- Source
- Aristotle. Aristotelis De arte poetica liber. Kassel, Rudolf, editor. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, 1965 (printing).
- Translation
- AI-generated (gemini-3.5-flash) — machine translation; may contain errors
- Languages
- 日本語 · English · 简体中文 · 한국어
- CTS URN
- urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0086.tlg034.humanitext-grc2:14.1-14.21
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-10-27
Aristotle argues that fear and pity in tragedy should arise from the structure of the plot rather than visual spectacle. He analyzes four ways of handling tragic deeds within family relationships and concludes that the best method is when a character is about to perform an action in ignorance but recognizes the relative just before acting.
ἔστιν μὲν οὖν τὸ φοβερὸν καὶ ἐλεεινὸν ἐκ τῆς ὄψεως γίγνεσθαι, ἔστιν δὲ καὶ ἐξ αὐτῆς τῆς συστάσεως τῶν πραγμάτων, ὅπερ ἐστὶ πρότερον καὶ ποιητοῦ ἀμείνονος.1
Now, the fearful and the pitiable can arise from the spectacle, but they can also arise from the very structure of the events, which is prior and belongs to a better poet.
δεῖ γὰρ καὶ ἄνευ τοῦ ὁρᾶν οὕτω συνεστάναι τὸν μῦθον ὥστε τὸν ἀκούοντα τὰ πράγματα γινόμενα καὶ φρίττειν καὶ ἐλεεῖν ἐκ τῶν συμβαινόντων· ἅπερ ἂν πάθοι τις ἀκούων τὸν τοῦ Οἰδίπου μῦθον.
For even without seeing, the plot should be so constructed that the person who hears the events taking place will both shudder and feel pity because of what happens; which is what one would experience on hearing the plot of Oedipus.
τὸ δὲ διὰ τῆς ὄψεως τοῦτο παρασκευάζειν ἀτεχνότερον καὶ χορηγίας δεόμενόν ἐστιν.
Producing this effect through the spectacle is less artistic and requires the resources of stage-production.
οἱ δὲ μὴ τὸ φοβερὸν διὰ τῆς ὄψεως ἀλλὰ τὸ τερατῶδες μόνον παρασκευάζοντες οὐδὲν τραγῳδίᾳ κοινωνοῦσιν· οὐ γὰρ πᾶσαν δεῖ ζητεῖν ἡδονὴν ἀπὸ τραγῳδίας ἀλλὰ τὴν οἰκείαν.
But those who produce through the spectacle not the fearful but only the monstrous have nothing in common with tragedy; for one should not seek every kind of pleasure from tragedy, but only that which is proper to it.
ἐπεὶ δὲ τὴν ἀπὸ ἐλέου καὶ φόβου διὰ μιμήσεως δεῖ ἡδονὴν παρασκευάζειν τὸν ποιητήν, φανερὸν ὡς τοῦτο ἐν τοῖς πράγμασιν ἐμποιητέον.
And since the poet must produce through representation the pleasure that comes from pity and fear, it is clear that this must be built into the events.
ποῖα οὖν δεινὰ ἢ ποῖα οἰκτρὰ φαίνεται τῶν συμπιπτόντων, λάβωμεν. ἀνάγκη δὴ ἢ φίλων εἶναι πρὸς ἀλλήλους τὰς τοιαύτας πράξεις ἢ ἐχθρῶν ἢ μηδετέρων.
Let us determine, then, what kinds of occurrences appear terrible or what kinds appear pitiable. Such actions must necessarily take place either between those who are friends, or enemies, or neither.
ἂν μὲν οὖν ἐχθρὸς ἐχθρόν, οὐδὲν ἐλεεινὸν οὔτε ποιῶν οὔτε μέλλων, πλὴν κατ’ αὐτὸ τὸ πάθος·
Now if an enemy does this to an enemy, there is nothing pitiable either in the doing or the intending, except in respect of the actual suffering itself.
οὐδ’ ἂν μηδετέρως ἔχοντες·
Nor is there if they are indifferent to each other.
ὅταν δ’ ἐν ταῖς φιλίαις ἐγγένηται τὰ πάθη, οἷον ἢ ἀδελφὸς ἀδελφὸν ἢ υἱὸς πατέρα ἢ μήτηρ υἱὸν ἢ υἱὸς μητέρα ἀποκτείνῃ ἢ μέλλῃ ἤ τι ἄλλο τοιοῦτον δρᾷ, ταῦτα ζητητέον.
But when the sufferings occur within relationships of close affection—for example, if a brother kills, or is about to kill, a brother, or a son his father, or a mother her son, or a son his mother, or does something else of this sort—these are the situations to be sought after.
τοὺς μὲν οὖν παρειλημμένους μύθους λύειν οὐκ ἔστιν, λέγω δὲ οἷον τὴν Κλυταιμήστραν ἀποθανοῦσαν ὑπὸ τοῦ Ὀρέστου καὶ τὴν Ἐριφύλην ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἀλκμέωνος, αὐτὸν δὲ εὑρίσκειν δεῖ καὶ τοῖς παραδεδομένοις χρῆσθαι καλῶς. τὸ δὲ καλῶς τί λέγομεν, εἴπωμεν σαφέστερον.
Now, one cannot dismantle the traditional plots—I mean, for example, Clytemnestra being killed by Orestes, and Eriphyle by Alcmeon— but the poet must invent for himself and make a fine use of what is handed down. Let us explain more clearly what we mean by “fine use.”
ἔστι μὲν γὰρ οὕτω γίνεσθαι τὴν πρᾶξιν, ὥσπερ οἱ παλαιοὶ ἐποίουν εἰδότας καὶ γιγνώσκοντας, καθάπερ καὶ Εὐριπίδης ἐποίησεν ἀποκτείνουσαν τοὺς παῖδας τὴν Μήδειαν·
For the action can take place in this way: as the ancient poets used to write, with the characters acting knowingly and with full awareness, just as Euripides made Medea kill her children.
