Aristotle’s Idea of Tragedy
1. Aristotle means that when someone is writing poetry it can be controlled by the person writing it and it is more important and higher-ranked compared to history; which is already happened and a thing of the past. Poetry focuses on the philosophical side of life, such as knowledge, reality, and existence, when in history, nothing can change and it is the complete opposite of reality. In poetry, things can be made up from imagination, and you can include tragedy and other elements. I disagree with Aristotle’s out look on his comparison of poetry and history, I for one not being a fan of poetry, I cannot empathize how a writer comes up with plot and imagination.
2. People might enjoy leaving a theater with catharsis because when a person usually doesn’t usually have emotion, such as pity and fear towards a play or comparatively, a movie. It is also good to leave with catharsis because when people are watching the play the audience should experience at the very least SOME type of emotion. It is not stressed more by Aristotle that an audience with emotions is a lot more realistic than a play without it.
3. I don’t agree with Aristotle’s words that the idea that tragedy can exist without characters as long as there is action. Characters are only in plays for one reason, that is, to enhance the action and provide emotions that the audience will feel. Tragedy cannot exist without action because action is what inspires, and triggers tragedy. There is certainly not a definitive answer to this, different people have different opinions on the topic, and may not be interested in a tragedy if they cannot experience something they can relate to, such as people.
4. A movie that places character at equal importance or ahead of plot focus would be The Clash of Titans. In the movie there are civilians that live in a city, who drift away from the belief in the gods. The gods control anything and everything in people’s life, they said...