[…] Part 17: …read more […]

Scott, "episode" in Greek means "entering in addition or besides" and in Aristotle's usage means "digression" or the speaking parts between choric songs. For screenwriting purposes, I wonder if "scene" isn't the proper adaptation, but I also like your equation with "sequence." Perhaps he also means "subplot."

I was most intrigued by that last line in this section, and thank you, Grant, for that definition. I wondered if Aristotle meant that the plot is the through line of the core scenes, or plot points, almost like a spine, along which the rest of the "episodes" or scenes will be strung? The most important cause-and-effect elements, that keep the story from being merely episodic, in the contemporary meaning of the word? Also, I thought it almost sounded as if he were describing the sensation of a reading a good screenplay, or even of watching a movie, in the opening of this section, and I agree with you, Scott - what a hoot to hear Aristotle pitch "The Odyssey" to his readers!

I like Ingram Bywater's translation of this chapter, particularly that "His story, again, whether already made or of his own making, should first simplify and reduce to a universal form". In modern drama, "universal form" would refer to the requirements for specific genres. I find Aristotle's use of Euripides' "Iphigenia in Taurus" in this chapter interesting. The play is Aristotle's other model play, after "Oedipus The King" by Sophocles. He refers to it 6 times in "The Poetics", mostly in favorable terms. His high estimation of the play initially perplexed me because there is no significant conflict between the two major characters (sister and brother). Nor within a single character. Nor is a character victimized by fate. The story has a happy ending not a tragic one. Iphigenia doesn't kill her brother, Orestes, and brother and sister with a timely intervention by the goddess Athena make good their escape. Why,I wondered, does Aristotle use "Iphigenia at Taurus" so often to illustrate his points? Because, I finally came to realize, it conforms to his requirements for a good plot: 1] It is driven by probability and necessity. 2] There plot pivots on discovery and reversal. 3] AND because it entails issues of "philia" -- kinship, relationship. I finally "got" why Aristotle puts a premium on tragedies that concern families. Like in Chapter 14: "if an enemy kills enemy, there is nothing to excite pity either in the act or the intention except so far as the suffering is itself pitiful. So again with indifferent persons. 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 poet." "Iphigenia in Taurus" may fail my oh-so modern sensibilities that require conflict between the principals to build to a climax and resolution in the 3rd Act. What tension and jeopardy there are climax in the middle of the play after Iphigenia recognizes Orestes as her brother and doesn't kill him in the ritual sacrifice. But it succeeds as tragedy in Aristotle's book because it focuses on family, social and community relationships. This was an issue of prime importance to Aristotle. And keenly relevant to the Athenian audience watching the play: Euripides wrote his play near the end of the bitter Peloponnesian War, which dragged on for over a quarter of century, pitting Greek against Greek with calamitous consequences for Athens. Aristotle's emphasis on the role of relationship in drama brings to mind the observations of Lindsay Doran's, producer of such hit movies as "Sense and Sensibility" and "Stranger than Fiction". In a popular TED talk and in other lectures and writings, her experience and study of audience psychology has led her to conclude that audiences care greatly about the outcome of relationships in movies. She argues that if the movie doesn't have a happy ending in terms of the main character achieving the objective goal, the audience will accept that ending as long as there is a happy ending in terms of personal relationships. Relationship trumps achievement. And furthermore, when the objective goal is achieved, it needs to be a shared moment. The main character shares the victory with loved ones. Conversely, a tragic ending for a modern movie is for the protagonist to achieve personal success at the expense of personal relationships. Example: "The Godfather,Part 2". Or to fail at both. Would "The Wolf of Wall Street" qualify in that respect? It seems to have Aristotle's Big 3 plot ingredients: 1] necessity and probability; 2] discovery; 3] and careens -- does it ever!-- around issues of "philia", friendship and family.

This part of Poetics speaks to the importance of outlining, which Aristotle describes this way: "he will discover what is in keeping with it, and be most unlikely to overlook inconsistencies." Lots of work has to be done before I outline. First the concept has to be encapsulated in a few paragraphs, then the themes and the characters who take those universal themes and transform them into something unique and concrete. Outlining can show if there are two many subplots, or if the antagonist is not the main driver of obstacles, or if the inner need is not adequately helped or hurt by supporting characters, etc. I look at outlining the same way a director looks at a screenplay - a beginning. My outlines loosely follow the "Hero's Journey", tailored to the individual story, and under each category I list beats, which forms my beat sheet. After each beat I put information in brackets, such as [locations] or [emotional meaning to protagonist]. The beat sheet is copied several times, one for each bracket. If the bracketed information is for the protagonist I color is blue, if it goes against then I color it red, even if the protagonist is not in the beat. The color coding tells me if things are going too easy or too hard for the protagonist. If the story or a character takes an unexpected twist, then I follow that and change the beat sheets after I write it to not lose sight of the structure.

