Notes and reflection WEEK 4

WEEK 4 NOTESTRAGEDY?

WHAT  IS IT?—->

– IMITATION OF ACTION (MIMESIS)

-MORE OF DRAMA THAN STORY, SHOWS NOT TELLS

-ABOUT REVERSABLE FORTUNE , FROM SOMETHING GOOD TO BAD

-AROUSES PITY AND FEAR

SIX IMPORTANT PARTS OF STORY

-PLOT

-CHARACTER

-THOUGHT

-DICTION

-SONG OR MELODY

-SPECTABLE

 PLOT—what is it?

-Arrangement of incidents presented to audience or structure of play

-Must have beginning, middle and end

-Begining should start with cause and effect chain, Climax must be caused due to prior incidents and end should be resolution and not lead to any more incidents.

-Must have unity of action->plot must be internal or self contained and incidents should be drawn internally and have no outside’s influences interfering

-Should have magnitude and not be brief,

-Plots must be SIMPLE OR COMPLEX.SIMPLE refers to change of fortune which is called “catastrophe”, COMPLEX plots involve perpetiea and anagnorisis. Peripetiea-refers to effect opposite to what which character intended. anagnorisis refers to is change from ignorance to knowledge. e.g finding out your uncle is an evil man when you believed in him.

CHARACTER

-Support plot

-realistic

-consistant

-“fitness of character”, according to aristotle courage fits warrior but does not fit a woman

-idealized

-necessity or probable-must follow law of necessity

THOUGHT-Proved to be or not to be

-Refers to themes of a play

DICTION-Expression of words

-Aristotle believes this must suit characters, plot or tragedy

SONG OR MELODY

-not very important

-Aristotle believes it should act in giving unity to a story

SPECTACLE-

sPECTACULAR EFFECTS THAT CAPTURE ATTENTION

The 3 Act Structure
1st act: set up (goal oriented character)
2nd act: confrontation (character must make a choice and action intensifies)
3rd act: resolution (level of effort raised to now height. Character can either achieve or not achieve his goal)

Some important words
katharis- purification of a motion
.mimesis- look like real life, mimic
anagnorisis- ignorance to knowledge
.perepeteia- turn/twist tragedy
hamartia- flaw

Hello again!

My reflection on Aristotle

Today we had a holistic view on who Aristotle exactly is. Earlier on, we did a small research on Aristotle and episodic plots. I was telling Mr. Ryan what i felt about Aristotle. Initially, when i read his qoutes i had a very good impression of him. Storytelling is a form of ART. There are aboslolutely no rules in telling a story. If there are rules, there is no difference from your story and a textbook. It is true a story needs a structure. A body. Or a backbone to be more precise. But, there are so many forms of structures, in fact you can create your own. Storytelling is about creativity. THERE ARE NO RULES IN CREATIVITY

As long, as your audience understand your story, it means you did a great job! Aristotle belives in chronological order in stories. He seemed to have emphasized on it alot. And he also believed story should have a proper start, middle and end. The idea is to be creative! So you can capture the intrest. It is a pity, that Aristotle did emphasize on spectacle so much. But why cant the order of the story be a spectacle itself? Something that catches your attention!

If everyone does everything the same way. There is no spice at all. I believe always in one thing. Being different! If there is a black dot on a wall, people notice the black dot, not the whiteness around it. Stories should capture attention. Stories are not about a good plot. It is also very important how you arrange your incidents in a plot. Incidents can be arranged in so many ways. Like Momento, such a movie can create a sort of confusion in the start. But, a confused mind is always attentive, it wants to clear its confusion, therefore it concentrates on its surroundings to gain a better understanding. That is the same way with movies like Momento. You capture their interest, they follow you and they become a part of the story!

I totally disagree with Aristotle. I find him very conventional. But, let us not condemn him so much. Let us think, about the good he has achieved. Maybe, people last time arent as educated as the audiences today! Therefore, complex storylines probably would confuse them. Or in other words, episodic plots may have never interest them. Times change, people change. There is no absolute rule. If you do not change with time, you will be lagging behind. The demands of today’s audiences are very high. EVERYTHING MUST BE INTERACTIVE! From computer games to ( i dont know what else). They want to be a part of the story, not a third person. So it is important to experiment!

