The way the arrow's pointing

[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.

Comments

[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.

[larryhammer]

It originally meant something like "missing the mark" or "falling short."

---L.

[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.

[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.