This first paragraph, in which Aristotle exhorts the poet to “place the scene, as far as possible, before his eyes,” makes me think of the mistakes often made by new screenwriters who don’t yet understand what their words on the page will look like on the screen. Interesting to see that this problem goes back to ancient times. In the next paragraph, he appears to be urging the writer to get out of his chair and pace around the room, acting out the role of the character to embody the emotions they are wanting to portray, such as agitation or anger. He then comments that the writer must, therefore, either have “a happy gift of nature or a strain of madness,” or, as translated elsewhere, have “a sympathetic nature or be slightly mad” (McLeish), or be “the genius or the madman” (Janko). The scholars seem to take this statement very seriously, especially with their translations of the follow up sentence. But I can’t help feeling that Aristotle was joking. After all, he’s admonishing the writer to talk to himself and wave his arms around, which to an accidental bystander would easily resemble madness. So then there’s this business of outlining, also translated as setting out the “universals,” as opposed to “episodes” (which, by the way, can easily be understood as scenes since the episode is one of the five components of the drama laid out in chapter 12). The distinction Aristotle is trying to make here is between the generic and the specific. The young girl, the sacrifice, her disappearance, her arrival in another country, that she’s given the job to sacrifice strangers, then her own brother shows up. These are all generic plot elements, could be part of any story. But, that her brother was told to go there by an oracle is not a universal, it is specific to this story because the gods command him to go there due to his need to escape his madness. This is particular to his character, not a general element of the plot. However, the fact that he is seized and then recognized as the girl’s brother in the nick of time are generic plot elements. But the method by which he is recognized is specific, as evidence by the fact that it happens differently in Euripides play than it does in the play of Polyidus. So first you lay out the general plot, then you fill in the episodes with the specifics of character and how the actions come about. He then brings in The Odyssey for a further illustration of what constitutes generic plot: “This guy has a long journey home. Meanwhile, at home all hell is breaking loose . . .” That’s the universal. Those 12,000 lines of poetry are the specifics of this particular telling of that plot, as elaborated in the episodes. Sorry I’ve been away the last couple of weeks, distracted by holiday debauchery. But I did manage to crank out an analysis of All Is Lost that makes reference to some of the Greek themes we’ve been exploring here: http://www.screentakes.com/lost/ (intended to be read after having seen the film).

Jennine: Thank you for a very interesting and t hought provoking write up of "All is Lost". One statement in particular resonated with my own experience of the film and triggered a rumination on a topic germane to this chapter of Aristotle: "universals". One of more popular "universals" these days is Joseph Campbell's "Hero's Journey" paradigm. This paradigm may fit well for movie characters in the 1st half of life -- for the box-office: the bulk of viewers are young or early adults. But as Scott has noted in his blog postings, Hollyweird is discovering that there is a growing market of older viewers. They grew up in the pre-internet, pre-computer (as a mass market commodity) where going to movies was a primary social activity. They still like to go to movies. They have the time -- and most of them have the disposable income to go to movies. But as psychologists like Erik Erikson and Carl Jung have pointed out, the challenges, psyco-social agenda and priorities of the 2nd half of life are different. So is Campbell's "Heroes Journey" a good universal for stories catering to this demographic, stories for people and about people in the 2nd half of their life journey? Is there another universal better suited to the life experience and interests of an older audience? Something different than movies like "Grudge Match" and "Last Vegas", generic stories about old geezers trying to relive their glory days, have one last juvenile hurrah, one last binge of wretched excess? Is that the what "Hero's Journey" of the 2nd half of life amounts to? Is that the best Holllyweird can do for a generic universal plot for older characters? Anyway, the statement in your analysis of "All is Lost", that got me thinking was: ".. the Greeks also put a high value on the Great Death, so there was dramatic pay off in seeing a main character go down in glory." That is so true. Then you go on to write, "Today’s audience is not so accepting of death as the honorable result of a battle well fought." Well, for viewers in the 1st half of their life journey, probably, but for viewers in the 2nd half? I'm not so sure. The theater was packed when I saw "All is Lost" and the most of the audience was closer to Robert Redford's age than to Leonardo DiCaprio's. I did not get the impression that the audience was hung up on the issue of a happy ending, whether the character lived or went on to the great bye and bye. Rather, my non-statistical impression was that they were gripped by the struggle. He went down fighting; he did not go gentle into that good night. Maybe Our Man did not live a Great Life (the movie opens with a brief V.O. of him expressing regrets), but if he died, it was a Great Death.

pgronk, Thank you for your nice words about my post. And interesting that you bring up the point about the older audience. Just the other night I was at my local multiplex to see Her and noticed on the way out that the video game arcade off to the right of the box office area (where I had never seen a single person playing a game) had been replaced with cafe tables several of which were taken up by people in the 50s and 60s sitting chatting. But I had not made the connection to a shift in dominant story universals. I'll just say at this point, I hope you're right that a greater awareness of a burgeoning mature audience will also have the effect of making more room for story forms that don't slavishly follow the dictates of the Hero's Journey.