[…] Actions capable of this effect must happen between persons who are either friends or enemies or indifferent to one another. If an enemy kills an enemy, there is nothing to excite pity either in the act or the intention- except so far as the suffering in itself is pitiful. So again with indifferent persons. But when the tragic incident occurs between those who are near or dear to one another- if, for example, a brother kills, or intends to kill, a brother, a son his father, a mother her son, …read more […]

Reading this section, it seems to me that Sophocles really pushed the tragedy envelope in Antigone by incorporating deeds done in ignorance (Creon, acting in defense of the state - himself - may unwittingly have offended the gods in leaving his nephew's corpse unburied/defiled), deeds threatened but left undone (the example cited by Aristotle), and deeds carried out wittingly, when Antigone kills herself (even though Creon, unknown to her, has decided to rescind her death sentence), and then Haemon and Creon's wife also kill themselves when Antigone's suicide is revealed. . .and what a strong vein of irony runs through tragedy as defined by the Greeks (and later, Shakespeare) - whether or not they were tragically hip themselves (proto-hipsters?), they certainly were hip to the various strands of irony inherent in the greatest tragedies.

The observation by Aristotle that stands out for me is how family feuds are the social milieu par excellence for tragedy: >>> If an enemy kills an enemy, there is nothing to excite pity either in the act or the intention- except so far as the suffering in itself is pitiful... But when the tragic >>>incident occurs between those who are near or dear to one another... these are the situations to be looked for by the poet. Thus, the murder of Sonny Corleone is a catastrophic event for the Corleone family in "The Godfather", but it is not a tragic moment for the audience per Aristotle's criterion because Sonny was ambushed by enemies in a mafia war. But the murder of Fredo Corleone in "The Godfather: Part II" is pure Aristotelian tragedy because it is done intentionally, with malice and forethought, on the orders of his brother, Michael, capital punishment for Fredo's disloyalty to the family.

It seems that another way to look at this is that tragedy is about raising the stakes. Using your example of Romeo & Juliet, it isn't just that the lovers are star-crossed, it is that they die. It isn't just that they die, but they die while trying to escape from their families. It isn't just that they die while trying to escape but that Romeo thinks Juliet dead and kills himself before she wakes. Each raise of the stakes increases the dimension of the tragedy.

That's a good point, Melanie. Irony CAN amplify the tragic, can't it? Such as the aforementioned Romeo & Juliet, one dies when he thinks the other is dead... but isn't.

Great example, pgronk. Brings to mind how the feuds between various Greek gods are often connected to their familial connections. That sense of betrayal by a relative -- "Hey, I thought blood was thicker than water!" -- which contributes to a sense of tragedy.

Another excellent point: Raise the stakes. And a notable aspect of your point is that the stakes are PERSONAL ones, grounded in character, rather than massing armies at the borders, blowing up the entire Earth, etc.

And the ultimate irony of "Romeo & Juliet", hatred kills through love: THE PRINCE: Where be these enemies?—Capulet! Montague! See what a scourge is laid upon your hate, That heaven finds means to kill your joys with love; [Act V, Scene 3:]

The Road To Perdition has some tragic moments in it. Near the end when the 'photographer' finally catches up with Sullivan Sr and kills him, quickly followed by an event perhaps more tragic, where his son does the very thing that Sullivan strived to protect him from - he ends up murdering the photographer. The movie Se7en also had the most shockingly tragic ending I think I have ever seen.