larryhammer: floral print origami penguin, facing left (Default)
[personal profile] larryhammer
It has been suggested that a tragic hero's strengths are also his flaws. Attempts to derive this from Aristotle's discussion of harmartia (often mistranslated as "tragic flaw") in Oedipus Tyrannus run aground on the fact that the old Greek was talking through a Thessalonian hat -- but it is nonetheless true that, as with Aristotle, the schema works remarkably well with that play: what made Oedipus a strong king (quick decisiveness, a passion for justice) also (as impetuosity and personal righteousness) got him in trouble. In the wrong context, any virtue can be a vice.

That's fairly straightforward -- it's how to write a character with more than two dimensions. Taking it another step, though, my thesis that a comic hero's flaws are his/her virtues -- making/marking the main difference between tragedy and comedy the direction of irony. In other words, in a satisfying comedy, the traits that get the protagonist in trouble are also (when finally applied correctly) what gets her/him out of it again.

Thoughts? Arguments? Assertions of personal hattery?

One caveat comes to mind -- I don't think this applies to satire, which despite surface similarities to comedy is a different form. Exactly how and why, I can't articulate. I'm not even sure I can distinguish between the two reliably -- what makes The Producers satire but not the Discworld novels? And most of Pratchett's works are perfect object lessons for the comic hero thesis, just as Oedipus Tyrannus is for the tragic hero. (Perhaps the difference is whether the catastrophe is resolved?)

---L.

Date: 9 May 2005 12:42 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] madwriter.livejournal.com
Oddly enough, harmartia is a word Paul often uses in his Biblical letters which is mistranslated as "sin" in English. I hadn't realized that was the term originally used by Aristotle as well.

Date: 10 May 2005 07:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] madwriter.livejournal.com
I've had it explained to me that it was often used in the context of a good try, but that you couldn't make the mark without help--and thus that Paul used it because we would always fall short on our own, and need God's help and grace. I don't know if that's true or not, but it was an interesting explanation nevertheless.
(deleted comment)

Date: 30 June 2005 03:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] madwriter.livejournal.com
It is very odd when I go to an old-style Southern Baptist church (not unusual for me, since my wife's family are Southern Baptists) and hear the preacher get a lot more fiery than Paul himself.

P.S.

Date: 9 May 2005 12:44 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] madwriter.livejournal.com
Someone set The Guide to Greece to music? :)

Re: P.S.

Date: 9 May 2005 09:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] malsperanza.livejournal.com
And it is a tune you can hum, too. Unlike that awful, tuneless hiphop Parallel Lives thang.

Date: 9 May 2005 01:39 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dbborroughs.livejournal.com
The "what gets you in to trouble is what gets you out" line of thought was often the set up for many screwball comedies where the hero, say Danny Kaye, is brash about something unintentionally and then later uses the ability to act that way to get him out of the situation in the end. More times than not the trouble is unintentionally gotten into. You see the same pattern in fairy tales and many heroic adventures where the hero, say brave little tailor type bluffs his way into trouble only to bluff his way out of it.

Date: 9 May 2005 11:41 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] movingfinger.livejournal.com
Hunh. It might also be true for, say, Pratt and de Camp's Harold Shea stories. I'm thinking of the dungeon scene with Heimdall.

Date: 9 May 2005 09:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] malsperanza.livejournal.com
I like the idea, but would like to hear more about what you mean by "the direction of irony." Not the presence of irony, but its aim? Its purpose? [insert dissertation on Aristotelian concept of Final Cause]

Although the equation of the hero's flaws with his greatest traits (or their confluence, or superposition) is not perfect, I think it usually works in both comedy and tragedy of the classic sort. Hamlet's tendency to think things over, his intelligence and judiciousness. Lear's authority. Antigone's righteousness (pigheadedness). Rosalind's wit. Viola's doubleness.

The problem is, I think, that it is much harder to define a comic hero as such. They don't have the sharp profile and clear silhouette of tragic heroes. Is Leo Bloom a hero? Is Yossarian? Yes, probably. Sort of. Maybe.
(deleted comment)
(deleted comment)
(deleted comment)
(deleted comment)

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1 2 34567
8 9 1011121314
15 16 1718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 18 June 2025 01:53 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios