’s definition of a tragic figure” is, for those of us who may not be as familiar.
From Wikipedia:
Aristotle suggests that the hero of a tragedy must evoke a sense of pity and fear within the audience, stating that “the change of fortune presented must not be the spectacle of a virtuous man brought from prosperity to adversity." In essence, the focus of the hero should not be the loss of his goodness. He establishes the concept that pity is an emotion that must be elicited when, through his actions, the character receives undeserved misfortune, while the emotion of fear must be felt by the audience when they contemplate that such misfortune could possibly befall themselves in similar situations. Aristotle explains such change of fortune "should be not from bad to good, but, reversely, from good to bad.” Such misfortune is visited upon the tragic hero “not through vice or depravity but by some error of judgment.” This error, or hamartia, refers to a flaw in the character of the hero, or a mistake made by the character…
Aristotle’s tragic heroes are flawed individuals who commit, without evil intent, great wrongs or injuries that ultimately lead to their misfortune, often followed by tragic realization of the true nature of events that led to this destiny. This means the hero still must be – to some degree – morally grounded.
I can’t say this is totally clear to me, but I’d say that at least neither Romeo nor Juliet would be considered Aristotelean tragic heros. They’re not virtuous, morally grounded individuals who make a tragic error of judgement; they’re just a couple of immature kids who make foolish and ultimately disastrous choices.
None of them.
In a nutshell: In Classical drama, tragedy befalls characters because of fate, misfortune, or the gods. In Shakespeare and in most subsequent modern drama, tragedy arises from the characters’ own flaws.
In Shakespeare’s plays, none of the bad things HAD to happen - you can see exactly what each character could have done differently. In Greek tragedies they’re all doomed from the start.
“….who commit, without evil intent, great wrongs or injuries that ultimately lead to their misfortune“. According to this Macbeth would not qualify as a tragic figure / tragic hero since he does intentionally commit evil acts. Not so?
You also have to be clear on who the “tragic hero” is, of each tragedy. For instance, Julius Caesar isn’t the hero of his own eponymous play; Brutus is.
You can also have a tragic figure in a play that isn’t classified as a tragedy. A Winter’s Tale for instance, is usually classified as a comedy, because it has a happy ending, but that happy ending is a deus ex machina tacked on to the end of what’s otherwise a textbook tragedy.
Exactly so. MacB is a Shakespearean tragic hero because his downfall is caused by a fatal flaw in his personality — in this case, ambition. That fatal flaw led him to commit evil acts. So not an Aristotelian tragic hero.
I’m thinking that Alessan is correct. Aristotelian tragedy and Shakespearean tragedy have different definitions/structures/whatever, and so none of Shakespeare’s tragic characters fit Aristotle’s definition.
Brutus in the tragedy of Julius Caesar seems to get close, since he kills Caesar for a noble purpose. He thinks he’s saving Rome.
Hmmm. You may be right with that. I knew I should have thought harder before posting.
Seems to me that Othello fits Aristotle’s definition.
Othello may have been tricked, but the tragedy comes from his failure to control his temper.
There’s an old hypothetical that if you’d switched the lead characters of Othello and Hamlet, the plays would have been over by the end of Act One. Othello would have killed Claudius without hesitation, while Hamlet would have held back, thought a bit, and seen right through Iago’s lies.