Writing & Aristotle · 3:56am Jan 27th, 2021
Aristotle's known for his belief that rationale & understanding can be applied to all things, even storytelling. Because the very notion that reason, emotion, & imagination must conflict is a purely post-modernist invention, & most previous generations saw no such conflict, somebody as logical as Aristotle could easily appreciate a highly original, emotionally moving, awe-inspiring story, & his Poetics is not only him talking about what makes a good stage play, but also his gushing over the stories he liked. As homage to his work, this blog post will also proceed to gush over cinema I liked, applying some guidelines established in Poetics to my brief praises of them.
However, there is a problem.
Aristotle's most recent translation of Poetics was accurate, but only in Victorian English dialect. There have since been subtle changes in vocabulary that have resulted in a very dated translation of Poetics. This is given away in the very title: in the context of Poetics, it is not about poetry, but about Greek stage plays. The ancient Greeks had stage plays as we do now, often based on mythological figures, as many of their tragedies were, or were original ideas that were meant to be hot takes on their society, as many of their comedies were. These plays were often musical in nature, filled with song & dance. They even had Satyr plays, which were when the play opened with a tragedy, had a brief intermission of actors dressed as satyrs mocking the characters & events of the tragedy, & then this was followed by a comedic play.
So important were these plays to Aristotle, that he was inspired to lecture students about playwrighting, & what made the best plays. Some of his lecture notes about what constituated good tragic plays have survived to this day. However, as explained earlier, all of the old dialectacal choices of the Victorian age have aged so poorly that it has surrounded his ideas with many serious misconceptions. Thus, with some more accurate translations of some key ideas, I shall teach you Poetics, & thus, what makes a good story with real scripts & real actors.
"Plot" - Mythos
According to Aristotle, the most important feature to a good stage play is "mythos", which is often translated as "plot" in Victorian English, as this was their main concern in any of their stories besides "settings" & "ideas" of their respective time period. But Aristotle's exact word is not one specific to plot, but one used for all stories as a whole in ancient Athens - "mythos", which basically means "story". Aristotle even proceeds to describe what would be in modern writing terms a narrative-structured plot driven heavily by the characters, meaning that the main elements of a story, plot, setting, theme, characters, narrative, & audience experience, were all almost equally important to him, but his exact description of "plot" pointed to primarily dynamic plots, relatable characters, & deep story. "Narrative" is only briefly alluded to him when he says that "there should be a beginning, a middle, & an end."
A good example of "Mythos" would be Star Wars: A New Hope. Luke Skywalker is our main character, feeling isolated, lonely, & misunderstood for his deeper aspirations towards achievement, something his Uncle Owen fails to understand. The plot is that Princess Leia stole the plans to the Death Star & hid them in the R2 unit Luke found, & he found her message, which leads him to Obi-Wan Kenobi, & the rest begins. The story is a young man's journey to finding himself & being a part of something bigger.
"Character" - Ethos
According to Aristotle, the next most imporant feature to contemporary storytelling is "ethos", which is translated as "character", as in Victorian English, character was meant to convey unique values, essentially a word that encompassed the overlap of morality & personality. However, since that point, "character" is often used to refer to a fictional person, a member of the dramatis personnae. Indeed characters are shaped somewhat by his "ethos", & in turn help to convey it, as he says that "even a woman may be good, and also a slave" (remember the time period), & as you guessed from reading this, the ethos is also conveyed by the story's themes, & in turns serves to enhance them. However, ethos is basically the story's values & personality, so it's neither the characters nor the theme...in modern English, this would probably best translate as a combination of "propriety" & "tone". Stories should have tones that do not clash with each other, nor do they clash with the audience (unless the very point is to be an edgelord). Ethical propriety should be conveyed, & all of the characters should have moral capability.
"Thought" - Diolania
Diolania is given a translation that would be very curious in modern English: thought. Indeed, that translation is very accurate, so the question is, what kind of thought is Aristotle talking about. Basically, in this case, "diolania" amounts to "does this make any fucking sense?" Such would translate perhaps in this context best as "consistency", "conherency", & "continuity" - those elements so often confused with plot. No doubt that events from the plot can occasionally hinge on Diolania, but often Diolania's main connections to Mythos is in the setting & characters, not the plot, as a large part of Diolania is the context that Aristotle explains in character motivations & backstories.
A good example would be MLP: The Movie or A Canterlot Wedding - the truth is that their plots are both just fine. There is a problem & the Mane Six have to solve it with their wits & through the lessons they learn on the way. Simple plots with no actual problems. The real issues, which I think are few & far between, almost entirely amount to consistency with the other episodes, with the audience, & in the individual stories themselves. The plots are good, the characters are good, the settings are good, & the narratives are both perfect. In other words, the mythos of MLP: The movie is good. However, some of the reasoning the story follows is a little weird on occasion, the backstories could have been more elaborated on for characters besides Tempest Shadow, the tone is good with itself, but slightly different from the episodes airing at the time.
These aren't primarily mythos problems. These are primarily diolania problems.
"Diction" - Lexis
Probably the least mistranslated element of poetics, Lexis means, more or less, diction. Because of the way Greek plays were written, the goalpost was not good dialogue, where each reply would sound perfectly natural to each prior statement, but rather good diction, in which each statement is well-worded, regardless of whatever was said previously.
A good example to demonstrate the difference is in Kingdom Hearts 3 - Sora gives a good speech to Davy Jones about love, which is very well-worded. This is good diction. However, it is idiotic to give a speech about love when Davy Jones is about to fucking stab someone. This is bad dialogue.
Lexis basically amounts to the use of words rather than why or when they are being used. Dialogue is why or when to use words. Both, however, I think should be treated with roughly equal importance. Diction is especially good if you are shooting for credibility to readers, even if it's not realistic, & dialogue is especially good if you are shooting for realism, even if readers have a hard time believing it. But if you can have both, that's all the better!
"Music" - Melos
Probably the least mistranslated word. Melos refers to song & dance, & these should be used to enhance what is already there.
"Spectacle" - Opnis
Out of all of the peculiar Victorian translations, this has aged the most poorly. Opnis absolutely does not mean spectacle in contemporary English - Opnis means "likeness", & in Aristotle's context, most especially referred to beauty, particularly costumes & set designs. It was not common in Aristotle's time period to have costumes that were particularly realistic - rather, they often used interesting, fantastical masks. However, some plays did, & apparently were heavily guilty on relying on the sheer realism & beauty of the costumes.
A great example of how irrelevant beauty & realism of costumes & set designs can be could be found in the original 1954 Godzilla film. The truth is that Dr. Serizawa's mansion's interior looks incredibly fake, because it is obviously a stage. The miniature buildings in the 1954 movie also don't look quite as real as the miniature buildings of 1960s entries like King Kong vs. Godzilla or Mothra vs. Godzilla. But who cares? It's one of the most well-written Godzilla films of all time!! So I see just about nobody complaining about these faults of the sets, & instead everybody praises the good writing & acting, because that's more important than realistic or pretty sets. Of course, one can get away with extensive set detail if the story is good, especially for purely fantastical settings, one thinks of The Dark Crystal. However, remember that The Dark Crystal's mythos & diolania were both good, & the movie would not have been good if it only had good sets alone.
That was was my hot take on Aristotle's poetics!
Really interesting, thank you for writing that.
Very nice!