ἔστιν δὲ πρᾶξαι μέν, ἀγνοοῦντας δὲ πρᾶξαι τὸ δεινόν, εἶθ’ ὕστερον ἀναγνωρίσαι τὴν φιλίαν, ὥσπερ ὁ Σοφοκλέους Οἰδίπους· τοῦτο μὲν οὖν ἔξω τοῦ δράματος, ἐν δ’ αὐτῇ τῇ τραγῳδίᾳ οἷον ὁ Ἀλκμέων ὁ Ἀστυδάμαντος ἢ ὁ Τηλέγονος ὁ ἐν τῷ τραυματίᾳ Ὀδυσσεῖ.
Or, they can perform the deed, but perform the terrible act in ignorance, and then later recognize the close relationship, like Sophocles’ Oedipus; now, this act is outside the drama, but examples within the tragedy itself are Astydamas’ Alcmeon, or Telegonus in “Odysseus Wounded.”
ἔτι δὲ τρίτον παρὰ ταῦτα τὸ μέλλοντα ποιεῖν τι τῶν ἀνηκέστων δι’ ἄγνοιαν ἀναγνωρίσαι πρὶν ποιῆσαι.
Still a third alternative besides these is where someone is about to do something irreversible in ignorance, but recognizes the relationship before doing it.
καὶ παρὰ ταῦτα οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλως. ἢ γὰρ πρᾶξαι ἀνάγκη ἢ μὴ καὶ εἰδότας ἢ μὴ εἰδότας.2
And besides these there is no other way. For it is necessary either to act or not to act, and that either knowingly or unknowingly.
τούτων δὲ τὸ μὲν γινώσκοντα μελλῆσαι καὶ μὴ πρᾶξαι χείριστον· τό τε γὰρ μιαρὸν ἔχει, καὶ οὐ τραγικόν· ἀπαθὲς γάρ. διόπερ οὐδεὶς ποιεῖ ὁμοίως, εἰ μὴ ὀλιγάκις, οἷον ἐν Ἀντιγόνῃ τὸν Κρέοντα ὁ Αἵμων.
Of these, to be on the point of acting knowingly and then not to act is the worst; for it is shocking, and not tragic, since it lacks suffering. Therefore, no one writes in this way, except rarely, as for instance Haemon towards Creon in the Antigone.
τὸ δὲ πρᾶξαι δεύτερον.
To perform the deed is second.
βέλτιον δὲ τὸ ἀγνοοῦντα μὲν πρᾶξαι, πράξαντα δὲ ἀναγνωρίσαι· τό τε γὰρ μιαρὸν οὐ πρόσεστιν καὶ ἡ ἀναγνώρισις ἐκπληκτικόν.
But it is better to act in ignorance and then, having acted, to recognize; for the shocking element is not present, and the recognition is astounding.
κράτιστον δὲ τὸ τελευταῖον, λέγω δὲ οἷον ἐν τῷ Κρεσφόντῃ ἡ Μερόπη μέλλει τὸν υἱὸν ἀποκτείνειν, ἀποκτείνει δὲ οὔ, ἀλλ’ ἀνεγνώρισε, καὶ ἐν τῇ Ἰφιγενείᾳ ἡ ἀδελφὴ τὸν ἀδελφόν, καὶ ἐν τῇ Ἕλλῃ ὁ υἱὸς τὴν μητέρα ἐκδιδόναι μέλλων ἀνεγνώρισεν.
And the best is the last; I mean, for example, in Cresphontes where Merope is about to kill her son but does not kill him, but recognizes him; and in Iphigenia where the sister is about to kill her brother; and in Helle where the son, when about to hand over his mother, recognizes her.
διὰ γὰρ τοῦτο, ὅπερ πάλαι εἴρηται, οὐ περὶ πολλὰ γένη αἱ τραγῳδίαι εἰσίν. ζητοῦντες γὰρ οὐκ ἀπὸ τέχνης ἀλλ’ ἀπὸ τύχης εὗρον τὸ τοιοῦτον παρασκευάζειν ἐν τοῖς μύθοις· ἀναγκάζονται οὖν ἐπὶ ταύτας τὰς οἰκίας ἀπαντᾶν ὅσαις τὰ τοιαῦτα συμβέβηκε πάθη.
For this is the reason why, as was said some time ago, tragedies are not concerned with many families. For in their searching, it was not by art but by chance that they discovered how to produce this kind of effect in their plots; they are forced, therefore, to resort to those families in which such sufferings have occurred.
περὶ μὲν οὖν τῆς τῶν πραγμάτων συστάσεως καὶ ποίους τινὰς εἶναι δεῖ τοὺς μύθους εἴρηται ἱκανῶς.
Concerning, then, the structure of the events and what kinds of plots there should be, enough has been said.
- 1453b1ὅπερ ἐστὶ πρότερον καὶ ποιητοῦ ἀμείνονος
The relative pronoun ὅπερ refers back to the entire preceding clause ἐξ αὐτῆς τῆς συστάσεως τῶν πραγμάτων (the arising of the effect from the very structure of the events). ποιητοῦ ἀμείνονος (belongs to a better poet) is a possessive or characteristic genitive functioning predicatively.
- 1453b35ἢ γὰρ πρᾶξαι ἀνάγκη ἢ μὴ καὶ εἰδότας ἢ μὴ εἰδότας
The accusative plural participles εἰδότας and μὴ εἰδότας function as the subject of the infinitives πρᾶξαι ἢ μή (understood as general agents). The conjunction καὶ coordinates the two binary oppositions: to act or not to act, and to do so knowingly or unknowingly.