According to Aristotle, the ideal tragic hero is neither perfectly virtuous nor entirely wicked. He is generally a good person who makes a single error in judgment or has a small character flaw that ultimately leads to his downfall. This creates feelings of pity and fear in the audience as they see a good man face undeserved suffering due to a minor shortcoming. Aristotle argues this type of hero and plot best elicits the desired emotional response from viewers of tragedy.
According to Aristotle, the ideal tragic hero is neither perfectly virtuous nor entirely wicked. He is generally a good person who makes a single error in judgment or has a small character flaw that ultimately leads to his downfall. This creates feelings of pity and fear in the audience as they see a good man face undeserved suffering due to a minor shortcoming. Aristotle argues this type of hero and plot best elicits the desired emotional response from viewers of tragedy.
According to Aristotle, the ideal tragic hero is neither perfectly virtuous nor entirely wicked. He is generally a good person who makes a single error in judgment or has a small character flaw that ultimately leads to his downfall. This creates feelings of pity and fear in the audience as they see a good man face undeserved suffering due to a minor shortcoming. Aristotle argues this type of hero and plot best elicits the desired emotional response from viewers of tragedy.
According to Aristotle, the ideal tragic hero is neither perfectly virtuous nor entirely wicked. He is generally a good person who makes a single error in judgment or has a small character flaw that ultimately leads to his downfall. This creates feelings of pity and fear in the audience as they see a good man face undeserved suffering due to a minor shortcoming. Aristotle argues this type of hero and plot best elicits the desired emotional response from viewers of tragedy.
The ideal tragic hero, according to Aristotle, should be, in the first
place, a man of eminence. The actions of an eminent man would be
‘serious, complete and of a certain magnitude’, as required by Aristotle. Further, the hero should not only be eminent but also basically a good man, though not absolutely virtuous. The sufferings, fall and death of an absolutely virtuous man would generate feelings of disgust rather than those of ‘terror and compassion’ which a tragic play must produce. The hero should neither be a villain nor a wicked person for his fall, otherwise his death would please and satisfy our moral sense without generation the feelings of pity, compassion and fear. Therefore, the ideal tragic hero should be basically a good man with a minor flaw or tragic trait in his character. The entire tragedy should issue from this minor flaw or error of judgment. The fall and sufferings and death of such a hero would certainly generate feelings of pity and fear. So, Aristotle says: “For our pity is excited by misfortunes undeservedly suffered, and our terror by some resemblance between the sufferer and ourselves.” Finally, Aristotle says: “There remains for our choice a person neither eminently virtuous nor just, nor yet involved in misfortune by deliberate vice or villainy, but by some error or human frailty; and this person should also be someone of high-fame and flourishing prosperity.” Such a man would make an ideal tragic hero.
The characteristics of Tragic Hero
According to Aristotle, in a good tragedy, character supports plot. The personal motivation / actions of the characters are intricately involved with the action to such an extent that it leads to arouse pity and fear in the audience. The protagonist / tragic hero of the play should have all the characteristics of a good character. By good character, Aristotle means that they should be:
1. True to the self
2. True to type 3. True to life 4. Probable and yet more beautiful than life. The tragic hero having all the characteristics mentioned above, has, in addition, a few more attributes. In this context Aristotle begins by the following observation,
● A good man – coming to bad end. (Its shocking and disturbs
faith) ● A bad man – coming to good end. (neither moving, nor moral) ● A bad man – coming to bad end. (moral, but not moving) ● A rather good man – coming to bad end. (an ideal situation) Aristotle disqualifies two types of characters – purely virtuous and thoroughly bad. There remains but one kind of character, who can best satisfy this requirement – ‘A man who is not eminently good and just yet whose misfortune is not brought by vice or depravity but by some error of frailty’. Thus the ideal Tragic Hero must be an intermediate kind of a person- neither too virtuous nor too wicked. His misfortune excites pity because it is out of all proportion to his error of judgement, and his over all goodness excites fear for his doom. Thus, he is a man with the following attributes: He should be a man of mixed character, neither blameless nor absolutely depraved. His misfortune should follow from some error or flaw of character; short of moral taint. He must fall from height of prosperity and glory. The protagonist should be renowned and prosperous, so that his change of fortune can be from good to bad. The fall of such a man of eminence affects entire state/nation. This change occurs not as the result of vice, but of some great error or frailty in a character. Such a plot is most likely to generate pity and fear in the audience. The ideal tragic hero should be an intermediate kind of a person, a man not preeminently virtuous and just yet whose misfortune is brought upon him not by vice or depravity but by some error of judgement. Let us discuss this error of judgement in following point. The meaning of Hamartia Hamartia (‘fatal flaw’ or ‘tragic flaw’) may consist of a moral flaw, or it may simply be a technical error/ error of judgement, or, ignorance, or even, at times, an arrogance (called hubris in Greek). It is owing to this flaw that the protagonist comes into conflict with Fate and ultimately meets his/her doom through the workings of Fate (called Dike in Greek) called Nemesis.