My reflection on EPISODIC PLOTS

I enjoy them. And i did enjoy Moll flanders very much. The main reason is, it is different from other stories. A totally new feeling! It is sometimes comical to relate to a REAL life character just like you, who faces the same problems as you do. Even though, climaxes go up and down. It creates a sense of anticipation. Unexpectedly, you find yourself going through different climaxes. In fact, i wonder if there were movies with episodic plots. It would be a great experiment!

My reflection on ARISTOTLE and tragedy

Aristotle sets too many rules. His rules may serve him well. But not in the field of art. There are no boundaries in art. For an example, i was speaking to Eugene today about his openers. I dont know but his openers caught my attention. His choice of words arent conventional at all! Therefore, i thought it was great. To me, it felt like the openers were very unperdicatable starts. What i mean is, it can go this way or that. Even though, he didnt elaborate much. The fact that he didnt, gave me a resticted vision of WHAT IS GOING ON! And it interest me, like i said earlier, a confused mind is always attentive. Another person, i admire is Ray. Even though, witticisms are peppered all over her stories, it catches attention. No doubt, it is madness! But i like it, she is different. In today world, only people who are different make it BIG! I admire her style even though i would not want to adopt it. Like there was once, she wrote about turning mother’s volume down? I was like, what does she mean by that? And she told me, its up to your imagination. The human mind is a very powerful tool, we can actually make things happen. That is why i do not like Aristotle’s point of view. I believe anything is possible in a story as long as you can convey your message to your audience.

His idea of tragedy, i hope i remmeber it well. He mentioned about the character being propserous. And he hits rock bottom.

Ok i got a small idea of tragedy from the net. Take a look

He defines tragedy as “the imitation of an action that is serious and also as having magnitude, complete in itself.” He continues, “Tragedy is a form of drama exciting the emotions of pity and fear. Its action should be single and complete, presenting a reversal of fortune, involving persons renowned and of superior attainments,and it should be written in poetry embellished with every kind of artistic expression.” 

Mr. Ryan was mentioning a begger cannot stoop any lower. I do quite agree with him. Maybe Aristotle wanted to show the magnitude of the character’s fall. But fall, is not necessary in the form of wealth. I dont know, but i feel like making a beggar fall further and also having a huge amount of tragedy. I feel like its a challenge. Ok, let us imagine a beggar. He has no money. Let us imagine, one day as he begs, he loses his leg. But yet he tries dancing with one leg (Inspired by “BY THE PEOPLE” not trying to plagerise). And maybe he meets a girl, let us make it another beggar woman. And he loves her alot. Maybe she leaves him for another man. Let us add more tragedy, let us kill the character. So, one day the beggar guys gets hit by a car and loses his life! I dont know if this is a good tragey enough. I just made it up on the spot. So you see, a beggar can fall. And there is magnitude. It is already bad enough he is a begger. The form of magnitude of his tragedy can be seen in his pityful life. Then we added more and more tragedy by making him lose his leg.

Let us compare! A rich man becoming poor and a poor beggar guy losing everything and dying. Who do you feel more pity for? Rich guy or baggar? Atleast the rich guy was happy in one part of his life! But the beggar, he suffered in the start, middle and end. That is what i feel PURE tragedy is. It is like falling to the deepest pit ever, and breaking your legs and your disability prevents you from even dreaming of climbing up again. That is my intrepretation. Why must tragedy be potrayed in only one pattern. I am sorry. I find this ridiculous like the education system of  this country. The education system here tells you to be creative BY THE RULES? How can you be creative if you create limitations to yourself?

Dont limit yourself. A human mind does wonders. You can create and destroy. Screw the rules. I dont like swearing. But seriously, THINK OUT OF THE BOX!

One thought on “Notes and reflection WEEK 4

  1. The difference between your beggar and Aristotle’s beggar is that your beggar is in control of his life and his choices. That’s a very modern interpretation. It didn’t come about until the Enlightenment. Before then, everything was left to God, and God decides how your life will be. If you question this pattern, God will punish you, and that is tragic.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s