Essay: The Poetics of Aristotle

Though written in a remarkably distant past, The Poetics of Aristotle extraordinarily hold value and relevancy in modern criticism and analysis of art and aesthetics. Aristotle’s views on comedy and tragedy, as well as his description of the structure and shaping on narratives can be seamlessly applied to a modern analysis of film, as well as art at large. Giving his primary attention to tragedy as genre, Aristotle describes it as “the most representative of the arts; or rather, that one which, when examined, will most revealed the qualities essential in art in so far as it is art.” (Aristotle IV). Aristotle argues that within a tragedy, plot holds priority over character – that is to say, the plot of any given tragic work drives the narrative, rather than any specific traits of aspects of character. While this may create some interesting room for argumentation, when placed within the context of Michael Curtiz’s 1942 film Casablanca, it becomes apparent that Aristotle’s definition of plot offers itself effortlessly to the film’s structure, as well as that of all tragedies. Indeed, the film’s protagonist Rick Blaine must experience certain events, which are entirely results of plot, in order to then experience subsequent character development. As such, it is evident that plot does indeed hold primacy over character, as characters are not able to develop, nor can they truly be established in their entirety without plot devices and elements driving the narrative as well as their respective character arcs.
In order to place Aristotle’s argument within the context of Casablanca is it perhaps integral to first examine the proposition in detail and establish its parameters. Aristotle begins by establishing certain parameters of the tragic story genre. He primarily contrasts tragedy with comedy, explaining that in a comedic structure, people are portrayed as being worse than they may be in real life, however by contrast, in a tragedy, they are always presented as being better – perhaps adding a certain super-human aspect to them. He defines tragedy as an “imitation of action, that is serious, complete in itself, and of certain magnitude.” (Aristotle III) Though this will be further discussed, at this time there is no means by which to say that Casablanca does not fit into his described formula for tragedy. It will therefore be considered as such. Aristotle explains that through different means and throughout different parts of given work in dramatic form; emotions are brought together through scenes of pity and fear. He explains that every tragedy is made up of six parts, which in their sum total determine the overall quality of the work. He names them as Spectacle, Melody, Diction, Character, Thought and Plot. From here, Aristotle draws that character and plot are the two most important factors of tragedy, and to further narrow this statement down, plot ultimately becomes the foremost element in the structure and outcome of a given story. This is to say, character becomes a secondary aspect, and plot points are what ultimately motivate character development, which is otherwise unable to exist without plot determining outcome of character. Aristotle defines plot as the imitation of action and life of a character, as well as their emotions, which ultimately take on the form of action, and it is therefore contained within a succession of incidents. In the end, this imitation of action aims to create activity rather than mere quality, which can be attributed only to character. One may have a set of given qualities, but it only through their actions that these qualities are established and expressed, therefore the ultimate end of a tragedy is in its action.
Further to this, he explains that plot should not be thought of as simply an arrangement of events, but rather the precedence of action and their integrated sum total. The plot is fuller – it is an entirety of the story and the way in which all given actions find an end means. In this great overall outcome, character for Aristotle becomes merely a secondary element –tragedy does not only reveal character but rather it presents a complex interlacing between actions, reactions, outcomes and various plot points, all of which influence character. A character having agency to choose within the narrative structure of a story is not so much a show of his moral purpose, but rather evidence that such morality only exists because the plot presents the opportunity. Without a given plot point, in which a character may be asked to make a decision, that development simply dos not exist and character can therefore not be further developed. Similarly, discovery cannot be made by characters without the plot first presenting that prospect. It is evident therefore, that plot does indeed drive tragic narrative structure.
Interestingly, a modern reader or viewer of narrative film may be more familiar with considering drama as a means of character revelation. Various authors of Elizabethan drama such as Jane Austen or Henry Fielding, as well as more contemporary novelists such as Thomas Harris and Ken Kesey (both of whose books were adapted into dramatic screenplays) seem to root their stories primarily in human psychology, which of course cannot be separate from character. It seems in such narratives, characters behave accordingly to only their written parts, and while perhaps there is some importance to be seen in heavily character driven works of film and literature, it remains true that even the most psychologically intricate and convoluted characters are only able to express their emotions as actions when presented with opportunity from plot. The plot is what enables such characters to become the extraordinary beings they are then described as, and their characterization is revealed only through action.
Aristotle’s principles regarding tragedy can be effectively applied to cinematic structure, particularly in the context of Casablanca. The narrative of this film is rather complex – which is yet another element of story structure discussed in the Poetics of Aristotle. In his writing, he compares the simple plot to a complex one, explaining that a simple plot contains change without reversal of situation and with no recognition of said change by a character. By contrast, complex plot contains either one or both of those elements, which arise from the interior structure of the plot. As previously mentioned, Casablanca is being herein examined as a tragedy, for it does indeed fit in many ways into Aristotle’s understanding of the tragedy. The protagonist experiences a rather difficult loss (as part of the plot) and though he is able to overcome the struggles of his character journey, the tone and major structural elements lend themselves to that of a tragedy. Rick Blaine’s flaws are evident at the outset of the film and are clearly displayed as part of the building of his character. It seems as though these flaws however are simply outwardly projections by Rick, and he is actually a greatly empathetic and considerate person who prioritizes others over himself. Rick therefore is portrayed overall as a good person, arguably better than most in real life, fitting therefore into Aristotle’s model of tragedy, rather than comedy. Though the audience may not feel immediate admiration for Rick in the first act of the film, due to his apparent coldness and outward projection of arrogance, there is no indication that he will be the cause of his own demise, nor does he have any ill-intentions for those around him. Only with the introduction of specific plot points does Rick’s character experience change and development. When his past lover Isla returns, Rick begins to experience a negative change within himself; not motivated by himself but rather as a result of a casual event that unfolded before him in a seemingly random manner. Thus, that specific plot point was what triggered the change in Rick – his own character is not enough to create a structured narrative or story, as there would be simply no action, only his emotion without outcome. Aristotle’s idea of plot as the forefront of tragedy becomes incredibly evident here – the plot indicates the outcome of the story and the characters, regardless of their depth or likability, are not on their own enough to generate react or create progress in the narrative structure. A viewer is concerned with Rick’s actions and reactions to the situations he is faced with, which can only come as an outcome of plot.
The structure of the films serves itself to Aristotle’s definition of a tragedy and the certain magnitude that is found within that – “In the case of animate bodies and organisms a certain magnitude is necessary” (Aristotle VIII) According to Aristotle, all stories are comprised of a beginning, middle and end, which are then associated by a casual connection. It is undeniable that the basic structure of the film fits within this model and its execution allows the plot-driven development to enhance characterization in a way in which audiences are able to consume and appreciate the content in its entirety. Finally, towards the end of the film, Rick creates a plan in which he fakes his true intentions as a means of self-preservation. He plans to leave Casablanca with Isla, though really he is looking to avoid being captured. Here, Rick formulates what Aristotle describes as a complex plot. Rick is able to entirely understand that change within himself and is therefore conscious of his morality, and he is administrating the reversal of a situation. Therefore, a development is created simultaneously in both plot and character resulting in a complexity defined by Aristotle.