tessa koveleski emily beaver
DESCRIPTION
Arguments on if "Things Fall Apart" is an Aristotelian Tragedy or not.TRANSCRIPT
Things fall apart
Tessa Koveleski, Emily Beaver
Question
Is the book Things Fall Apart an Aristotelian tragedy?
Argument
In act I of Things Fall Apart, it is not an Aristotelian Tragedy, but in acts II and III, it is an Aristotelian Tragedy.
Argument of Act I
In act I, the author goes all over the place talking about Okonkwo’s life and the things he has done. It doesn’t have a steady plot. It goes from talking about his father to the wrestling match.
Why isn’t that an Aristotelian Tragedy?
Aristotelian tragedies always have a steady plot and shouldn’t jump from one plot from the next. They must have a beginning, middle, and end.
Act I arguments
In Act I, nobody really has anything serious they have to do. Mainly it is just setting up a plot.
Why isn’t that an Aristotelian Tragedy?
Aristotelian tragedies have to be in all seriousness and importance rather than being silly or relaxed. Also it is supposed to be dramatized.
Act II and III arguments
Act II and III is an Aristotelian Tragedy, because the plot finally begins in Act II when okonkwo gets sent out. The plot carries out through act II and III.
Act II and III arguments
The plot doesn’t jump around, it stays steady from beginning, to middle, to end.
Conclusion
Act I is more of a setup for a Aristotelian tragedy rather than being one. The plot actually begins in act II and carries out the Aristotelian Tragedy through the rest of the book.