Plot

Aristotle regards tragedy as made up of six elements of these elements he considers the plot as the most
important. Indeed he devotes a major portion of his decision of tragedy to plot. Aristotle defines plot as
the soul of tragedy and emphasizes much on its unity. He treats it as a unified artistic whole directed
toward the intended effect, that is, pleasure of pity and fear and catharsis of such human emotions.
Being a unified whole, a plot should have a proper beginning, a middle and an end in which every part
supports the whole and none of the parts are non-functional. And being an imitation of an action, the
plot should imitate single action. The inclusion of a series of actions simply because they happen to a
single character does not make an artistic whole.

He then makes the famous statement which led to such a great deal of controversy. He declares: “A
tragedy is impossible without plot, but there may be one without character”. But there are other reasons
apart from purely literary or generic ones which determine why plot should be more important than
character. In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics we also find the view that in actual life, and not merely in
literature, character is subordinated to action because it is the product of action; it is developed in
particular directions by the nature of our actions from our earliest days, and a man’s bent of character
can be manifested only in his actions. Similarly, in drama ‘character’ in its full sense can be manifested
only in action, and must therefore play a subordinate part to plot.

According to Aristotle the plot should have dramatic unity. The dramatic unity is of three type unity of
action, unity of time and unity of place.The most important unity is unity of action that action must be
coherent whole; each event would be logically connected with other event.Second one is unity of
time .Aristotle mere says in the Poetics that tragedy should confine its action to a single revolution of the
sun, as far as possible. Third unity is unity of place that place would not change rapidly from desert to
green fields or mountains. Aristotle mentioned only two unities, the unity of place he did not mentioned
but renaissance and French critics mentioned this unity.Aristotle prefers fatal plot or fortunate plot
because he prefers the better than average character falls from happiness to adversity not due to
depravity but from error of judgment and arouse the emotion of pity and fear.

Aristotle lays down that the plot must be ‘a complete whole’. It means that a plot must have a
beginning, middle and an end. The plot must have a certain magnitude or ‘length’. “It should be neither
too small nor too large. It should be long enough to allow the process of change from happiness to
misery but not too long to be forgotten before the end. If it is too small, its different parts will not be
clearly distinguishable from each other. Thus magnitude implies that the plot must have order, logic
symmetry and perspicuity.

Aristotle compares the unity of the plot to the unity of a living being. It is only a comparison, but it has
its importance. As Humphrey House has pointed out,11 the comparison of the unity of a literary work
with that of a living organism refutes the charge that Aristotle is describing a formal, dead, mechanical
kind of unity. This is “unity” in a sense similar to that used in modern structuralist poetics.

Aristotle joins organic unity of plot with probability and necessity. The plot is not tied to what has
actually happened but it deals with what may probably or necessarily happen. Probability and necessity
imply that there should be no unrelated events and incidents.Humphrey House makes it clear that plot is
not a story but is governed by the law of cause and effect. Thus probability and necessity are vital for
artistic unity and wholeness.
“Probability’ implies that the tragic action must be convincing. If the poet deals with something
improbable, he must make it convincing and credible. He dramatist must procure, “willing suspension of
disbelief. Thus a convincing impossibility is to be preferred to an unconvincing possibility

Aristotle defines two types of plots. He uses the term (a) simple plots (b) complex plots. In simple plots,
the fortune of the hero moves only n one direction ending in catastrophe. In complex type of plots there
are elements of ‘peripety and anognorisis’. A good plot has either of the two element or both.

Peripeteia’ has been defined as a reversal of the action. Humphrey House defines it as a ‘reversal of
intention’. This definition takes into account the 'thought' or the dianoia exercised by the character.
House describes it as ‘holding the wrong end of the stick'. Peripeteia is therefore the turning of the stick
thinking that it is the right end. The ignorance behind any peripeteia is not mere ignorance. It is the
ignorance arising out of error. The other definition offered by Frank Kermode is that ‘peripetea’ is a
'disconfirmation followed by a consonance; the interest of having our expectations falsified is obviously
related to our wish to reach discovery by an unexpected route. It has nothing to do with our reluctance
to get there at all. So that in assimilating the peripeteia we are enacting that readjustment of our
expectations in regard to an end’. This points out the pleasure we receive from peripeteia which is quite
different from the straightforward following of a narrative to its end, or in other words, mere change of
fortune.

The characteristic pleasure derived from peripeteia is the element of surprise or wonder [Gk.
Thaumaston]. The source of wonder is often the tragic recognition or anagnorisis. Aristotle defines this
anagnorisis as a change from ignorance to knowledge. House himself defines recognition thus, ‘The
discovery of the truth of the matter is the ghastly wakening from the state of the ignorance which is the
very essence of hamartia.’

Aristotle likes best the recognition which arises out of the events themselves, as in Sophocles’s Oedipus
Rex. The whole play is a step by step unravelling of Oedipus’s true identity and Oedipus’s holding the
wrong end of the stick, as it were, in trying to discover his identity without knowing that the results will
be catastrophic. At second best, he places those tragedies where reasoning effects the recognition. The
combination of peripeteia and recognition does not merely affect the characters in the tragedy. They can
also extend to the audience or the reader. The unexpectedness of the tragic catastrophe which the
complex plot brings [the element of wonder or thaumaston] heightens our feelings of pity and fear as
well as other related emotions.

In terms of the progression of the plot, Aristotle divides the tragedy in to two parts, the complication
and the denouement or “unraveling.” The complication extends from the beginning of the play to the
moment of peripeteia and/or anagnorisis–the turning point of the plot.The denouement includes this
turning point and extends to the conclusion of the play

Aristotle enters into such a comprehensive and penetrative discussion of the point because he regards it
as, ‘the ground work, the design, through the medium of which ‘ethos’ (character) derives its meaning
and dramatic value.” (Butcher)